Most skilled: Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Jersey Joe Walcott, or Harold Johnson

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Flo_Raiden, Feb 8, 2024.


  1. Flo_Raiden

    Flo_Raiden Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,118
    35,569
    Oct 12, 2010
    4 ATGs known for their exquisite boxing skills and having fought in one of the toughest eras. Some of them even fought each other more than once and had each others numbers. In terms of overall abilities, versatility, and skills who would you say was the most skilled technician out of the bunch?

    This content is protected

    This content is protected

    This content is protected

    This content is protected
     
    Last edited: Feb 8, 2024
  2. themostoverrated

    themostoverrated Active Member Full Member

    563
    679
    Feb 9, 2022
    In-prime: Ezzard Charles

    Out-of-prime: Archie Moore
     
  3. Greg Price99

    Greg Price99 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,885
    11,888
    Dec 17, 2018
    Charles was the best, peak for peak, and is the greatest.

    Based on pure technical acumen, arguably Moore.

    Charles (as well as Johnson and JJW) was technically very skilled too, but I think he was more reliant on his incredible athleticism/speed than Moore.
     
    JohnThomas1, Mike Cannon and Bokaj like this.
  4. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    52,179
    27,641
    Jan 3, 2007
    They all had immense skill but I’ll give the trophy to Charles
     
    TipNom and InMemoryofJakeLamotta like this.
  5. thistle

    thistle Boxing Junkie

    8,481
    9,094
    Dec 21, 2016
    JJW - Classy, Skillful, Cagey, Hard Punching Slickster.
    Charles - Methodical Scientific Basic Boxer
    Moore - Fundamentalist, Adaptable, Strategic, Boxer Fighter, with obvious Killer Punching power...
    Johnson - I honestly can't say with certainty, but as I remember reading, he was a Hard Hitting Technical Fighter (?).

    ALL Great Fighters forsure.
     
  6. Flo_Raiden

    Flo_Raiden Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,118
    35,569
    Oct 12, 2010
    I would actually classify Harold Johnson as a methodical scientific basic boxer-puncher. As textbook of a boxer that you can get. Didn't do anything fancy but was a master of the basics.

    Ezzard Charles was a complete boxer-puncher with power on both hands, great ring IQ, good defense, and stylistically reminiscent to Sugar Ray Robinson in some ways.

    Hard to separate all of them honestly. They were so good at what they did.
     
  7. janitor

    janitor VIP Member

    71,995
    28,005
    Feb 15, 2006
    How to pick a winner among such an elite group of men?

    Any of them would be better in at least one respect, than all of the others.

    They are all maestros of course, but Ezzard Charles strikes me as being the most complete among them.
     
  8. InMemoryofJakeLamotta

    InMemoryofJakeLamotta I have defeated the great Seamus Full Member

    17,460
    12,892
    Sep 21, 2017
    At their peak, this would be a murders row. Could anyone from 175-200 pounds fight all of them back to back and remain undefeated? But in prime, I would say Charles gets the trophy
     
    thistle likes this.
  9. robert ungurean

    robert ungurean Богдан Philadelphia Full Member

    17,162
    16,924
    Jun 9, 2007
    Another Charles vote. Incredible fighting machine
     
  10. Journeyman92

    Journeyman92 Mauling Mormon’s banned Full Member

    19,739
    21,759
    Sep 22, 2021
    Ezzard was possibly the greatest boxer of all time. I think if you wanted to learn with your eyes you wouldn’t pick up any mistakes or bad habits watching EC.
     
  11. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft He Who Saw The Deep Full Member

    27,717
    46,629
    Mar 3, 2019
    Charles, he proved his superiority over the other three too IMO. I had him beating Johnson - only by a point, mind you - and the reports of the Moore fights paint a picture of him being plain and simply, a better fighter. The fourth digit against Walcott seemed to be an unpopular decision as well, although that's not as easy to figure out.

    An aged Moore with more experience may be a strong contender, but Charles to me is king here.
     
  12. Vic-JofreBRASIL

    Vic-JofreBRASIL Obsessed with Boxing

    23,559
    5,872
    Aug 19, 2010
    For my taste (and it is about that when you have guys that are basically the same level like these) is Johnson. His jab and his ring generalship and his punching form, is the perfect expression of the textbook fighter.
     
  13. JFK

    JFK The greatest light heavyweight to have ever lived Full Member

    17
    11
    Sep 10, 2023
    Johnson had the jab and timing
    Moore had defense and toughness/heart
    Walcott had the footwork and feints
    Charles though...

    Charles was the mix of all of them. He didn't have the stylish shuffling of Jersey Joe, he didn't perfect the philly shell like Moore did, and he didn't have a top 10 all time best jab like Harold, but he was still able to blend angles, distance management and feinting, all of which set up his beautiful counters - and he had power in both hands, too. No wonder he went in and 2-2 Walcott (arguably 3-1, last fight was pretty close and some say he won), 3-0 Moore and gave Johnson a close losing decision while out of his element. These 4 should've been called the murderers' row of the 50's, honestly. Or maybe a counter-punchers' row?
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2024
    robert ungurean likes this.
  14. ikrasevic

    ikrasevic War for Souls Full Member

    8,982
    9,350
    Nov 3, 2021
    Yes, Rocky Marciano.
    I choose Charles, but that's for nuance.
     
    cross_trainer likes this.
  15. Greg Price99

    Greg Price99 Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,885
    11,888
    Dec 17, 2018
    I doubt that many people rank Charles higher than I do - #1 all time at LHW and #5 all time at p4p.

    Yet, I'm surprised the majority who have commented have cited him as the most skilled. Perhaps I have a different interpretation of the term skills.

    Charles is the best and the greatest of the 4, sure, but in terms of technical skill, I think there are some parallels between Charles/Moore and RJJ/ Hopkins.

    Peak for peak, Charles and RJJ had the better physical/athletic gifts, most notably more explosive speed, and consequently were better than Moore and Hopkins, respectively.

    However, Moore and Hopkins had better longevity, because, imo, when past their physical prime, their superior technical skills made up for their diminished physical abilities, which they were never as reliant on as Charles and RJJ.

    Granted, Charles was very skilled, more so in a conventional sense than RJJ, but Moore is one of the greatest technical fighters of all time.

    There can be no question that - 1. Peak for peak Charles had better physical gifts, especially speed, than Moore; and 2) When past their respective physical primes, Moore was the better fighter.
     
    Rumsfeld, JFK, hdog500 and 1 other person like this.