Ezzard Charles and Jersey Joe Walcott

Easily Ezzard,his resume was thicker.

 

Charles because Walcott didn't deserve the shot he won. Which was one of 5 Walcott received coming off losses. If Walcott doesn't get that title shot its 2-0 Charles and this isn't a conversation. Charles resume is much better too.

 

I think JJW is the better overall fighter as in a stylist, slickster and boxer. Charles is the more straight up basic boxer, equally great and dangerous. But I think Jersey Joe, overall is the better fighter, but there isn't much in it really, both greats.

 

Charles was a lot more consistent before his downfall. But realistically all time HWs they are usually grouped pretty close together.

 

For me its JJW but split by a gnats pube.

 

I voted for Charles, partly b/c:
1. I think he had begun to slip by the time of the 3rd Walcott fight, &
2. The 4th fight was considered debatable or at least indecisive by many observers.

 

plus Charles fought approx 40 Top & Noted fighters, where as JJW fought about 25 of them... however I still say Walcott was overall the better fighter, but close, yes, very close indeed.

 

I picked Ezzard Charles.

 

charles for me too. he's a bit more of a complete fighter than walcott.

 

Charles fought all the top challengers while he was HW champ -- Ezzard had eight successful defenses (including against Joe Louis), Jersey Joe zero. Charles' record as a fighting champion rates better than most.

 

Jersey had one defence successful.
Against Ezzard Charles.

 

Yup, I forgot (How could I??) . Thank you!

 

Lol no worries buddy