Do not mean to open up a flame war here but I honestly believe a better version of Ezzard Charles, say from 1949, could have beaten a prime Marciano. We know that he could take him 15 rounds so one cannot write this off as an easy KO for Rocky. By the time Charles faced Marciano for the first time in '54, his skill has slipped drastically. He was still a capable fighter but it is said that he was no longer the sharp boxer of his earlier days. I think that the added speed and aggressiveness of a younger Charles could pull a UD over Rocky, perhaps by even a large margin. Ezzard had an incredible run up until his first loss with Walcott, it is hard to see Marciano winning a decision unless he catches him with something. Anyone else of the same opinion?
Yes, Charles could have won a 15 round decision over the peak Marciano of the Layne and Mathews fights. Rocky could have also taken out the 1949 Charles with a single shot, if Ezz slipped his concentration for an instant.
I agree. That's the thing with Marciano, he was often in with slicker guys, he just managed to find the way to win in all 49 of his fights.
I think Charles would out box him to a decision although he may can knocked down in the process he'll get up to win.
Ezzard takes a close unanimous decision over the pressing, and powerful Rocky. I think Ezzard does enough to avoid being floored, however.
Too many people just don't understand what an impressive run charles had from 1946-1954. He went 53-8 in 61 fights during this time. Only Walcott and Marciano beat him decisively. He beat Walcott two out of four times and some feel 3 out of 4. That said, when Charles beat Louis the retired champion was coming off a long lay off, 27 months. when charles beat walcott he was coming off a knock out loss and had not fought for 12 months. first time they fought walcott had not beat a rated fighter for 2 years. second time walcott was also coming off a loss. yes, charles won those fights and we look back now and realise these were difficult wins but they excited nobody at the time. I have my doubts if either the last two Walcott or Marciano fights can be used as convincing proof that Charles had gone noticably back. Marciano and Charles had seven common opponents--Layne, Beshore, Louis, Reynolds, Matthews, Walcott, and Moore--Marciano went 8-0 with 8 ko's against them. Charles went 10-4 with 4 ko's. Marciano was just a better heavyweight than anyone Charles had previously fought.
I just think that ultimately Rocky is too powerful for Charles to ever beat. Prime Charles has a better chance obviously but I don't think he should ever be favoured to beat The Rock.
Marciano is too strong, hard hitting and relentless for Charles who ofcourse is competitive and close but no cigar
There seems to be a general agreement that the Charles of 49 was superior to the one that fought Marciano. It will stay that way till the nut huggers show up ... that being said I still ever so slightly favor Rocky because Charles simply got hit more than he should have given his skill set ...
A key point that makes me favour Marciano by KO is a slightly fresher Charles was more aggressive. Charles' over aggressiveness would lead to Ezzard being open a lot more to that big right hand of Rocky's.