Anyone else rank Ezzard Charles top 5 p4p of all time?

Funny, but Royale "With Cheese" Jones prolly would be a SOLID top-10 dude had he fully retired after either beating John Ruiz for the WBA title or after barely escaping a loss to Tony Tarver at 175 pounds back in 2003......... Had R.J. gone into 2004 in full retirement from the ring, his legacy and overall rating would be well preserved here in 2010......... The KO losses to "Tarver & Johnson" in 2004 totally HAUNT R.J. to the maxi-pad........ Cheers.......

MR.BILL

 

Jones takes up 10 places? :huh :nut

 

His legacy would always suffer from having never decisively settled matters with Tarver, who was one of his chief rivals at LHW (along with Dariusz, who he also never settled matters with). The two subsequent fights with Tarver simply settled a matter in need of settling - though obviously not in Roy's favor.

 

I see your point, but from about 1949 he weighed 180 lbs -185 lbs and stood 6ft tall. Arguably, Joe Louis and Joe Walcott were his two biggest wins, both P4P and overall. Although i can see arguments for Moore and others to be those wins as well. Rocky also weiged 180-185 for the majority of his fights (though he did gain the extra 2 or 3 lbs for the occassional fights) and stood much shorter at 5' 10. Plus, by the time Ezzard fought Rocky, he was regularly scaling 190 plus, which is bigger than Rocky ever fought.

Interestingly, Rocky was just 2 years older than Charles. When Charles last scaled under 180, so did Rocky Marciano! One can only guess that at the corresponding age, an in shape Rocky would have wighed the same as charles. As Charles aged, his weight pretty much corresponded with Charles'.

I accept your point, regarding primes, but is their any version of
charles that you pick to beat Marciano (actually it is a good question, i might think about it later).

 

Definately. Beat hall of afamers at Middleweight, Light heavy and Heavy. If he fought today, with all of the weight classes and multpile titles, I would bet he would be a five division titleist

 

he's on my top 5 list ,no problems

 

If you take that stand point Ezzard Charles can't be in your top10 either with all his past prime losses. Hell the past prime losses of Armstrong/Robinson/Pep must eliminate them from the top10 to :yep

 

The only one's who have a case for the lower end of a top 10 in there are Charles, Moore, Gans and possibly Leonard in my opinion.

 

He wasn't better than Ali, nor does he possess as good a record. As usual "p4p" is being used to penalise boxers who didn't happen to be small. I see no logical argument for having Duran above Ali.

Even if one were to do a hypothetical head to head, Ali has the style to beat Duran.

In any case, it was having Duran as high as 4 which I thought was truly daft.

 

#4 is a bit daft, however Ali is not certain of a top 10 ranking. I feel Duran could justify a top 7-8 place, Ali could be as low as 11-12 for me.

 

Don't forget Duran.

I personally don't have Jones in my top 10, but I can't help but recognize that he gets more flak for his past prime losses than not only these guys, but also than someone like Leonard.

For me, very few on this forum have a balanced view of Jones. Either he's seen as the second coming or else his extremely impressive victories over Hopking, Toney and especially Ruiz is brushed off with all manner of flimsy excuses while very much of losses he suffered in his mid and late 30's.

But I do think it will settle a bit when more time has passed and we get more perspective.

 

Thing is, you have to put those past prime losses into the context of their resumes, this spells trouble for Jones since his is quite thin.

His wins over those three guys are impressive but compared to those of the others fighters they are not so impressive anymore when put into the context of their careers and/or styles.

 

I do.

Best ever at LHW for me, could beat most of the fighters who ever fought under 200Lbs (CW) IMO, and a great HW as well.

 

I agree that they rank higher (well, he does have an argument with Leonard, but that's it).

I just think that many downplays his achievemnets and overstated the importance of losses he suffered when 35+. On the other hand, others exaggerate his ability IMO. All in all, it probably evens out, but this polarity can be a bit tiring at times.

 

As for the question of the thread, Chales certainly have an argument for a nr. 5 spot. Could be between him and Duran.