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

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by SuzieQ49, Jun 5, 2010.


  1. Hookie

    Hookie Affeldt... Referee, Judge, and Timekeeper Full Member

    7,054
    383
    Dec 19, 2009
    Charles came back in 1946 after serving in the U.S. Military. Prior to 1946 he was 30-4-1 but had not yet peaked.

    He went 39-1 overall and 9-0 in HW World Title Fights from 1946 - July of 1951.

    Among others, Charles beat-

    Anton Christoforidis KO3
    Charley Burley x2
    Jose Basora KO5
    Joey Maxim x5
    Archie Moore x3, once by KO
    Lloyd Marshall 2 out of 3, both wins by KO
    Jimmy Bivins 4 out of 5, once by KO
    Elmer Ray 1 out of 2, WKO9
    Jersey Joe Walcott 2 out of 4
    Gus Lesnevish KO7
    Joe Louis W15
    Rex Layne 2 out of 3, once by KO

    25-6 vs. these men... some of the losses could have went either way
     
  2. MRBILL

    MRBILL Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    21,116
    119
    Oct 9, 2008
    Christ, I googled a KO magazine ratings list of the top-50 pound-4-pounders of all-time and they rate Ezzard Charles somewhere in the mid-20s........ I checked it last night when I was tweaking pretty hard on Kentucky Gentleman whiskey...... I'm not gonna argue with KO magazine......

    NO! I do not hold Charles' tail-end losses on his career against him in my ratings.... If I gotta judge the dude's greatness, I already stated it was from 1946 thru 1951...... I think that five year period was his best years........

    MR.BILL
     
  3. Hookie

    Hookie Affeldt... Referee, Judge, and Timekeeper Full Member

    7,054
    383
    Dec 19, 2009
    Right on MR.BILL! Charles was awesome during that time. Even the loss to Elmer Ray and the 2nd loss to Walcott (in 1952) could have went either way. Many people felt he should have regained the title vs. Walcott in their 4th and final fight. As it was he went 2-2 vs. Walcott and 1-1 (1) vs. Ray.

    In his 94th and 95th pro fights he lost close fights to Nino Valdes and Harold Johnson that honestly could have went either way.

    In his 98th and 99th pro fights he gave a prime Marciano absolute hell despite being well past prime, L15 and LKOby8. He was 86-12-1 after the fights with Rocky... he went just 10-13 in his next 23 fights, then retired.
     
  4. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,088
    3,779
    Sep 14, 2005
    "Well past his prime" is overdueing it a little. That june 17th 1954 Ezzard Charles was a very good version of himself. Not prime. but not THAT past it. He fought his heart out for 15 rounds.
     
  5. MRBILL

    MRBILL Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    21,116
    119
    Oct 9, 2008
    I wrote earlier that '54 was the LAST year of whatever Ol' Buzzard Charles had left in his body, in terms of prime-time stuff, but '51 was really his last PEAK year........... Peace...

    MR.BILL
     
  6. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,088
    3,779
    Sep 14, 2005
    I know. I was talking to hookie. not you bill. i agree with you bill.
     
  7. Boilermaker

    Boilermaker Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,372
    475
    Oct 6, 2004
    Suzie, you didnt answer my previous question.

    Is there any version of Charles who beats Marciano?
     
  8. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,088
    3,779
    Sep 14, 2005
    Remember...Marciano and Charles were not the same size. Charles was a light-heavyweight..at his best 175lb. Marciano was a big boned muscular tank training down from 210lb to 185lb. Different weight classes. Just because Marciano can beat charles, does not mean he rates higher p4p.


    Charles has the perfect combination of skill, speed, movement, and sharp combination punching to pile up points on the Rock early on. The big question that lies ahead is 1. Can Rocky land a few big punches, maybe a Suzy Q right hand and take charles out on the spot? or 2. Does rocky bombard charles with high volumes of punches to to wear him down before charles builds up too much of an early lead

    A couple things:

    A. Charles best weight was 175-180lb. Charles would be lighter fighting Marciano in 1948. He would gain some speed, but he also might lose some durability, which will hurt him over the course of 15 rounds.

    B. Charles, even in his prime, had issues with swarmer Elmer Ray..and Valentino also gave him a few problems crowding him. Then again, Rocky had issues with boxers like charles, walcott, and lastarza.


    Charles showed more heart and courage in that June 1954 fight than any other fight in his career. If he can somehow combine that heart/courage/stamina with his 1948 body..he can beat the rock. But I don't think he can. Charles never displayed intense "fire in his belly" in the 1940s, which is often what newspapers critisized him for.

    I see Rocky vs a 1948 charles getting outboxed early and falling behind on points. but his non stop aggression, punching, relentless will wear charles down and stop charles late. I see charles being ahead on points at the time of the stoppage..as his younger legs would allow him to take a few more rounds. Rocky by late knockout.


    In a trilogy I see a 2-1 result for Rocky..but the 1948 Ezzard could def nip one on points.
     
  9. Doc Dynamo

    Doc Dynamo Member Full Member

    232
    2
    Mar 12, 2010
    I don't have Charles in the top 5, but it's not unreasonable.

    Two small issues with Charles.

    Size. Charles wins over Burely need to be downgraded a bit, because he was naturally a lot bigger than Bruley. Charles was a big MW, Bruley seems to have a natural WW or JM. It's the Marciano-Charles issue in reverse,

    Peak. When Charles fought Bivins at Bivins' peak, he lost. Charles 4 wins against Bvins came when Bivins had dropped considerably from his best. I know Charles was before his peak for the Bivins loss, but I think he was closer to his peak level than Bivins was durring his losses to Charles.
     
  10. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,088
    3,779
    Sep 14, 2005
    I disagree. Charles beat Jimmy Bivins in 1946. Bivins in 1946 was very much still in his prime, at a tender age of 26 years old. I would say Bivins was at the tail end of his prime, but still in his prime.

    I think the more accurate statement is when Bivins fought Charles at Charles's peak, he lost. Bivins win over charles came before charles hit his prime.
     
  11. Son of Gaul

    Son of Gaul Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,628
    31
    Feb 16, 2010
    Top 10 but not so sure about top 5...
     
  12. Doc Dynamo

    Doc Dynamo Member Full Member

    232
    2
    Mar 12, 2010
    Bvins had lost his last two fights before the 46 Charles loss, admittedly to quality opponents.

    Immediately before Charles' loss to Bivins, Charles had beaten Joey Maxim twice in a row.
     
  13. SuzieQ49

    SuzieQ49 The Manager Full Member

    37,088
    3,779
    Sep 14, 2005
    Charles was only 165lb the first time he fought Bivins. He was young 21(years old)...and had not yet physically matured. Charles himself said he went into the army and became bigger, stronger, tougher...by the time he came back to boxing in 1946.

    Jimmy Bivins lost his last two..but they were to two top 5 rated heavyweights in the world....6'4 210lb Lee Q Murray and ATG Jersey Joe Walcott. It's also true Bivins won 20 of his last 22 prior to his fight with Charles. He was 26 years old in 1946. I don't see how you can argue he was past his prime. What's next, are you going to argue Jersey Joe Walcott beat a past his prime Jimmy Bivins in 1946, despite Bivins being on an incredible undefeated winning streak?
     
  14. MRBILL

    MRBILL Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    21,116
    119
    Oct 9, 2008
    Weight is indeed tricky............

    My man Larry Holmes was 209 for Norton in 1978 and 211 for Ali in 1980, and 212 1/2 pounds for Cooney in 1982........ Larry Holmes was physically peaked in them yrs as a man / fighter....... Larry Holmes was 217 for Texas Cobb to cap-off 1982 and was criticized for being soft.......

    When Larry Holmes fought Timmy Spoon in May of '83, Holmes was 213 to Spoon's solid 219 pounds.......... Holmes claimed he was over-trained and suffered from a case of the shits days before facing Spoon in the ring out in the heated desert of Vegas........

    By 1983, at age 33, "The Homer" would never again see 213 pounds ever again in the ring........

    Come the fight with Marvis Frazier to end 1983, Holmes was now near or above 220 pounds, and there to stay......

    MR.BILL:deal
     
  15. MRBILL

    MRBILL Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    21,116
    119
    Oct 9, 2008
    Anyone ever seen the entire (if it exists on tape) 1952 fourth and final fight between Charles and Walcott? I've read that it stunk.......... Walcott got the nod over 15 cuz he was the champ..... Any words??

    MR.BILL