Charles P4P GOAT?

Langford fought
Jeanette
Johnson
Mcvey
Wills
Smith
Godfrey
At Heavyweight
-------------------
Dixie Kid
Stan Ketchel
Jeff Clark
Jack OBrien
Kid NOrfolk
Below heavy ,plus ..numerous contenders.I think his resume is superior in terms of quality of opponent s faced.
The best Heavies Charles faced were Walcott ,who beat him twice ,once by ko,Marciano ,ditto and a faded Louis.

 

I've seen some say they feel he's their number one, and sometimes I wonder it myself.

Charley Burley's been called the greatest fighter ever seen by fighters like Archie Moore, and I want to say Eddie Futch. Look what Ezzard did to him.

He could of easily retired without moving up and fighting heavyweights, and hanging around so long. His high loss to win ratio lowers him in some peoples eyes, I'm sure.

I can't see how he's outside of the top five of all time, P4P, anyway.

 

Same weight but 5 inches shorter.His losses to Wills for the most part occurred when he was on the way out,Johnson would have an easy time with Charles imo,Wills would be close,ditto Jeanette,and Mcvey ,Charles was a great LH but not a great hvy,he didnt nearly beat Marciano ,Rocky won clearly .Charles beat an old Louis ,Joe said "6 years ago I would have stopped him in side 8",and I beleive he probably would have.I would pick Tunney and Langford to both beat Charles at lh.Langford beating OBrien by ko and drawing with Ketchel is on a par with Charles earlier work ,I think,dont get me wrong Charles wins over Moore,Maxim and Burley ,[though he had a weight advantage] are very impressive,but he isnt the paramount p4p for me.

 

I was comparing Langfords opponents 6 3-4 Wills ,6 2 Smith,6 4 Fulton,6 3 Godfrey,with Sams height at 5 7,,plus Tate 6 6 ,Wright 6 3.But I think you knew that,just wanted to put a smiley face up ,bless.Langford was a harder hitter than Charles as good defensively ,and more durable,he met everyone ,and how many time he wore the cuffs we will never know,let me ask you a question if Burley fought Sam who do you pick?I think a prime Langford would have beaten the Louis that faced Charles.ps Hearns is 6 2

 

That's funny, because I've heard from multiple sources that people close to Ezzard, like trainers and other fighters, claimed he was suffering from certain degenerative conditions while he was active as a fighter.

A certain ******* around here laughs at the idea, but hey. Nothing new in boxing. Ali was active, Miske fought while he was DYING, and so on.

 

I'll add that Verne Troyer is taller than Andre the Giant.

What does it matter what you add if it's total bull****?

Much tougher competition? In a P4P sense we're talking. 5'8 Greb, who never weighed out of his 160's no matter who he was facing(around 158 or so at his peak), was definitely a smaller man than the 6'0 Charles who often weighed in around 200 pounds or higher on many occasions, likely around 175 in his peak. Greb was easily the smaller man, therefore he obviously isn't going to be fighting the bigger opposition and having greater success with them. He was a natural MW, and as a MW he fought at higher weights. Charles fit directly into higher weight classes up to HW as his career progressed.

In a P4P sense, Greb's win over Tunney is probably better than Charles's win over Louis given the circumstances. In fact, it surely is in my mind, given the fact that most accounts consider him to have won at least two of those bouts with the bigger great, while Tunney was prime and Greb was likely past his very best.

So the fact that the bigger man fought the bigger competition doesn't really mean a damn thing in a P4P thread now does it? Greb, even at his small stature, was ranked among the top 10 HW's for 7 straight years, as a MW! Again, this is a P4P thread, and while Charles fought the bigger HW's and was the more natural HW, how in all honesty does that prove your point that he was a better P4P fighter than Greb? If you want to debate resumes, we'll do that as well.