who would have won in 1953? a 20 years old williams 27-0(against bums or average boxers) vs a 32 years old charles(after to be knocked out by walcott and before to lose against marciano).
maybe because charles at the time had great experience but williams was a very good puncher and very strong, he might ko charles too.
Can't see Williams at that stage in his career doing much better than, say, a Coley Wallace did - probably a Charles KO in around 9 or 10 rounds - wouldn't be a huge shock if it was sooner that that though. Bit of a master a pupil situation I think here
Williams may have been a fair fighter and a huge hitter but...come on, man. You could debate about how well he does or the off chance he lands well enough to get the favorite but we still all know who should be the big favorite.
