Ezzard Charles defended the HW belt 7 times..

Charles is also only behind Ali and Louis with wins over top 10 Heavyweights. His HW Title run is pretty strong and overlooked. Charles is a top 10 HW in my eyes, criminally underrated.

Nick Barone and Breshore were the only filler defenses. Both actually being very tough seasoned guys who had never been knocked out.

Lee Oma=Long time contender coming off his best run. Rings #2 behind Charles going into 1950. Traded wins with Satterfield.
Joe Louis=Returning lineal Champion.
Gus Lesnevich=former LHW Champion and rival he had been trying to get in the ring for years.
Pat Valentino=tough top 10 fighter coming off a win over Ring's 1949 #3 Turkey Thompson.
Joe Walcott=Rematch with long time rival, top Heavyweight.
Joey Maxim=Long time HW contender and current LHW Champion.

 

Charles is a top 10 HW in my eyes, criminally underrated.



I agree with this

 

charles was a great lhw, p4p one of the greatest but he is not top 10 hw...

ali,louis,foreman,holmes,holyfield,marciano,frazier,jonhson,lewis,jefries,dempsey, are higher than him for sure. even sonny liston

 

perhaps, but charles beat a lot more rated heavyweight contenders than most of them. If they all fought as many contenders as charles did would their records and legacy look as good as they do now?

 

Top 10 HW IMO and one of the best light heavyweights never to win a title there. He beat two capable ATG's in Louis and Walcott twice. Pretty good and better wins than those of say Holmes or Foreman.

 

charles was a lhw really, he fought even at mw.
it is pure speculation, i am talking about facts, and they are greater hws than charles. anyway , and i think that charles would not beat no of them

 

the version of frazier(29 years old undefeated) who faced foreman in 1973 would beat the louis and the walcott who faced charles... simple. prime vs prime in my opinion frazier would beat louis and would **** walcott.
ken norton did beat ali and he had the style to beat walcott. and foreman is the oldest hw champ ever.
about larry holmes... he did many defences and he was better than charles at hw.

 

having greatness and who would beat who is often two different things my freind. charles was a great heavyweight because the record shows he beat many more heavyweight contenders than many other champions. He was a hard fight for anyone.

evander holyfeild was once a middleweight as physicaly mature young man. muhammad ali (as big as he was) was a lightheavyweight as a physicaly mature young man.

 

Nah I'd say Louis had more in his tank than Frazier did later in their careers. He just wasn't the same after FOTC and definitely after Manila but he was still good. What makes you think Frazier would run over Walcott? Walcott fought a bigger puncher in Marciano and almost went the distance but by the second fight he just didn't have it in him anymore. Walcott had enough power to take out Norton no problem but it would be interesting to see how the fight would play out. Foreman is the oldest HW because of his power. He was getting taken to school but caught Moorer later in the fight with the perfect punch. Previous to that he lost his other two title opportunities to Morrison & Holyfield. What's Holmes' best win @ heavyweight during his reign? Cooney? An older yet capable Louis is a better win.

 

no no no, holyfield was a natural cruiser, ali was a lhw when he was a kid,charles weighed 185 pounds in his 30s, ali weighed 214 in his 20s, and 6´3 ali was a natural hw.charles was 6´0 and he was a natural lhw.charles was past his prime when he fought at hw. they were naturally bigger men than charles. principally ali. and charles did fought in one of the weakest eras in the boxing history (in hw). past prime louis, past prime walcott,nino valdes and rocky marciano who weighed 178-187 pounds. several hws would clean this era at hw. and charles did not. charles in the 60s and 70s would lose against liston,ali,frazier,foreman,holmes, and norton(close).
quarry,patterson,lyle,young,terrel,chuvalo,ellis would give the hell to him

 

frazier was 29 years old and he was undefeated when foreman destroyed him in 2 rounds... joe louis was finished and he was 36 when he faced charles, great diference.

lmao are you joking? joe frazier had the worst style for the boxers, frazier would beat walcott always. marciano was harder puncher with the right hands, end of the history, frazier was better than marciano, bigger,stronger,25 pounds heavier, even more heart,equal stamina,better defence, faster,better pressure fighter. AND NORTON DID BEAT ALI 70S, HE WOULD BEAT WALCOTT BY SD.

:rofl:rofl AND? ALI WAS THE BEST HW BECAUSE OF HIS SPEED....FOREMAN KNOCKED MOORER OUT, END OF THE HISTORY , TOMMY RAN FROM HIM, AND MORRISON WAS A PUNCHER, NOT A STYLIST.... OLD FOREMAN WAS COMPETENT IN HIS 40s AGAINST A PEAK
EVANDER,EVEN TYSON COULD NOT FINISH THE FIGHT AGAINST A PAST PRIME EVANDER.

I NEVER SAID THAT HOLMES DID BEAT GREAT PRIME LEGENDS BUT STILL HE FOUGHT IN HIS 40S A GREAT FIGHT AGAINST HOLYFIELD AND HE DID BEAT MERCER. FOREMAN AND HOLMES WOULD CLEAN THE DIVISION IN THE ERA OF CHARLES

 

Still wasn't the same fighter. Louis defeated contenders after Charles so he wasn't done by then. He was done in the Marciano bout.

Walcott was a boxer though he did have the power to put many folks on the canvas. I'd like to see how Norton responds to the left hook that finished Charles in the third Walcott/Charles match.

It's a fact and Tommy still beat Foreman as did Holyfield. What does Tyson have to do with anything? He was years removed from his prime too and his stamina was crap by then. Foreman fought a prime Evander so the one of '96 has nothing at all to do with what we're talking about.

Fact is that Charles still holds a win that Foreman & Holmes wish they had, a win over Louis.

 

LIKE I SAID... JOE FRAZIER73 WAS BETTER THAN LOUIS50 BY A MILE.

NORTON TOOK SHOTS FROM HOLMES OR QUARRY, HE WOULD TAKE THE SHOTS FROM WALCOTT.

THE POINT IS THAT OLD FOREMAN WAS COMPETENT AGAINST PEAK EVANDER, A WORSE VERSION OF EVANDER DESTROYED THE TYSON WHO DESTROYED BRUNO. AND THE ONLY FACT IS THAT PRIME VS PRIME FOREMAN WOULD **** MORRISON AND tko HOLYFIELD, HE WAS IN HIS 40s and MORRISON RAN LIKE A CHICKEN FROM AN OLD MAN AND EVANDER WAS A PRIME LEGEND.

TONS OF HWs WOULD BEAT THIS VERSION OF JOE LOUIS.... FOREMAN,FRAZIER,ALI,LISTON,TYSON,HOLYFIELD,LEWIS,BOWE,VITALI,DEMPSEY,TUNNEY,JEFRIES,JONHSON,HOLMES..(some of these men would beat prime louis)

 

By a mile? He was shopworn and not the same guy of '71 FOTC.

And they are harder hitters than Walcott? It's not hard to believe that Walcott ko's Norton at all.

Again, 96 Holyfield has nothing to do with our conversation as Foreman fought the prime version. And lost.

Other guys would have beat him but not much beat prime Louis. Not much. Charles still has a win over a capable but past-prime Louis.