Ezzard Charles defended the HW belt 7 times..

:rofl:rofl:rofl

 

After a long hard career, some of the fights may have been at HW, but well know Maxim, Johnson and Bivins are all LHWs

The record against HOFamers is HW only? The likes of Maxim shouldnt never be in the Hall anyway

 

cobra, maybe i think that he is OVERRATED, and he is not top 10 hw, noway. he is a atg lhw. but he is not top 10 hw. charles in the 60s ,70s,80s and 90s. would lose against ali,foreman,liston,frazier,holmes,norton(50%/50), holyfield,tyson,lewis,bowe.
patterson,quarry,chuvalo,ellis,terrel,lyle,spoon,tucker...... would give him the hell.

guys like dempsey,jonhson,jefries a prime louis would beat him.
charles fought in a very weak era in the hw and still he was not the best. and he was not a hw,charles never was a hw.

 

From 1942 to the end of his career, Bivins fought about three times or so at LHW. When Charles knocked hiim out, Bivins enjoyed a 14.5 lb weight advantage as a Heavyweight. Maxim found his way into the HW top 5 more times than most, he has some strong wins over Walcott, Bivins, and Sheppard..and often faced Charles while coming in well over 180 with 20-25 lb advantage. He had a long successful career and was a top notch spoiler, like him or not.

No, I didn't count Johnson as a HW, despite his success at the weight. He only fought Charles at LHW. Moore wouldn't count either.

 

ezzard charles never was a hw, he weighed 185 pounds in his 30s, HE WAS NOT A ****ING HW. ALI WAS MUCH BIGGER THAN HIM, YOU ARE TRYING TO SAY THAT HE WAS A LHW WHEN HE WAS A KID... IT IS BULL****. EVEN WHEN HE WAS A MAN IN HIS 30s HE WAS 6´0 AND WEIGHED 185 POUNDS( A CRUISER) AND IT WAS NOT HIS NATURAL WEIGHT. ALI WAS A LHW WHEN HE WAS A KID. BUT ALI IN HIS 20s WEIGHED 214 POUNDS OF MUSCLE AND NATURAL WAY, AND ALI IN HIS 30s WEIGHED 230 POUNDS AGAINST JIMMY YOUNG. ALI WAS 6´3 AND HE WAS A NATURAL HW 214-220 NATURAL POUNDER , CHARLES WAS A NATURAL LHW, PLAIN AND SIMPLE.AND HE WAS NOT IN HIS PRIME WHEN HE FOUGHT AT HW. THE BEST CHARLES WAS THE LHW CHARLES

 

truth

 

Sometimes, when I'm all alone and bored I stand on my head and **** into a fan? Do you share this hobby?

 

?¿

 

:good

 

joe louis in his late career was not better than joe frazier, frazier 75 in manilla was better than joe louis in 1950.
And i was talking about the frazier who faced foreman in 1973(29 years old undefeated) and joe louis who faced charles in 1950 (36 years old, and finished). Jo frazier was better by a mile. Frazier was great in 1973, simply the typical excuse is... Foreman destroyed him, so he was finished... Foreman would have destroyed any version of frazier, is not matter the year. It is about styles, joe was a beast even in 1975. And he was definitely by far better than louis50

 

charles was every bit the natural heavyweight evander holyfeild ever was. They were identicle frames, both were midleweights at 18 years and matured to around the 190 pound mark but evander was a body builder.

 

You have identified a bit of muscle on Charlses heavyweight resume that was not apparent to me.

The moral of this story is that it is always productive to take a closer look at what the wins meant at the time.

 

:goodCooney still failed to show his power to take out someone at the top and the same goes for Shavers. Walcott dropped 3 elites and ko'd 1. Tyson also failed to take out elite fighters. Not saying Walcott hits harder than Shavers, Cooney, or Tyson but Walcott still was no slouch when he used his power at the elite level. Cooney & Shavers were slouches when against the elite. Foreman was no beast in his 40's but did well for himself by picking and choosing opponents. Movers would give him problems and always have.

 

He was at his best at lt hvy but you can't ignore that he picked up a title at HW.....when it counted as these days there's alphabet soup titles.

 

Frazier was not great or a beast in 73 and over and was done after Manila, so was Ali really. Ali had good wins after 75 but should've retired after Manila and the same goes for Joe. He was good after FOTC but not the same and not at his best. Louis of '50 still had a title before Ezzard swiped it. Joe never regained the title after he lost it to Foreman.