Ezzard Charles reign

It was pretty solid. Louis (obviously very past it, but still had something left in him), Oma, Maxim, Walcott and Valentino were all ranked at the time, and Beshore was a former contender 2 years prior. The former 3 were top 3 ranked at the time, and Walcott was the divisional #2 when Charles won the NBA belt. He did miss some fighters he fought after he lost the belt, but it was circumstantial rather than deliberate.

Better than whatever any current fighter (aside from maybe Usyk) managed while holding the title.

 

Through no fault of Charles' it was probably the worst heavyweight era ever, which is why he ended up fighting Walcott so many times, and Maxim who he ended up beating five times. A bit ironic since Charles finished with one of the best reume's in boxing overall.

It was just a terrible era, with guys like Lesnevich and Savold getting in there as considered to be in big-time tournaments that never came off, and I want to say it was Joe Baksi who was once considered as a guy who might ignite the division. Dreadful.

But Charles basically did what he could and made up for it by fighting often.

 

Kind of remind s me of Holyfield s time At the top.
He had a few good performances and some just so.
Guys still a legend.

 

He beat everyone he could in his era but it was truly an awful era so I wouldn't rank his reign super high but I'd still put him in my top 20 HW list

 

No, I know.
I was just referring to when he held a belt.

 

He did okay… I agree with you, Charles was suffering the early stages of Lou Gehrig’s disease so it puts things in perspective for where the division was at and just how great he was.

 

I don't rate Lewis' opposition at heavyweight that much because those guys were so big they would have been too immobile and low stamina to fight the real athletes of Charles' era.

 

What do you mean terrible era?

 

I explained it in the post.

No one denies that the heavies in the immediate post-Louis era were pretty bad. But I can explain it no further than I did.

 

Charles is, in my opinion, one of the all-time great p4p fighters and a very tricky, dangerous heavyweight for a smaller man. That said, his title opposition was pretty weak. Lesnevich, Valentino, Beshore, Barone, Oma, and Maxim were all limited, undersized heavyweights. Walcott was by far the best he faced in that stretch. I don’t find his reign anything special outside of the fact that he defended his title often.

 

Underrated. I rate Charles higher at heavy than most, him being anywhere from 11-15 in my rankings. In a short span of time he managed 8 consecutive defenses. With the exception of Walcott it wasn't against the best opposition, but there wasn't much else for him to fight at the time and the Walcott wins were still a very solid wins to have, the Louis win wasn't bad either.

 

Yeah but what's wrong with Lesnevich and Savold?

 

How does Charles title opposition compare with Floyd Pattersons ?