Ezzard Charles vs Floyd Patterson at HW

Patterson by ko. Because he was better hw and stylistically Patterson had the tools to beat and even stop Charles.
Charles did not have the type of power to worry Patterson.
Patterson had the power to knock out Charles.
Patterson had the speed to catch Charles.
Patterson had the skill to rival with Ezzard's
Patterson was the stronger man and probably naturally 10 pounds bigger.

 

Charles is far more skilled, can match Patterson for speed and is far more proven as a HW fighter.

Both were 6'0, Charles has a better reach. Both weighed between 180 and 190 as a HW.

Charles is better, bigger and far more proven.

Quite an easy pick tbh.

 

Charles dec or late stoppage.

 

Lol what a bunch of trash. Probably the 80% of the post is lie

 

Charles is bigger than Patterson, far more proven than Patterson and operates at a much higher skill level.

Patterson only has an advantage in power, but unless he lands a perfect punch he isn't knocking Charles out.

 

"Charles is bigger than Patterson because he had longer reach" lmao only here..

Hearns was obviously bigger than Tyson,Frazier and Tua. He was taller with longer reach

 

Charles was also the same height as Patterson and weighed in the same weight range.

The only difference in terms of attributes is the reach of Charles.

Charles is obviously the naturally stronger HW.

 

Obviously Charles and Patterson are approximately the same size.

But I saw someone trying to claim Patterson was more of a HW but Charles more of a LHW so I was going ott to counter that ridiculous argument.

Neither man has a size advantage, but Charles has a reach advantage and given his propensity to fight on the outside that's actually a big advantage here.

Patterson coming at Charles with a peekaboo isn't going to work.

 

No. It is simply false. Patterson was a" hw " (cruiser) in his prime weighing 185-190 pounds, at 21 he could not make the 175 limit anymore, however charles at 21 was making 160 pounds and he made perfectly the 175 limit until his late 20s.
So your afirmation is ridiculous and false, Patterson was the bigger man(not huge difference but he was bigger), stronger ,faster and harder puncher.
Charles has advantage in skill not by much, Patterson was pretty skilled himself.
Patterson was a hw fighter who started as lhw when he was very young (Ali also was a lhw in the amateurs)and Charles was a natural lhw who fought in the hw division later in his career because the age.

 

Whilst campaigning at HW Patterson and Charles were the same weight.

Patterson has no advantage in size.

 

Your posts make me want to shout

This content is protected

 

So james toney weighed 217 against Holyfield and Tyson weighed 217 in his prime they were the same size?
Stop talking nonsenses please

 

What a great example. Did Tyson have a size advantage over Holyfield?