SuzieQ49's recent thread about Marciano, Patterson, and Moore made me think of this match up. Both knocked out Moore, though Charles prevailed against Maxim where Patterson wasn't able to in what was, though, a disputed loss. Both are not true heavies, so, at about the cruiser-weight level for 15 rounds, who most likely wins? Is Charles too skilled? Or is Patterson too quick?
I think Patterson is fast enough and powerful enough to land a big shot. EZ Charles would get caught at one point or another, He goes down to a Patterson L hook, and does not survive the round with the ref stepping in.
I say Charles out boxes him and knocks him down a time or two when Patterson lunges in off balance, he had great timing. When a cobra meets a gentleman the cobra wins every time.
Charles was a better fighter and took a better shot, Patterson had the quicker hands but a little but Charles was the better smallish heavyweight
.....oddly enough, ezzard thought he could get shot at patterson. this was late in his career. he was in denial then about how far back he had gone. for a while he thought he could get another match with marciano, and then when marciano retired he thought he could re-win the title against patterson. totally not realizing how far past even being a contender, and his friends and his wife gladys kept trying to get him to retire. each in his prime? i'd pick ezzard and it wouldn't be one of his hardest fights.
Great and interesting responses. I still don't know who'd win, but I'm leaning towards Charles, that is, if Patterson doesn't catch him with a haymaker. Can't an extraordinary gentleman tame a cobra?
You underate Charles. He rates up there with Greb as one of the P4P best of all time. Can't see how you could possibly favor the 1954 175lb Patterson(who lost to Maxim) over a peak 1948 Ezzard Charles
Both are underrated. I will go with Charles. In his prime he was smooth as silk. Great boxer, good puncher.
