Ezzard Charles vs. George Foreman (1974)

How are Ken Norton and Ezzard Charles even remotely stylistically similar?

Norton's aggressive offense and crab defense was perfect for boxers, and terrible for punchers. You can't crowd Foreman and catch his power swings like Ali jabs.

 

-I would say he had trouble with the older Louis' jab at points. I personally dont' feel Foreman's jab was often as good as billed, especially when walking down more mobile fighters, George usually went into swing for the fences mode when he had to make chase. I think his jab was at its most effective against Fraizer, not landing it, but using it to make him duck into his big uppercut as he tried to bob inside.

-Not sure on Valdez. I used to think that, but the most reliable articles I could find on that match seem agree that Valdez won the fight by smothering Charles after he gassed in the heat going for an early knockout.

 

Ezzard's margin for error is going to be very slim - I'd probably fear for anyone going in with Foreman tbh - I suppose the closest thing on film that we can use as a guage is maybe Ezzard boxing the shot Joe Louis - I would say as a boxer even tho shot and old Joe was still a much more precise and controlled machine than Foreman - and he couldn't really pin EzZard Charles down - obviously that speed on pulling the trigger just wasn't there anymore with Louis but the Foreman was slow and had absolutely zero poise whatsoever - anyone who even moved a little bit pose him problems as far a levering his massive arm punches to the target with enough snap and leverage - if you watch the Foreman Ali fight - in that first round Foreman barely lands anything that really connects in that first round and Ali was actually pretty stationary as far as his feet were concerned and he was in vulnerable positions close to corners and ropes etc - Ezz would be moving moving moving and George wouldn't be able to set himself very often - so where Louis couldn't get his shots off very often because his reflexes had gone George wouldn't be getting his off because he didn't have enough reflexes and or balance in the first place and needed you in just the right place to get you with his - on the flipside when he did get you (or even half get you) he had massive power - we know Ezz had an amazing chin - but even watching against Louis to me it looked like if Louis had had that speed of youth (or had Ez stopped moving) then he might not have been big enough to have withstood the dreadnought power of a Louis - or for that matter, a Foreman - but Foremans stamina and proven susceptibility to any good boxers - or anyone putting a decent boxing exhibition on him makes me wonder - I struggle to imagine anyone surviving Foreman but then people Jimmy Young did not long after 74 - I know syche had gone but still? I suppose I gotta go Charles by decision because I can't see Charles being stopped within 3 or 4 rounds by anyone really

 

I said size alone. Foreman obviously completely overpowered much larger and heavier men with ease in during both careers, while sub 200 pounders like Forte (who was wiped out in two by Patterson a month later), and Peralta were able to survive to the final bell.

Foreman was able to use his height and reach to shove Frazier to arm's length, from where Joe had logistical trouble reaching him in Jamaica. Charles wouldn't have that issue with George's height, reach and weight. Dealing with his physical strength and punching power would be a different issue. Fulton-Langford was an instance where the deficit in height and reach alone was simply too much for Sam to overcome. The disparity between Ezz and Foreman in that respect is not so prohibitive. Charles would be able to maneuver as needed to get to George.

 

although I like the chances of JJ Walcott even more I still give the Charles who fought Marciano or the Charles who fought Louis a very good chance against Foreman. I look at the 2 Peralta fights and Gregorio never hit the floor and he hit Foreman an awful lot in both fights. Thing is Peralta fought in the pocket and he could not hit like Charles nor did he have the talent. !st fight Foreman was Green but I was not impressed with Foreman in fight 2 either ...Peralta was 6' even and weighed 195-197...Goyo was good but he was no Charles...Charles was not the same guy after the Marciano fights but he was on fire just before with his electric KO's over the 6"3 Coley Wallace and 2nd rd KO over Bob Satterfield. I like Charles to have a good chance with a smart tactical fight and an sporadic inside battle like Peralta but Charles was faster and hit harder than Goyo

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmiaY9foH8w[/ame]

 

Charles, who tended to weigh no more than 184 lbs, was just too small to threaten Foreman. I imagine Charles would have boxed brilliantly for a round or two, but he would have been wiped out by the bigger and infinitely more powerful man.

Foreman by KO within 5 rounds.

 

Charles weighed 193 for the 2nd Marciano fight and was about 190lbs for Louis and Coley Wallace...He fought up to 204lbs and fought Walcott at 191 and 185 but he was ripped

 

The Foreman who fought Ali was arrogant and clueless ... over confident based on his crushing victories over Frazier and Norton , his tremendous physical skills were neutered by self-loathing and ignorance ... he was as self-destructive as the later incarnation was crafty and wise ... that being said I can easily imagine a lightning quick, well conditioned, highly experienced , tough and game Charles taking him ...

 

ON paper your point makes sense but based on styles I see it a mismatch the other way ...

Can you tell what great boxer did Foreman ever beat ? He lost decisively to Ali and was squeezed out buy Young who I do not consider to be close to Charles' class .. if George did not tag him fast and very early I see him having a very rough night ... again, I am stressing the 1974 version, the height of his arrogance and nadir of his talent maximization ..

 

I agree but to me that Foreman was one of the most talented under achievers that ever fought at heavyweight ... even more than Dempsey .. both could have been so much better but never peaked and maximized their exceptional skill sets ..