Ezzard Charles vs George Foreman

Charles or Foreman?
Because Charles has an argument for being the best ever and his record is iron clad perfect....

 

6'3, 215 lbs Ezzard Charles would've destroyed Foreman.

 

Charles. Records are very decptive. It's possible that some losses were wins, and vice versa. Who knows? Maybe he'll be considered the greatest in the next 30 years. His stock might fall too.

 

I’d probably pick big George but this is no easy fight. Charles went many rounds with numerous puncher’s in both victory and defeat like Elmer Ray, Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano and Archie Moore. He was an exceptionally skilled and mobile boxer as well

 

Don't like this fight. I like Ezz but I wouldn't put him in with a beast like Foreman.
Charles was tough and brave, not stupid but brave.

 

Maybe we should think about Charles and Young, and who we think was the better fighter.

 

Think Charles is being wayyy underrated here. Styles considering. George has a great chance of getting him out of there but I wouldn’t discount a Charles points win either

 

Charles was a superb fighter. Arguably the best LHW EVER.
An at least if you did not allow day before weigh ins, or fairly allowed him to drain from his up to late 180's HW campaigns to fight at LHW: he may well be the greatest H2H LHW ever.

Looking at his record & just considering losses is very deceptive.
He fought way past his prime, I like him better than Moore H2H, but Moore you likely pick Moore for overall accomplishments due to his extraordinary accomplishments including most HW KOs...Ever.


He certainly might take at least a markedly subpar Foreman into deep waters & win.
But I think prime for prime, we have to heavily favor Foreman.
Size is NOT everything, but it is meaningful. Certainly a factor when distinguishing World Class fighters.

Jimmy Young was not as great as Charles pound for pound.
But he was even more elusive & slick.
Foreman was coached to be *too* cautious, Young was out on his feet once-but it was not enough given his post Ali trauma & strategy.
We must favor even this version of Foreman against Charles.

Please note that Young was more than 20 lbs. heavier than any version of prime HW Charles.
He had to put on weight to reach 189 vs. Rocky, which it was suggested slowed him down.

Anyway I do not think his frame would support him having the combination of speed, power & punch resistance necessary to survive prime Foreman.
Just like how SRR was even greater P4P, maybe the greatest ever, but at about the same height did not have the frame to compete as well in the LHW & HW divisions.

 

Soooo let's get this straight, the dude who struggled with Pat Valentino and was KO'd by Walcott vs. the dude that made Tommy Morrison a Boxer....

Wow. If this doesn't teach kids to stay off drugs, nothing will.

Foreman KO 1.

 

Arguably if you pretend guys like Loughran, Conn and Tunney didn't exist. And they all had more impressive Heavyweight careers than Charles... they also didn't wind up in diapers shortly after retiring. In fact, they all out lived him.

But I wouldn't pick any of them to beat Foreman. I say that acknowledging not only that they were better than Charles, but that STYLISTICALLY they presented more problems for Foreman than Charles ever could. Yup, I still would not pick any of them to beat Foreman. At least, not based on what we have seen of them. Given the time to train and adapt to Foreman, I am sure they'd all do well. Maybe Tunney would have pulled it off. But George was too big and too good.

If you want a reference for how Foreman handled small mobile Heavyweights with guile, look at the Peralta fights. At least one is available.

The idea that George was some ponderous oaf is terribly misguided.