Ezzard Charles vs Jack Johnson

I agree with McGrain's assessment.

 

I like ezzard is close competitive bout. Creative matchup.

 

I pick Johnson to win the decision in a dull, clinch-filled chess match.

 

Johnson would play patacake as Charles boxes from the outside. The odd few may land but it would not ruffle Johnson as he waits for the right moment to pounce, clutch and uppercut, using his strength to force Ezzard off-balance and then a stinging punch which would ruffle him.

Ezzard may get Johnson thinking more than usual but the latter not only has the smarts and the physicality to take the play away but the punch to keep Ezzard in check. No need to hit record here.

 

Cool match up. I like Jack here too. Ezz's love for mauling wouldn't be rewarded against JJ and I don't think he would get enough space to open his usual bag of set ups either.

 

An aggressive, prime Charles has way too much offense for Johnson. No way that twirling-fisted, Fred Sanford-esque style works against a more modern battler. Johnson doesn't like the pace Charles sets and focuses mostly on NOT getting hit. He manages to pick off some punches that Ez throws, but finds that the "Cincinnati Cobra" always has a LOT more to offer, thank you very much.

Charles by wide UD.

 

I'm not sure how Johnson-Charles goes, but one of the things that really impressed me in reading apollack's recent book is how often people expected a boxer with an aggresive repute to bring it to Johnson, and Johnson's opponent would come out agressive, then in a round or two he'd be a lot less aggresive. Makes me think Johnson could apply a fair amount of negative feedback.

 

I don't see Johnson as any form of Red Foxx .. I see him giving guys fits today as he did in the day .. he was the Mac Daddy of the back foot based catch and counter .. I like Ez but Jack was much stronger and a naturally larger guy and I think he takes it .. Charles would miss a lot and get hit a lot ..

 

Johnson was quick. Johnson was strong. Johnson had good power. Johnson had a good chin. Johnson had good stamina.

Charles was quicker than Johnson and he faced plenty of other quick fighters. Charles had very good power at LHW and even as a HW his power was decent. He dropped Walcott on his face, stopped Elmer Ray, Rex Layne, Bob Satterfield, and others. His chin was good. He took good shots from Moore, Walcott, Louis, Marciano, Satterfield, and others. From 1946 thru his 3rd fight with Walcott (1951), he went 39-1 with the only loss comimg to Elmer Ray (very close, questionable even). He also stopped Ray. Charles had plenty of stamina. He was a busy fighter and could still throw fast and hard punches in round 15... even vs. fighters like Walcott, Louis, Marciano, and others.

Johnson was close in size to Walcott, nothing Charles hasnt seen before. He fought plenty of quick fighter, strong fighters, fighters with good stamina, smart fighters, big hitters... you name it.

Ill take Johnson by 1st round KO... Just kidding, Charles by decision

 

We do not know if Charles was quicker at all but we do know he got hit a lot more ..