would charles have been considered one of the top 3 light-heavys if he had stay at the weight,from what i have read he could really punch at that weight charles vs jones jr charles vs foster charles vs spinks
Charles is my #1 at LHW. Not many agree, but I think Jones would give Charles real problems. I think of Jones as a rythym breaker that doesn't sacrifice his own pace to do it. But Charles was a compact puncher and could definitely KO him. Foster is a very difficult one to call, I don't think anybody could claim to really know how that one would go until they see it. Sattersfield couldn't put Charles away, but then Foster was a much better boxer...I think I lean towards Charles, but anything could happen. I favour Charles to edge Spinks but I've no problem with the reverse pick.
Charles is maybe the no1 LHW of all time, he whips Spinks and Foster and maybe beats Jones who would be trickier and beat Charles to the punch early
I don't know if Charles is number one or not .. he may be slightly overated here as the top five ar so are pretty amazing and I don't see him dominating ...however, I can see him outpointing Spinks and stoping Jones ... Foster would be extremely dangerous ...
He's not a lock for #1, certainly. There are so many greats at 175. Nobody dominates the very top of any long-lived division in head to head terms, with the possible exception of Ali at HW.
Actually I think Charles is a near lock for LHW no1 with his performances and legacy at and above the weight Charles has fought and beat better LHWs than Foster, Charles would be much more dangerous to Foster than vice-versa
Spinks - excellent resume (although not as deep) but not as skilled Tunney - technically poor, not as physically gifted, much weaker resume, a few avoided fights in his time Roy Jones - weaker resume Moore - beat him 3 times Foster - weak resume Greb - excellent resume, although lost the series to Tunney who clearly isnt as good as Charles and it was a weaker less advanced era
I think its a bit of a stretch to say Charles "whips" some of the very best the division has produced in other eras..especially when there isnt a whole lot of film that I know of him out there at the weight. Of course his record is absolutely spectacular at 175...but he was prone to the odd hiccup aswell. In saying all that he still is firmly my no1 h2h at lightheavy given his dominance at the weight and the names he beat there. I think Foster and Spinks can beat him and Jones in the 12 round era under modern interpretations of the rules would certainly be a hard fight for anyone. In a series Id confidently pick Charles to find a way more often then not..he doesnt lose series at this weight.
Charles would most definitely not 'whip' Foster or Spinks. I think Jones would give him troubles, but I think the other two would stop him. Saying that, I rate Charles WAY above Jones in both my LHW list AND my all-time P4P post-war list...............I just think all three of these guys are bad matchups for him. I also think both Spinks and Foster (who probably weighed similar amounts to Marciano) hit harder than Rocky..........I don't think it ends up too well for Charles at all, although if he has a trilogy with any three of these guys he beats all of them at least once. IN MY OPINION!!!
I do think that he is as near to a lock as can be for number 1 at the weight personally, though an authentic lock is hard to determine. In the past i have never considered Moore as the greatest, though recently i see him in a lighter shade of greatness, maybe it's more the respect for the man that alters his standing (a new bias?) for me. But Charles beat him three times regardless of some thinking the middle bout was ultra close. I think Charles could beat Jones personally, the way he can jump in with rapid fire multiple shots, a stoppage is not out of the question imo, you would see Jones in actual trade-offs here that might look not too dissimilar from the ones in Mosley-DeLa Hoya 1 (not to make a comparison in ability between the respective comabatants). I think if a man offsets Ezzard Charles it would be the less technically skilled Spinks to be honest. And the ability that Loughran and Foster posess, in vastly different aspects, means they cannot be written off here either. Charles might beat all of them, he might not though. As much as people talk of Foster's weak resume, getting close to him is silly.
I and I would think most have him at 1 his resume at the weight is unmatched. I feel he would stop Jones and Foster and a decision in Spinks which would be the hardest fight.
He's number one at the weight for me, though the matter is certainly up for debate owing to the richness of the division's history. I can envision scenarios where Spinks, Foster and Jones may beat Charles, but as WhataRock said, he wins a series against any of them. I think it's his overall completeness as a boxer-puncher that slightly separates him from the other 3 and I wouldn't be overconfident of Jones even fighting him in the first place, particularly the pre-Baroudi version who may have had less inhibitions.
i honestly dont think Spinks or Foster hit harder then Marciano. Besides Charles want exactly AT his peak when he met Rocky.
