One could argue that Charles was a better fighter than Lewis, but Lewis was so much larger. Could Charles cause an upset against a prime Lewis or is the size difference too much?
I think Charles has a good chance. Lewis could be awesome when he was on his game but he didn't always bully smaller guys in the way I'd have expected him to. I think Lewis would win because ultimately he was a very good big fighter but I see Charles giving him trouble along the way. Close points win for Lewis is my call.
As much chance as Holyfield. If they meet in the 1950s Lewis would be 216lb without being an inch shorter. If they fight in the 1990s Charles is everything Holyfield is.
Charles was a great , great fighter but not in the highest level at heavyweight and Lennox was too big and too good.
Lewis would be dead in the water before the contract is even signed. Lewis would have caught wind of Charles being avoided at the lower light HW class and panic would set in. Lewis went 12 rounds with Billups and Mavrovic, Ezzard went 15 with unbeatable Marciano. Do the math?
Lewis is easily a top ten ATG heavy Charles definitely is not, add the size and power factor and there is only one outcome here.
At their best, Lewis wins. That said, Lewis could blow hot and cold and on an off night he's within the scope of Charles to beat.
Charles is a more skilled boxer so he would win cause size and strength doesn't mean anything in boxing, especially if you do weight lifting like Lewis did - that's an artifical size and strength. Only skills, speed and stamina.
Ezzard would be a 25 to 1 favorite in his day, they would laugh at someone like Lewis...they would say oh look another huge Hw who can't fight proper like the small guys.
Your sarcasm is duly noted. I pick Lewis to win myself. Size and strength does mean something, though Charles had the skill level to MAYBE overcome it.