Nat Fleisher's Top 10 Heavyweights

Yes, perception can sometimes change over time... and Charles is one of those boxers who really has benefitted (legacy-wise) from the emergence of the internet. Over the past several years now, he has been talked up on forums like this - to the point where he now seems to be in just about everybody's p4p Top-10. On McGrain's Top-100 list he's as high as #5!

It wasn't always like that: When the World Boxing Hall Of Fame voted in their first 16 inductees in 1980, Charles wasn't one of them. He only finished 35th in the voting! Incidentally, Sam Langford (McGrain's #1) wound up in 26th place - so he also didn't make it that first year! And neither did SRR in 27th place, would you believe? Something that is very hard to understand today!

 

Whoops, missed that! Thanks Doosh

 

you've had a shocker there mate.

 

But if we have film we can see for ourselves what they saw before us.

 

Yeah! I had a serious case of WTF!!!

 

atsch

 

Sharkey concerning fighting Dempsey....."I never thought anyone could hit that hard"

 

Terrific article.

There have been plenty like that.

I remember back in the early sixties when Jacobs first began showing his ancient films,

there was an article in I think True Magazine entitled "I didn't know whether to laugh or cry" which was the comment of one of the boxing writers when he first saw the films.

 

"Charles doesn't belong in an all time top ten"

of a list made in the 1960's?

Corbett is #5--in 1948 Charles stopped Archie Moore, Elmer Ray, and Joe Baksi. How can anyone be certain this trio is inferior to Joe Choynski, Peter Jackson, and Jake Kilrain.

I certainly wouldn't be,

Why is Corbett's win over the 34 year old, fat, out-of-shape, laid off three years and heavy into booze Sullivan a greater achievement than Charles beating the 36 year old Louis?

After beating Sullivan, did Corbett actually defeat a heavyweight at all over the rest of his career?

Charley Mitchell--158 lbs.

Kid McCoy?

Peter Courtney?

Guys like Walcott, Maxim, and Layne are much more impressive to me than that bunch.

I see no problem at all rating Charles above Corbett.

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"of a list made in the 1960's?"

That is the key line here.

And ESPN rated him 7th in their top ten list compiled in the 21st century.

He was also 11th in the Ring Magazine list in 1999, but would only rank behind Louis, Marciano, Johnson, and Dempsey of those who were champions before 1960.

Of course, any opinion can be dismissed.

 

Nats top 10 was first published in the 50s not the 60s. Corbett was considered an ATG hwt champion for many decades. Charles was never considered an ATG as a hwt.....never by anyone.

 

"Corbett was considered an ATG hwt champion as a hwt"

"Charles was never considered an ATG as a hwt . . . never by anyone."

And the point?

So you are saying Corbett was clearly better both on film and by record than Charles? Or frankly, even in the same class?

Charles clearly defeated more good heavyweights than Corbett did.

 

There is no good film of Corbett. Charles WE KNOW was never thought of as an ATG. In 1955 you would be hard pressed to find a any article concerning ATG fighters that did not include Corbett. Charles was and is not in any way considered an ATG hwt.

 

There is good film of Corbett against Fitz and Courtney.

"In 1955 you would be hard pressed to find any article concerning ATG fighters that did not include Corbett."

I am not disputing that. I am just saying that their judgment was in error.

Your position seems to boil down to the errors of the past must be our errors also.

*and it all depends which "experts" we are going to abandon our own judgment for. In 1999 Ring Magazine did an ATG heavyweight ranking, and Charles was #11, ahead of Jeffries and Fitz. Corbett did not make the top 25.

 

"Nat's top ten was first published in the 50s not the 60s."

A mute point. I think the first list was 1958,

but as his final list included Eder Jofre at #4 among the bantamweights, he obviously did update it before he died.

 

There is no good film of Corbett as there really is no good film of Dempsey. Even the best silient film era footage appears as if every third frame is missing. You have to look ultra DEEP to see skills that would be obvious in more modern films.

Again Nats all time rankings were first published in the 50's. Charles was never considered an ATG fighter.