RJJ vs Ezzard Charles

I know Jones is hard to time, thats one of his main assets but I'm saying that Charles' timing was so good he would be one of the few that could. Jones a smarter fighter than Charles? The one who outsmarted Archie Moore and CHarley Burley? You need to explain yourself on that one.

 

Well, I don't think he outsmarted them so much as just had more firepower and more in his arsenal than the two of them, although I've obviously never seen the fights with the smaller Burley. He doesn't have more in his arsenal than Jones I don't believe, and as I said, I am not so sure he'd be able to time him very well, but it's possible. Very close fight to call, but I lean towards Jones for his physical advantages.

 

sweet pea.....oops..i checked the ezzard charles discussion thread after my post on this one and flnd that yes indeed you are amog those of us who consider ezzard among the greatest and do know quite a bit about his career, so please remove the smart ass tone of my comments.

As for charles setting the pace..... many times charles fought only as hard as he had to to win. if he was behind his corner had to really get on him and push him go on the attack. sometimes it was only after he got stung or really hurt before he would bring in his own full arsenal.

as for jones....yeah..i've seen a lot of his fights...and that's why i think ezzard would knock him out, not because jones is an inferior fighter, but because he is...or was...a very good one and he would make charles fight at his very best.

anyway, we're really not far apart in our opinions on this one.:hi:

re: charley burley...ezzard's wins...both of them were considered big upsets...that includes the second one even after charles was so dominaant in the first. the wieght difference wasn't all that big....burley fought as a middleweight in them, and charles as a light light heavy.

i don't know if the "official" weights are available anywhere, but people in Ezzard;s corner told me the difference was about five pounds.

 

It wasn't anything about firepower. Charles was just an exceptionally clever fighter. He also twice decisioned Jersey Joe Walcott, and they don't come a lot trickier than him.

But anyway, I don't think Charles would outpoint Jones. I think he'd be smart enough to read Jones' movements and clock him. I must point out now that I don't believe Jones was quite as fragile as some make out, but Charles was, in addition to being a master technician, a great puncher, and he found ways to knock out durable fighters on numerous occasions; he had a talent for it.

 

Charles by late stoppage Roy never fought anyone close to Ezzard's level at 175lbs.

 

Charles by late stoppage.

 

A hard hitting LHW faces a MW and it's nothing to do with firepower? Not saying Charles wasn't clever, but saying firepower had nothing to do with it seems a little off, considering neither of us have seen the fight. Also, Walcott may have been crafty like Jones, but was nowhere near the athlete.

 

Charles wasn't as big and strong as he would become.

 

Err **** off?

 

Ezzard has one point of vulnerability that could factor in here -his chin. Jones shares that vulnerability. Jones therefore has a chance of landing early and rendering Ezzard's superiority elsewhere moot. Other than that possibility, I have no doubt that Ezzard would win in a clinic after overcoming an early deficit.

There is no question here as to who would be the ring general. Ezzard's resume screams that fact and you just don't hand Moore, Bivins, Williams, Maxim, Marshall, and Burley multiple defeats if you are not brilliant. He was extremely well-rounded, versatile, adaptable, and fundamentally sound.

Jones indeed has a style that is disruptive to say the least, but he is a one trick pony to honest analysts. Jones is not a ring general. His genious is athletic. His genious is not strategic. I see Ezzard overcoming an early points deficit and making the necessary adjustments to Jones' speed and power with counters and well-timed straight shots. Experience, guile, and fundamentals all combine with superior adaptability and versatility and favor Charles over 15. If Jones doesn't get lucky early, he is likely to take an involuntary nap later on.

 

The only problem I have with the guys of the Classic Forum is how they underrate Jones. I dislike most in the General Forum for their lack of knowledge on subjects they feel they should speak about, but if there's one thing I dislike about guys in the Classic Forum, it's now how they underrate modern fighters, it's how they underrate Jones in particular. Not saying Charles couldn't win, he could, but Stonehands, Jones was someone who relied on his athleticism and quickness to work his magic, not just someone who happened to be very quick therefore noone could keep up with him. He was the most physically awesome specimen we've seen, but his boxing brain and timing were what made it so useful.

 

The only problem I have with [a few] guys in the Classic Forum is how they tend to lurch into apologetics and sacrifice objectivity. Ali has C.M. Clay and Jones has you. You do, nonetheless, show skill in argumentation but the problem is that you begin with an assumption that "Jones wins" and then go from there.

You repeat my premise that Jones was "someone who relied on his athleticism and quickness to work his magic"... overlooking my statement that "Jones' genious was athletic"... I dispute your notion that he was a "boxing brain." He relied primarily and predominantly on his physical gifts often at the expense of everything else and when those gifts subsided, his greatness did as well, at a faster rate than other greats.

 

I love how every fighter I defend I automatically become a nuthugger of, first Whitaker, now Jones. Clever.

Roy's boxing brain relied a lot on his athletic abilities. Sounds off, but I'll get to it. When in his prime, Roy would bait opponents in with his unorthodox style and open stance, leading to perfect countering opportunities. You could argue someone like Meldrick Taylor relied on his quickness, but Jones was a much craftier fighter than someone like that. He would lead with a lazy punch to the body a few times, waiting for the opponent to counter, at which point he would snap back and counter the counter. Yes, it took great speed to do that, but he was one who thought moves ahead, like a chess player. He didn't simply rely on his physical abilities to blow opponents out or use his quickness to outland based on punch output, he used them to compliment his boxing brain.

As I said, his style was very unorthodox and relied a lot on setting traps for opponents and capitalizing on them, which took great physical ability to do the way he did. That was his style.

Now, as far as your point regarding why he fell off as soon as his athleticism did. That was his immense ego. His ego that told him he was still the best P4P, and that he didn't need to adjust his style to make it work. Unfortunately, he was past it physically, and when he continued to fight with the same style as did did in his younger days when he had the abilities to pull off a lot of what he did, it eventually bit him in the ass.

His ego when past his prime killed him. His boxing brain while in his prime complimented his physical abilities perfectly.