Rocky v The 1950 Version Of Charles?

"..it doesn't change his agenda, that's the whole point. "

Reading sentences as a whole will open up whole new worlds of understanding for you. You should try it sometime, after the first few words there are often all kinds of useful bits of information that will further clarify the meaning of a comment.

 

I can become a bit semantic but I would say he was a non-entity as a heavyweight following the Marciano fights. Prior to that I would say he was on a steep and quickening slide.

 

He had become less consisent but was still capable of greatness. How do you account for writers who followed most of his career describing the first Marciano fight as one of his best performances if he was on such a slide?

The steep decline is after Marciano, and rock bottom is not long after.

 

If you take his word for it. I don't.

If you say so...:nut

 

Agreed. Not comparing Charles with the capability of Ali but Charles was about where Ali was in his career versus Foreman. A busy ex champ on the comeback trail. As you say still able to produce greatness.

Ali slipped up against Norton within a busy schedule just like Charles had done with Valdes and Johnson. But Ali was producing good form within this streak right up to taking on Foreman just like Charles had done. ALI won his title shot and Charles lost his versus Rocky but win or lose neither Ali nor Charles were ever really the same. Charles declined faster but he did step back into the ring against Rocky a bit quick. Ali eased his way back against Wepner..

People talk about a drop in form from Charles after losing by KO to Walcott but this is not the case. The truth is Ezard was matched harder after that point. I'm not saying Charles was not matched hard before the Walcott KO (because he was always hard working) but if you check the number of rated fighters he fought between challenging Rocky and losing the title often back to back as an ex champion and compare that to the frequency he fought AFTER Marciano that is a good enough cause decline in itself.

After the 23 rounds in 12 weeks with Rocky Marciano, Charles was thrown into a bruising schedule. Eleven fights in 1955. Including Twice in April, twice in August and twice in December. A lot of distance fights 8 of them. His worse loss of the year came 5 days after winning a bruising split decision over Bob Albright. I don't care how good a fighter anyone is he won't do so well against even a lesser fighter coming off a tough ten rounder just days before. Charles went 6-4 that year. That's what killed him.

 

......i won't comment on the other points in this post but-

ezzard's did not fight "the greatest fight of his career"

i saw charles in his peak light heavy days.....not seen by dan paker or the other new york writers and those were the greatest fights of his career. he began his greatness when he weighed 171 and got even better as he got a little heavier.

how he would have done against marciano at a different year is not my point here.

but i will discuss charles with anyone WHO SAW ezzard in the time period i'm talking about.

 

Did you see Charles fight Fritzie Fitzpatrick or Elmer Ray?

I think Charles' prime must have began around the final Archie Moore fight in 48' and he was an elite fighter for 6 years. He was already fighting heavyweights within a year of returning from the war. Charles exclusivity in the lightheavyweight division was actually quite brief. Before the war he was below 170lb.

I've seen highlights of a Bivins fight he had. Was he better than he was versus Louis or Wallace, I'm not sure.

I don't think there's many who would not say Charles was always a fine fighter right up to the First Marciano fight.

 

Yes I thought about that. Charles was matched very hard before the war when he wasn't much more than a high school kid. He did hit somewhat of the beginnings of a peak before the Baroudi fight but there isn't any demonstration of a real decline after it since the better opponents he fought came after like Louis, Walcott, Marciano. I think Layne, Satterfeild, Tommy Jackson, Harold Johnson, Brion, were on par with many of Charles 1940s opponents.