Ruslan Chagaev vs Jersey Joe Walcott and Ezzard Charles

Why do you care one way or the other? Christ, who really gives a damn if a short term champion from over half a century ago would have beaten an alpha titlist in one of the worst eras?

Its kind of like starting a poll over which shitty fast food meal was better, Chicken McNuggets or the Arby's roast beef....

 

Isn't that what this particular forum was pretty much created for though? I see mostly discussion about fantasy match-ups here.

 

agenda based chicken-feed.

jesus, you people care less for boxing than you do for arguing the unprovable.

 

You have a clear agenda yourself my friend. You came up with this gem after all:

 

No,

This particular thread was not started with the intention in mind to discuss boxing history on a subjective level.. It was started out of spitefulness and disdain for the opinions of a particular poster... Frankly, I could see if it was over a matchup between two greats like Carlos Monzon and Marvin Hagler... But, Ruslan Chagaev and Joe Walcott???

Again, McNuggets vs the roast beef.....

 

Wouldn't it be boring if we only discussed match-ups such as Tyson vs Ali, Mayweather vs Whitaker, Hagler vs Monzon?

I know why this thread was started but it could get interesting if people discussed this match-up in intelligent fashion, which I admit is likely not going to happen.

I assume that Walcott and Charles, brilliant as they were skill-wise, never faced anyone with the southpaw style of Chagaev. It was less common back in the day as we all surely know.

Chagaev however is not the best user of the southpaw stance that I've seen, since he tends to stand rather stationary, utilizing little head movement, and often moves the "wrong way" that a southpaw should.

 

A prime Charles or Walcott would beat a prime Chagaev...in my opinion, of course.

 

There,

You gave SuzieQ the answer he was looking for.. Now, let's all shut down this thread and go to bed..

 

It's after midnight here. Bed sounds pretty good to this old man right about now. :good

 

Can you find a wiser or better scribed comment on this entire board?

A slight bit of objectivity and just the scantest wiping of those rose-colored nostalgic lenses does an agenda make.

 

Explain this quote:

"The 1970's was a decade of unathletic, under-sized, over the hill slobs, by in large. I don't think Ken Norton would make the top-5 today."

It doesn't really make any sense to say that the 1970's were a decade of unathletic, under-sized slobs and then bring up Ken Norton, a modern-sized heavyweight and a super athelete, and say that he could not make top 5 today.

You look at today's top 10 heavyweights and you'll find out that most of them are "slobs" also, even more so than the 1970's "slobs" which include Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier, Larry Holmes, George Foreman, Ken Norton, Ron Lyle, Earnie Shavers...

Today's top 10:

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Vitali Klitschko
3. Ruslan Chagaev
4. Alexander Povetkin
5. Nikolai Valuev
6. Eddie Chambers
7. Chris Arreola
8. Alexander Dimitrenko
9. David Haye
10. John Ruiz

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showpost.php?p=4170419&postcount=25

 

How about Chagaev has a carreer first, THEN we compare them?

 

If under appreciating the 70's means wiping off my rose tinted glasses, then I never want to see the world for how it really is....In fact, keep the dirt and grime coming... Make those glasses nice and dirty....

 

Of course... because, oh my god!!! Ken Norton was fairly average unless you have a man crush on his sculpted abs.

Sorry, I love me some Norton, but he just wasn't that good, merely awkward and strong (which can go a long way when combined with a chin).

Being a guy who is result-based in his analysis, I give him full credit for being the kryptonite to Ali and truly think he got robbed in III. However, Ali was something of an unathletic slob this point, relying soley on his incredible innate abilities and capacity for punishment (along with his love affair with the press and refs)... Who ever got away with more clinching (not even Ruiz), holding the ropes or holding behind the head (not even Lewis). Yeah, I give Norton quite a bit of credit for surviving that.

He beat the living **** out of Quarry, I'll give him that, also. Too bad there weren't more alcoholic drug addicts with bad backs and daddy complexes to feed on.

I'm just saying...