What ATG Heavyweights could Ezzard Charles Beat.

The problem with the names you provided is we are comparing them at heavy.
1.Burley was 155lbs for those 2 fights giving away7lbs to Charles.
2.Bivins was a LHVY for one of his 2 fights with Ezz.
3.Moore was a LHVy for all 3 of his.
4.Maxim was a punchless LHVY who enjoyed some success at HVy.
Charles split a pair with Layne.
He split a pair with Valdes.
He split a pair with Ray, losing to the 36 years old version.
His defences against Barone ,Lesnevich,Valentino ,were also against puffed up LHV's.
His win over Louis was when Louis had been retired for 2 years, and the War finished Louis as the Brown Bomber .
It's true Tunney does not have a deep Hvy resume,.but I don't see him losing to;
Ray
Layne
Marshall
Bivins
Valdes
Johnson might be tricky
And I don't see Tunney being ko'd by Walcott or Marshall
Two wins over a past prime Dempsey
Wins over Gibbons,Heeney,Risko,Madden ,and Spalla, aren't that far behind Charles' best imo.

 

That very specific post was for comparing Charles to Tunney. I don’t think naming other LHWs is a problem there. Especially ATG ones like Burley. Louis was out of the ring just as long as Dempsey so they’re even.
Tunney was great and all but not so sure how he does against the ones named. I def don’t think he beats Walcott or Moore (at either weight). Bivins against Tunney would be super close. I think Ray Marshall Maxim Layne all have a good chance and are all better then Gibbons or on the level.

 

I'm comparing them too and I'm comparing their respective heavyweight resumes ,and there is imo very liittle between them.
Burley was a welter/middle Charles fights with him when Burley was giving him 7lbs and weighing only155lbs himself have no relevance whatsoever when it comes to assessing Charles at heavyweight.
No they are not even previous to his2 years retirement Louis had a further4 years of inactivity due to the War .Plus Louis was 36 when he fought Charles and Dempsey was 31 and 32, and for their 2nd fight Dempsey had only been out of the ring for 2 months,having recently ko'd Sharkey.

 

Think it’s a stretch to say they’re even close resume wise at HW. Tunney only
Had 7 fights and retired very early. I don’t know how he would have done had he fought Walcott
Four times, Baksi, Elmer ray, Bivins, Louis, Layne, Holman, Maxim, lloyd Marshall, Moore (still relevant even at LHW for many reasons imo) many are hall of famers amongst them or were at least ranked at the time. I like Tunney but I personally view his career at Hw like Michae Spinks career. To short to properly evaluate with two wins over top notch past it Hw. Maybe he beats them all but if Charles couldn’t I have my doubts Tunney could. I have zero issues with placing one above the other if that’s anyone’s preference. Most used to put Tunney above Charles in Hw rankings. I personally don’t because of the limited resume.

 

Nice to see you don't get overly emotional about people you never met or anything silly like that.

Do you want to take a deep breath and tell me what about my post that bothers you?

He always struggled with movers. He basically fought in smokers coming up.

The War damn near killed Boxing. After the War everyone moved to Baseball. Mickey Mantle was the world's greatest athlete. God Bless Babe Ruth, he pretty much revolutionized the very old sport of baseball and made it an entirely new and more fan-friendly sport - starting as a pitcher, no less. But Mantle is probably the greatest baseball player of all time (sorry, Trout). Probably the greatest athlete of all time. Boxing was a thing of the past.

I love the STORY of Ezzard Charles. Boxing is all about the story - hence the success of the Rocky franchise, or movies like Raging Bull and On the Waterfront. Charles might have the best story of any Boxer, at least as it relates to America today and how we want to think about the past.

My sincerest apologies for the rant, but that is why Charles is so lauded. Looking at his record, he fought a lot of crude fighters who went for broke more than the should have. And while I very much believe they were developing real skills which served the advancement of Boxing, these guys very often shelved those skills to make a buck. And they were never to be confused for Willie Pep.

Sorry, but the story about Charles being a better Light Heavyweight than Heavyweight, and losing his edge after killing Baroudi just don't jive with his record. Not that they are completely fallacious, but the narrative that has been fashioned doesn't align with Charles' career trajectory.

Tunney, Loughran, Dempsey, these guys were the real deal and their national fanfare and the opinion of the day speaks much more assertively to reality.

 

Excellent post. You made my point much better than I could. I respect Gazelle's angle, but I just cannot agree with it for the reasons you clearly demonstrated here.

 

Charles would beat Tunney though I don't consider Gene a great heavyweight. Some do. Ezzard probably schools Jack Dempsey. I gotta give Dempsey a punchers chance, no more than that.

Even $ with Marciano

Favored over Floyd Patterson

Even $ with Holyfield.

Probably goes the distance with Lawrence but loses.