McGrain you're swimming against the current here clearly. This is clearly a thread that proves beyond a doubt charles was picked by the majority to have beaten johnson.
I was planning on watching this later tonight when the missus goes to bed so ill post my scorecard up then.
I had it darn close, but the knockdown that Charles clearly scored should have cemented it for him. I'm good with 6-4 to either guy. I seem to flip flop myself.
Ok just finished watching it - heres my scorecard: 1 - Johnson 2 - Johnson 3 - Charles 4 - Charles 5 - Johnson 6 - Johnson 7 - Charles 8 - Charles 9 - Charles 10 - 9-9 even (thought Johnson took the round but Ezzard scored a knockdown) so 95-94 Charles w/KD. Tough fight to call though, I thought rounds 4,8 & 9 were very close and could swing. Johnson outworking Charles at points but Charles landing some very nice shots especially later in the fight, some great body punching as well. Both guys buzzed several times but overall I think Ezzard nicked it although I haven't got a problem with people scoring in favour of Johnson, just a close fight with a few rounds that could swing the fight either way depending on who's work you prefer.
I will score this fight if I can get a guarantee that Charles doesn't initiate at least 15 clinches per round.
I= Johnson. 2= Johnson 3= Charles 4= Charles 5= Johnson 6= Charles 7 =Charles (decisively) 8=Johnson 9 =Charles 10=Charles. charles 6-4 It was a good fight. Charles was against a master boxer not looking to get involved in a slugfest and use his boxing. Chares was the hunter during a lot of the fight but many exchanges were even and both were expert at preventing the other from entirely getting the upper hand. Johnson doubled up his jab well at times and landed nice counters. when Charles was looking to set traps Harold wasn’t buying it. However there were as many times where I felt Johnson was on the outside and at risk from Charles better punching and it was Charles not Johnson who looked most likely to have the edge if there was one. Johnson was working off Charles whilst Charles took the lead. both were stunned a equal number of times but Charles made more impression. you could even count a knockdown for Charles if you wanted to be fussy. if its close I tend go with fighter who does more leading off. many rounds could have gone either way.
Bujia, it's quite a good fight. Johnson putting on a jab clinic with charles setting up the counter right. Almost every round has johnson outlanding charles but charles landing eye catching jabs. Johnson also lands so great right uppercuts in there. You can see a decline in charles footspeed, handspeed, reflexes and workrate but he's still in good form. Just not good enough imo.
I just rewatched this and 1--Johnson 2--Johnson 3--Charles 4--Charles 5--even 6--Johnson 7--charles 8--Johnson 9--Charles 10--Charles 5-4-1 Charles *I turned the sound down and just judged on what I saw **It appeared to me that Charles did much better body work and landed more and harder power shots. Just watching, I can't say I ever thought Charles was stunned. Johnson appeared to be at least stunned by right crosses in the fourth, seventh, and tenth, and certainly appeared to me to be knocked down by a right followed by a left hook in the tenth. I watched this moment several times and it sure looked like a flash knockdown to me. However, I would have scored the 10th for Charles anyway. **For all the above posts about Johnson's jab, I noticed that it was Johnson's head that was snapped back by jabs. Charles had a longer and harder jab. He won the fight on the combination of a left jab which snapped Johnson's head back followed immediately by a right cross. This combination scored the knockdown and landed effectively several times during the course of the fight.
People always say this about fights where they fear they may be being led astray by the commentary. It never ceases to amaze. Not only are you depriving yourself of one of the senses you should be using to judge boxing (hearing the punches going in) you are admitting that you couldn't judge it independent of what some commentator is saying? I just don't get it at all.
