Who was better boxer? Ezzard Charles or Larry Holmes

Or Holyfield for that matter.
Do you feel these 187lb versions would tango 15 with the Bombers shadow? Or lose to an end-career Walcott two times? .....
Just asking. Cause we´re talking about a P4P boxing genius here....

 

It’s not entirely out of the question. Charles was a truly exceptional fighter. His winning streak from 1944-1950 is among one of the most impressive of all time in my opinion. His only defeat during that period was a robbery decision to Elmer Ray which he took care of in a rematch. In addition to beating Ray he beat Walcott, Moore, Lesnivich, an aging Louis and a whole lost of other good fighters.

 

Wait, does anyone really deny that Charles had better footwork than Holmes? What is so controversial in that?

 

I do.

 

Since you're trying to paint a pretty strange narrative. How about we put things into their actual context?

If Holyfield and Holmes started off as featherweights in the amateurs, building up to being middleweights by the age of 18 then staying around the middleweight limit for 4 years and only becoming a full fledged light-heavy after two years in service where he clearly bulked up, then having 40 fights or so vs the most stacked competition of almost anyone ever. Before moving up and beating a prime Walcott twice, and only then losing and arguably getting stiffed in the final match. Do you think they'd do better than Charles did? I definitely don't! Would they KO Louis? Possibly, but it's doubtful.

 

I wouldn't bet on any of them stopping this version of Louis.

 

Id bet on both of the real versions of them to stop that Louis. I wouldn't bet on them if they had to go through what Charles did.

 

I think that Holyfield could do that, but I don't think Holmes would. Louis was durable men and he wasn't easy to stop. He was still in much better shape than in Marciano fight and I don't think going for kill against him is a good idea.

Holmes would outbox him for clear decision, you'll never know with Evander.

 

I've always thought that Holmes would give him an Ali-esque beating. Holyfield was the heavier puncher of the three, and the most aggressive. I think he'd probably get a TKO from a combo at some point. Possibly a cross-counter sets up a barrage of hooks.

 

Charles is more technically well rounded while Larry is the better HW
Holmes has the better jab though. That's not even up for debate

 

P4p.

 

Charles

 

Charles obviously, he's a top 10 P4P god of war.

Charles is the consensus #1 light heavy nowadays i would think. H2H at 175 there's not a soul i would favor over him.

Charles was a big puncher at 175. P4P he easily hit harder than Holmes but Holmes hit a bit harder at Heavyweight.

If they were born to be the same size i'd take Charles H2H for sure. There's a reason he's rated so highly P4P. At Heavyweight as they were it's Holmes. Charles would put on a good show for a small guy however.