Tyson Fury vs Ezzard Charles

[Controversial]

I've never seen anyone say size is irrelevant. I did see a way expired holyfield box circles around valuev

Thats my point, Valuev wasn't good, he won the title because he was big. Had he been 5'10" he wouldn't have been anything.

You're right. Not sure what that has to do with this except for fury fits the same mold.

Fury is more talented than Valuev but yes sheer size also helped Fury win his fights too.

[Onetimeonly]

I agree he's better, neither would bother Charles. He's a top 5 all time fighter IMO.

[Controversial]

I agree he's better, neither would bother Charles. He's a top 5 all time fighter IMO.

Yes Charles is a far better fighter but sometimes sheer awkwardness and size poses different problems. That doesn't mean Fury is the better fighter, just awkward enough to cause a small ATG lots of problems and enough problems to beat him.

[Onetimeonly]

Fury lacks the power to get the job done.

[Controversial]

Fury lacks the power to get the job done.

Why does he need power? He would just switch hit, move, frustrate, hold, lean on etc..... boring as hell but enough to keep a little man away. It’s worked on far bigger and stronger men than Charles.

[oogiebe]

Fury lacks the power to get the job done.

Why does he need power? He would just switch hit, move, frustrate, hold, lean on etc..... boring as hell but enough to keep a little man away. It’s worked on far bigger and stronger men than Charles.

IMHO Fury's size and strength would wear out an undersized Charles.

[Onetimeonly]

Fury lacks the power to get the job done.

Why does he need power? He would just switch hit, move, frustrate, hold, lean on etc..... boring as hell but enough to keep a little man away. It’s worked on far bigger and stronger men than Charles.

Charles isn't going to throw 20 punches a Rd.

[Controversial]

Fury lacks the power to get the job done.

Why does he need power? He would just switch hit, move, frustrate, hold, lean on etc..... boring as hell but enough to keep a little man away. It’s worked on far bigger and stronger men than Charles.

Charles isn't going to throw 20 punches a Rd.

I don’t think it would matter, he would struggle to get near Fury. Love him or hate him Fury has good movement for someone that size, he proved he can do 12 rounds easily enough and kept away from much bigger fighters, keeping away from a small one is only going to be easier. It takes nothing away from Charles he was an fantastic fighter.

[Onetimeonly]

He kept away from someone who didn't want to find him. Fury is very easy to hit.

[HomicideHenry]

He kept away from someone who didn't want to find him. Fury is very easy to hit.

I see this argument all the time against modern heavyweights--- and I think they believe that because the big guys do not look nowhere near as fluid, sharp, and athletic as the heavyweights from earlier eras--- but I'm reminded of what Mike Tyson said when Wladimir Klitschko was champion, "He doesn't look great on film but he is great. I couldn't beat him. He's too big and strong."

As for the assertion Fury doesn't have power, says who? All of these guys are 240, 250, 260 pounds and anything they throw is going to be murder. Fury himself has said, "People say that I can't punch, but it's because I prefer to box. If I sit down on my punches, believe you me I will knock your head into the fifth row." He is more the jabber and mover, but even then he has a 70% stoppage rate. I'm sure Steve Cunningham will admit that Fury probably has hit him the hardest in the ring, and Chisora (the rematch) was so damn outclassed and was really hurting--- and Fury was mainly jabbing and moving in that fight.

It reminds me of interviewing Kevin Johnson for ATGRADIO and he had fought and/or sparred both the Klitschko brothers and he said, "People will say that they're boring and that they're not as strong of hitters as they want you to believe, but let me tell you something, every time they hit you with the jab it felt like your head was slamming into a brick wall."

My point is this, yes Fury isn't a strong hitter like AJ or Wilder, but alot of that is because of style--- these giants naturally hit hard, and they'd crumple anyone who was just 200 pounds even if that person was an all-time great.

I think, too, people still want to say Foreman and Shavers are the two hardest hitters ever--- but when you think about it "Big" George was only 6'3" and 215 pounds in his peak years. He'd be considered something of a small fry in today's division. AJ is 6'6" and 245, Wilder is 6'7" and 230 pounds, Fury is 6'9" and 250 pounds, etc. Could Foreman overcome the difference? Absolutely, but at the same time his abilities and powers are most likely leveled out with the passage of time.

If a Rocky Marciano could stop Charles, and Bob Satterfield almost stopped Charles--- and these men were 185-190 pounds--- and Charles could lose decisions to Walcott and get concussed by Elmer Ray, then could you imagine what the Klitschko's or Fury could do to an Ezzard Charles?

Quite frankly it's a no-win situation. If you beat up on the "greatest light heavyweight of all time" then what did you really achieve? You're perceived as a big bully. If you lose, then the entire division in the 21st century is written off as being completely horseshit because Charles (who is not a top 15-20 heavyweight) beat the undisputed champion of the world who had every single advantage.

I ask what's more likely? I say the former, and the critics will say, "That Fury can beat all the light heavyweights there was, but he'll never be considered anything to me." He'll never get his due, even if he defeats Wilder and AJ back to back. He'll never get his due even if he beat Louis's title defense record. Why? Because people can't take off their rose colored glasses long enough to see the talent that's actually there.

It reminds me of the idiots who diminish Wilt Chamberlain's NBA career by saying, "He was nothing more than a goon in an era of small men," all the while ignoring the fact how great of an all around athlete that he was. The same logic is being applied to the Klitschko's, Fury, Wilder, AJ, and even someone like Lennox Lewis. It's not fair.

Much as I love the older generation, the Sullivan's and the Dempsey's and the Marciano's, and even the likes of Ali--- they never fought enormous men who actually were skillful and athletic and immensely strong. If Ali fought men nearly as tall, they didn't have the skills. If he fought people with the skills, they didn't have the power. If he fought men with the power they simply weren't athletic. He never fought a combination of all of those things. And certainly never did Ezzard Charles.

[Cojimar 1946]

I don't think we have to worry about him beating Louis title defense record.

[HomicideHenry]

I don't think we have to worry about him beating Louis title defense record.

Probably not since fighters today are hardly hyperactive--- however--- Wladimir Klitschko damn near did and he gets dismissed by everyone regardless. I guess that's my point. The staunch critics always downplays the heavyweights today and praise the old guys to the point of ridiculousness--- the creator of the thread may as well said, "Fury vs Burns" and arguing that the 5'7" Canadian would have someway somehow found a way to beat Fury. It's laughable. It's also a disservice to all the principles involved.

[Controversial]

I don't think we have to worry about him beating Louis title defense record.

Probably not since fighters today are hardly hyperactive--- however--- Wladimir Klitschko damn near did and he gets dismissed by everyone regardless. I guess that's my point. The staunch critics always downplays the heavyweights today and praise the old guys to the point of ridiculousness--- the creator of the thread may as well said, "Fury vs Burns" and arguing that the 5'7" Canadian would have someway somehow found a way to beat Fury. It's laughable. It's also a disservice to all the principles involved.

I agree. Fury's last opponent was a 6'2" 210lb blown up CW. Fury dwarfed him and without really trying got the bloke to quit as he was knackered and couldn't get near him. Of course Seferi wasn't in Charles' class but kind of shows the issues small fighters have, and Seferi was even been bigger than Charles and Marciano. Fury is a 'rise to the occasion fighter', he pisses about with fighters that stand no chance but the point is his size and style causes all sorts of issues for little men.

[HomicideHenry]

Pianeta was Fury's last opponent, but even with Fury obviously holding back, the 6'5" former title challenger wasn't able to really land anything on Fury. Not that Pianeta is really any good, but, it only further cements your initial point--- if Seferi is much bigger than Charles, and Pianeta was much bigger than Seferi, then what could Charles really do? Skills will only take you so far when you are barely 6' and barely 195 pounds against a man THAT enormous who is that awkward and has good speed and skills. People forget that when Fury leans away from punches, he's eight feet away. He's alot harder to hit than people assume.

[HomicideHenry]

Now, I don't like putting my pics out there, but to really hit the argument home--- Fury is nearly the size of the cabinet. For all intents and purposes I'm the size of Ezzard Charles.

It's EASY to say an opinion. It's another to visualize and try to figure out how in the hell a guy my size could remotely reach, let alone beat, a guy that size.

Additional Note... I have a 75" reach, and Ezzard Charles had a 73" reach... And you can see even with fingers fully extended I'd be tickling the chin of Fury, so Charles would have to be leaping like Tony Galento to touch the man.... And anyone who has ever watch Fury's fights, most punches only land on his arms or shoulders so Charles is not going to have an easy time at all.

[Controversial]

Pianeta was Fury's last opponent,

Yes sorry meant last by one opponent

[Controversial]

Now, I don't like putting my pics out there, but to really hit the argument home--- Fury is nearly the size of the cabinet. For all intents and purposes I'm the size of Ezzard Charles.

It's EASY to say an opinion. It's another to visualize and try to figure out how in the hell a guy my size could remotely reach, let alone beat, a guy that size.

Additional Note... I have a 75" reach, and Ezzard Charles had a 73" reach... And you can see even with fingers fully extended I'd be tickling the chin of Fury, so Charles would have to be leaping like Tony Galento to touch the man.... And anyone who has ever watch Fury's fights, most punches only land on his arms or shoulders so Charles is not going to have an easy time at all.

I wouldn’t say the height difference is that great to be fair, Charles was 6’0” and Fury is closer to 6’7” I reckon when you see him next to Klitschko and Wilder. Also remember the top of the head is a good few inches away from your chin.

[HomicideHenry]

True, however, if you consider Fury is a mover--- not flat footed--- he fights on his toes, which makes him taller. Whether he's 6'7", 6'8", 6'9" doesn't exactly matter when you are fighting on your toes and making yourself anywhere from 6'10", 6'11", 7'0".

Old boxing axiom, "If you are tall fight taller, if you are small fight smaller," so in general principal Charles MIGHT shrink himself down from 6' to 5'8", etc just to try and make Fury lean down to hit him, leaving himself open to counters.

So Fury would be as tall as the cabinet no matter how you slice it or dice it. As for Fury's actual height, I'm not sure how tall he is because he doesn't stand tall in most pictures--- but he is taller than Klitschko and Wilder (6'6" & 6'7" respectfully) so the current BoxRec listing of 6'8 and three-quarters is probably accurate. People forget the picture of Fury with the Ustinov who was legitimately 6'8" and Fury was eye to eye with the man.

[HomicideHenry]

It really depends on whether Fury stands tall or not--- in most pictures he will slouch or stand hunch shouldered--- like in the Klitschko build up most of the pictures had him looking the same height as Wladimir, until this picture showed Fury WAS taller (flat footed).



Now my memory is long, and when the Klitschko brothers first came around I remember distinctly that Vitali was said to be 6'8" and Wladimir was listed as 6'7". Now they're listed as 6'7" and 6'6". I tend to think that the original listing is more correct--- why? Because David Price standing next to Tyson Fury says alot.



Price is listed as 6'9" on Wikipedia and 6'8" on BoxRec, and as anyone can see the two men are virtually identical in height. Both men fought John McDermott, and there's no tricks, they both tower the same over him. The only difference is Price fights flat-footed because he's a puncher and Fury fights on his toes which makes him taller.

[BoxBuzz]

So for some, the credibility and reputation of "W" otherwise known as "WC" or "Wilt" must be raising it's ugly head again.

For it is HIS head that stands above all others in the history of the sweet science.

[HomicideHenry]

So for some, the credibility and reputation of "W" otherwise known as "WC" or "Wilt" must be raising it's ugly head again.

For it is HIS head that stands above all others in the sweet science.

I only brought him up because that's the usual knock against his NBA career, "He was bigger than anyone else then," and it's an unfair assessment because he was a great all-around athlete.

Was nothing to do with boxing.

[BoxBuzz]

So for some, the credibility and reputation of "W" otherwise known as "WC" or "Wilt" must be raising it's ugly head again.

For it is HIS head that stands above all others in the sweet science.

I only brought him up because that's the usual knock against his NBA career, "He was bigger than anyone else then," and it's an unfair assessment because he was a great all-around athlete.

Was nothing to do with boxing.

Was not referring to your reference, just to the overall reasoning.

A line of reasoning that was explained to us by the great Pugilistic Professor from Princeton, was that Wilt was so feared due to his altitude, that he (and a few other giants) were banished and brazenly boycotted from the fight game. But now, the Giants are among us, no longer chained,, and the prophecy will be fulfilled.

[HomicideHenry]

Lmao, unfortunately we'll never know how Wilt would have been as a fighter. It'd of been an interesting project, for sure, to have seen if a guy that big and athletic could have been turned into a solid, decent professional.

I think he could have been since most heavyweights (then) were 195-215 pounds and here he was 275 pounds and nearly 7'2" with a 90+ inch reach. Had he been JUST a lumbering goon, he'd of gotten exposed fast because he'd of just been a large target. But he was very mobile, nimble, quick and strong. So it's a different dynamic.

But how far he could have gone.... No clue... If it was me matchmaking him, I'd of tried to have picked the shortest possible guys with average ability (ie, Ron Stander w/ 70" reach at 5'11" & 218) and have done that behind closed doors to determine whether it'd be worth trying or not.

If Wilt would have struggled with a guy like that--- yes, tough journeyman, but regardless still a journeyman--- then I would have said, "No dice." But it'd be a good test BECAUSE Stander did decision Jack O'Holloran who was a huge man in his own right.

Apparently, Wilt did do test fights behind closed doors--- but nobody has ever come forward saying that they sparred with him, so it could be just myth.

[Onetimeonly]

Jesus Hank, when you don't know what you're talking about just stfu. Scrolling through the million or so words of drivel you crapped on this page ended the thread.

[HomicideHenry]

Jesus Hank, when you don't know what you're talking about just stfu. Scrolling through the million or so words of drivel you crapped on this page ended the thread.

IT WASN'T EVEN A DISCUSSION ANYWAYS.

There's no man barely 190 pounds beating Fury, Wilder, Joshua. Period. Not happening. Quit living in a fairytale.