BoxRec

kareemabdullah wrote:Everybody says floyd patterson holds this record but I've added up how many times Ezzard Charles was dropped, he was down 32 or more times. No wonder he died how he did.

Ezzard Charles was clearly the greatest fighter to ever hold the Heavyweight title.

Il Duce wrote:The 'question' of Ken Norton's chin has come up,

He was 'bopped' to the canvas many times, and 'flat-out' viciously KO'd '4-Times.

And was nearly KO'd by Scott LeDoux and Randy Cobb in the 10th-Round of each bout,
though they were later career bouts.

Proof that Muhammad Ali had 'no big punch'.

That is rubbish and you know it.
By that logic Frazier isn't a big puncher because he couldn't dent Bonavena and Ali kayoed Bonavena. Frazier couldn't touch Foreman..Ali kayoed him...

Il Duce wrote:Mr. Evren B,

Oscar went down from shear exhaustion, and a few accurate medium-power punches in Round 15.

He wasn't over-whelmed by power shots.

I disagree.Ali pulled out an amazing uppercut/left hook....you and your Ali put downs....it's a lifes work for you eh?? Sheesh!!!!

kareemabdullah wrote:Everybody says floyd patterson holds this record but I've added up how many times Ezzard Charles was dropped, he was down 32 or more times. No wonder he died how he did.

Charles died from Lou Gherig's Disease, which I don't think has any real link to pugilistic dementia.

Henry, please stay on topic. Even and Duce are having another arduous Ali fight. Somebody send Klompton his bat signal so they can really bury this thread.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Henry, please stay on topic. Even and Duce are having another arduous Ali fight. Somebody send Klompton his bat signal so they can really bury this thread.

I'm not the biggest fan of Ali, but this is starting to get ridiculous lol.

If it isnt these Ali bashing threads, it's that Vladimir guy asking who can beat who.

KEEP IT TO ONE THREAD ONLY PLEASE

HomicideHenry wrote:

kareemabdullah wrote:Everybody says floyd patterson holds this record but I've added up how many times Ezzard Charles was dropped, he was down 32 or more times. No wonder he died how he did.

Charles died from Lou Gherig's Disease, which I don't think has any real link to pugilistic dementia.

Yeah, I've never heard of any.

dempseyfire wrote:Not a great measuring stick since by and large refs let fights go on for way longer in decades past than before. Frazier-Foreman or Ingo-Patterson would've been stopped much earlier by the wide majority of referees today.

It certainly can be deceiving. There are so many factors you have to consider, including what you have mentioned. The level of competition, amount of fights, stage of career of both the fighter in question and his competition have to be taken into consideration as well.
And of course we are counting a brief knockdown where the fighter may not even be hurt just as much as when a fighter is seriously hurt and barely beats the count.
I brought up Norton and Frazier because Norton is routinely considered to not have that good of a chin while Frazier's chin is rarely questioned at all.
The comment about Ezzard Charles is interesting. I guess I would have to check it's accuracy. It would be interesting to see how many came when Charles was close to his prime. He fought well past his prime and had a lot of fights. Still, worth looking into.

Ambling Alp II wrote:

dempseyfire wrote:Not a great measuring stick since by and large refs let fights go on for way longer in decades past than before. Frazier-Foreman or Ingo-Patterson would've been stopped much earlier by the wide majority of referees today.

It certainly can be deceiving. There are so many factors you have to consider, including what you have mentioned. The level of competition, amount of fights, stage of career of both the fighter in question and his competition have to be taken into consideration as well.
And of course we are counting a brief knockdown where the fighter may not even be hurt just as much as when a fighter is seriously hurt and barely beats the count.
I brought up Norton and Frazier because Norton is routinely considered to not have that good of a chin while Frazier's chin is rarely questioned at all.
The comment about Ezzard Charles is interesting. I guess I would have to check it's accuracy. It would be interesting to see how many came when Charles was close to his prime. He fought well past his prime and had a lot of fights. Still, worth looking into.

Yeah, what fight today would last for 11 KDs?

Il Duce wrote:On the Floyd Patterson - Ingemar Johansson I Bout.

An argument can be made that a competent Referee would have stopped the bout after
the 1st-Knockdown, because Floyd got up and walked toward his corner completely out of it.

He was 'defenseless' when the Referee called for the action to resume, and Ingo uncorked a
vicious punch on Floyd's head while he was walking away.

Bad Referee.....that Ruby Goldstein.

Wasn't he highly regarded?

Il Duce wrote:Not that Night...........

Or in Griffith/Paret.

Il Duce wrote:

Rover wrote:

Il Duce wrote:Not that Night...........

Or in Griffith/Paret.

I don't like to think about that bout............

Benny Paret had a 'very bad' Manager, who sold his fighter out for 'fast money'.

Too many brutal fights in a row without proper recovery time.

Yes, very sad; saw the ESPN documentary on it.

Il Duce wrote: Benny Paret had a 'very bad' Manager, who sold his fighter out for 'fast money'.

Too many brutal fights in a row without proper recovery time.

Fihting Emile Griffith three times, as well Gene Fullmer, in eleven months, all fifteen round bouts, was a huge ask.

Tommy morrison must have been decked a good few times......

evrenb wrote:Tommy morrison must have been decked a good few times......

Definitely. Mercer, Bentt x3, Williams x2, Purrity x2, Ruddock,
Lewis x3 or 4 (there were several).

Il Duce wrote:

Rover wrote:

Il Duce wrote:Not that Night...........

Or in Griffith/Paret.

I don't like to think about that bout............

Benny Paret had a 'very bad' Manager, who sold his fighter out for 'fast money'.

Too many brutal fights in a row without proper recovery time.

It certainly appears that Benny Paret's manager didn't look after him properly. Can you believe that Paret fought Gene Fullmer, a rough, tough fighter who was much bigger and stronger, before facing Emile Griffith for the final time? I wouldn't have let Paret get within a mile of Fullmer if I were his manager.

- Chuck Johnston

In the most controversial fight of Ezzard Charles' career on 7/14/1947. Tremendous puncher Fitzie Fitzpatrick was robbed of a KO over Charles at Cincinnati in the second round. Ez was dropped flat on his back and appeared out cold. Claims that Charles benefitted from a "slow count" persisted. Reports that Ezzard received valuable extra seconds between the second and third rounds were also presented. One indisputable fact is that the referee allowed Charles to cling to Fitzpatrick for the last half minute of the round, most of it on his knees as Fitzie tried desperately to pry himself free to finish Ez but the ref would not stop his frantic clutching.
* - FITZIE FITZPATRICK was the Bob Satterfield of his day - 'Kill or be Killed."

I looked into this a bit more and found the stat about Charles being knocked down is very deceiving.

He was knocked dwon 33 times, but it's important to look when those knockdowns occurred.
The majority were in his early career before he reached his prime. 7 were against Bivins who weighed 174 to Charles 165.
8 were against Marshall who was much more experienced fighter at the time.
10 more were after he fought Marciano and was well past his prime.

Between the Marshall fight in 1943 and the Holman fight in 1955, Charles was only knocked down 6 times in a 12 year period that includes 63 fights. 3 of those were against Marciano. (He also went 15 rounds in the first Marciano fight without being knocked down.) Thats not really much at all.

You also have to take into consideration that Charles had 119 fights. Even if you include all the knockdowns when he was not in his prime, he still has a more impressive ratio than Joe Frazier who got decked 11 times in just 37 fights.

Ambling Alp II wrote:I looked into this a bit more and found the stat about Charles being knocked down is very deceiving.

Was he the only fighter in history who started facing serious opponents quickly, or there were others, who, despite having worse defensive skills than Charles, weren't floored anywhere as often?

Ambling Alp II wrote:I looked into this a bit more and found the stat about Charles being knocked down is very deceiving.

He was knocked dwon 33 times, but it's important to look when those knockdowns occurred.
The majority were in his early career before he reached his prime. 7 were against Bivins who weighed 174 to Charles 165.
8 were against Marshall who was much more experienced fighter at the time.
10 more were after he fought Marciano and was well past his prime.

Between the Marshall fight in 1943 and the Holman fight in 1955, Charles was only knocked down 6 times in a 12 year period that includes 63 fights. 3 of those were against Marciano. (He also went 15 rounds in the first Marciano fight without being knocked down.) Thats not really much at all.

You also have to take into consideration that Charles had 119 fights. Even if you include all the knockdowns when he was not in his prime, he still has a more impressive ratio than Joe Frazier who got decked 11 times in just 37 fights.

Listen, how many heavyweights in history even get up from the uppercut Foreman laid on Frazier for the second knockdown in Jamaica?

The answer....

Very damn few. Do you think Charles does? Ha.

It is only because of Frazier's great heart and excellent chin that he got up from SIX knockdowns against an absolutely murderous puncher in one fight, which serves to very much distort his record for the purposes of this topic.

If he is counted out after the second knockdown in Jamaica like practically any other heavy would have been, then he has four fewer knockdowns on his total.

Things aren't always black and white.

Senya13 wrote:

Ambling Alp II wrote:I looked into this a bit more and found the stat about Charles being knocked down is very deceiving.

Was he the only fighter in history who started facing serious opponents quickly, or there were others, who, despite having worse defensive skills than Charles, weren't floored anywhere as often?

No he was not the only fighter in history who fought serious opponents early; though most didn't. Yes some of those that did weren't floored as often. That would make up a pretty small % of fighters. That small % of fighters probably had really good chins. Not saying that Charles had the best chin of all time or anything like that. I'm just saying that Charles had a decent chin and the stat of simply counting his knockdowns is deceiving.

It's worth looking at how many times any fighter was knocked down his career. However, you then have to consider the circumstances. Sometimes he very may well have had a mediocre or bad chin. Sometimes there are good reasons that show why the sheer amount of knockdowns of a particular fighter is deceiving.