BoxRec

Seamus wrote:Dempseyfire

The Valdes and Johnson losses were less than a year before Marciano v Charles I, isn't that prime enough ?

u have to understand the circumstances, charles wasnt really motivated againt nino and johnson and charless fought a bad fight vs nino and johnson was at his peak and a very good HOF boxer. charles career seemed to be going downward fast. then charles knocked out bob sattefield and was given a shot at the title.

charle knew THIS WAS A HUGE CHANCE, AND HIS LAST CHANCE TO EARN THE RESPECT HE NEVER GOT FROM THE PUBLIC. so charles trained harder for the marciano I fight than he had since his title reign and became INCREDIBLY CONFIDENT AND MOTIVATED and charles put everything he had into his training and the fight.

charles weighed in a high 192 against nino, he weighed a much trimmer 185lb vs marciano.

charles when he fought in the first marciano fight still wasnt in his peak, but not far from his best (at heavy) and certainly better than any version charles at 32 could put himself in. charles in first marciano fight would have beaten valdez and johnson has he showed up in that state of mind and shape in there fights.


nat fleischer wrote after marciano-charles I fight "no heavyweight in the world could have lasted 15 rounds against charles that night, let alone win the decission."

- walcott lost to layne before he won the title(though i thought it was bad decision), but i watched the fight and walcott underestimated layne and fought a bad fight not letting his hands go enough, sometimes fighters have off nights. if walcott fought layne again he would have beat layne.



charles was never the same after the first marciano fight, and that war totally took everything out of charles. marciano easily knocked him out in the rematch, and then charles career went into a huge plunge. he aged fast after those marciano fight, he def should have retired after the rematch vs marciano like walcott did.

.

I disgaree with BB and assert that Charles was most definetly a few years past his prime by the time of the first Marciano fight. Charles's prime was at 175 but he was very dangerous at HW until he lost the title and then he started to slip.

i agree with that but charles when he held the crown was coming in at 180-185 so its not like he was blown up. he was only 5lbs more than his peak weight. charles was 182lb and 27 years old vss louis, very much in his prime

By all accounts Charles was a PHENOM at light HW, but he lost steam when he moved up to HW and especially after killing Sam Baroudi in 1948, which affected him the rest of his career and many say he was never the same puncher/killer that he had been. And yes he was 27 vs Louis, but he turned pro at 19 and was already a veteran of 64 fights. We talk of James Toney as an old warhorse with that number of fights, and many pleaded for Evander to retire when he had 1/2 that many fights . . .

..charles beats evander at light heavy, cruiser or heavy. in fact, charles at light heavy beats evander at heavy. doubt if he'd score a kayo , as evander had that determination.....but charles was faster, had a better jab, outstanding hook of the jab, hit harder and smarter.

and...going back a few posts....charles didn't just go the distance with elmer ray...he lost a ten rounder that was a judge's farce...but okay....say the decision was fair...in their rematch he beat the hell out of the much bigger ray and knocked him cold.

he weighed about 170 (officially something around 175) when he cut the rough and heavier joe baksi to pieces in a fight few remember exists. as far as prime ezzard....he was a bit past his peak as early as the joe louis fight.

one major problem ezzard had....."I never could get into top condition as a heavyweight, because if i kept training i went down too far in weight...so always had to slack off." his own words...and confirmed by his main sparring partner and those who worked his corner.

yeah i agree 100% jaclem, charles at his peak was a deadly fighter and one of the best ring technicians in history of heavy division. he had incredible speed, fast jab, superb counterpunching and defese, and master boxing skills.

- people think ezzard didnt have power, but he did, he had a lot of snap in his punches and they cut peoples faces to shreds and had a good left hook.


jaclem, did u see that 1-2 he knocked pat valentino out with?? amazing accurate KO combination. it looked spectacular.


- i wonder if charles could have knocked out louis because he eased off in late rounds.

I've got a lot of respect for Evander. He put it all out there with everyone and was fighting naturally bigger men. You have to remember though that Ezzard is one of the greatest P4P fighters of all time.

In this case though I see Charles beating him by decision over 15. Charles would only be beaten by a much bigger HW and Holyfield was a Cruiser who moved up. Still a bigger man but not big enough.

I know BB will be on my case for this but I think Charles in his prime beats Marciano in his prime. Rocky has a chance but when you watch that first fight and imagine what Charles could have done 2-3 years earlier....

I totally disagree with you, Jaclem. Good of you to chime in though.

Holyfield would KO Charles at heavyweight. You know how you come across saying a light heavyweight Charles would beat a heavyweight Holyfield? Juvenile.

Oh, and thank you for that post, Ezzard. I like to hear from true fans of Charles, one of my favorites. It is strange that Holyfield and Charles, both with really good, similar talent, are both so underrated. Of course Charles is a P4P great. So is Holyfield. I could see prime Charles beating Marciano. And I could see prime Holyfield beating Charles.

Ezzard charles vs holyfield ya got to be kidding right






Holyfield win ko1

I know BB will be on my case for this but I think Charles in his prime beats Marciano in his prime. Rocky has a chance but when you watch that first fight and imagine what Charles could have done 2-3 years earlier....

rocky said "i fought my worst fight", he was said to have overtrained. i thought it was a magnifist preformance by rocky, but it wasnt his best. he knew it too. rocky got off to a terrible start because he had a lot of ring rust. in any case, charles fought one of his best fights at heavyeweight labeling nat fleicher to say "no man in the world could have lasted 15 rounds agaisnt ezzard charles that night, let alone win the decision."
rememer rocky changed his style after lastarza II fight to enable him to be a better boxer. he shortened his punches enabling him to throw more punches and he became a wear u down type guy, by doing that he lost his one punch power. when he fought louis, walcott, layne he was a slugger and one punch KO guy. i think that style would have fared much better against charles. i noticed signs of rocky aging late in his career.

but who knows, i mean ezzard never showed he could go to war like he did against marciano. it would be an interesting fight at there peaks, if ezzard won i wouldnt be suprised but he defintley would see a better marciano from there first fight which rock still won clearly on points.

marciano did easily knock out charles in the rematch, so u have to take that into consideration

1948 charles vs 1952 marciano


profesor x, charles was the greatest light-H in history and whose peak was at 175, he was way to fast for evander who wouldnt be able to catch him. prime marciano beats prime holyfield i might add.




but lets stick to the subject, im astonished so many are picking evander to knock him out. how?? charle survived elmer ray best punches and elmer ray hit much harder than holyfield


- u got to be kdding bradley, charles will cut evander face up to shreds

..professor x...thanks...it's been a long time since i've been called juvenile.

yes..i have seen the charles/valentino fight...complete....several times. valentino hurt charles with a couple of body punches...and yes...the charles lightning combo that flattened him was apip.

ezzard scored a lot of one punch kayos in his career....moore, bivins and marshall being three. after baroudi he tended to box and go for cuts unless he was stung or behind..and then he'd open up.

when asked if he could have knocked louis out but carried him instead in the last few rounds he said that would be demeaning of louis to say so...."he was still a dangerous fighter.". enigmatic response....but most of his ciomments about his fights were.

what were charles peak fights jaclem or best years In your opinion?


- people talk about holyfields size, but charles dominated a 6'2 218lb louis whose bigger than holyfield and charles showed no signs of the size difference being a problem despite giving up 36lbs.

Louis's best fighting weight was way under 218 (197 1/4-207 1/2). I think this must be taken into consideration.