debunking the myth of louis being completely past it ...

[keure]

when he fought marciano.
First let me start by saying ali was the greatest heavy of all time, but i feel like marciano has grown very underapreciated/ undrrated over the years. I would place marciano as 4 or 5 on an all time heavys list, probably 4. That list being, 1. ali, 2. louis, 3. Dempsey, 4. Marciano, 5. johnson followed closely by the likes of foreman holyfield tyson lewis. However over the years people have become so quick to discredit marcianos achievements because they feel his best comp was past their prime when they fought. First of all if that was the case their is nothing he could do about it and secondly he did retire undefeated which with an amazing ko percentage which in terms of accomplishment still has not been matched. Lastly i rank louis ahead of marciano on my all time list because i take eveythiong in to account, his longevity his durability and his competition, howvever i feel marciano beats louis at any point in his carreer in terms of head to head competition. Marciano had dynamite in both fists and marathon runner stamina, they said that he would wake up in december and run 15 miles in the snow. I think even in louis's prime marcaino knocks him out cold while behind on the cards in a close fight. Lastly when marciano fought louis, louis was not as past it as most louis fans would like you to believe, louis was 37, look at vitali klit at nearly 39 and what george foreman and bhop are and were able to do in their mid 40's, but more than just the age it was his activity, activity is a fighters best friend, and louis fought 8 times in the 11 months prior to the marciano fight beating the likes of jimmy bivins and cesar brion( 79 -20, and 29-3 respectively) so he wasnt really that past it after all i mean 8 victories in 10 months , 2 over very good comp, the myth of him being completely past it was created to protect his image and rightfully so. Louis was an amzing champion, who is deservingly one of the 3 greatest heavys of all time, but he really wasnt that past it when he got knocked out against marciano, and the result would have occured at any point in his career.

[teeto]

when he fought marciano.
First let me start by saying ali was the greatest heavy of all time, but i feel like marciano has grown very underapreciated/ undrrated over the years. I would place marciano as 4 or 5 on an all time heavys list, probably 4. That list being, 1. ali, 2. louis, 3. Dempsey, 4. Marciano, 5. johnson followed closely by the likes of foreman holyfield tyson lewis. However over the years people have become so quick to discredit marcianos achievements because they feel his best comp was past their prime when they fought. First of all if that was the case their is nothing he could do about it and secondly he did retire undefeated which with an amazing ko percentage which in terms of accomplishment still has not been matched. Lastly i rank louis ahead of marciano on my all time list because i take eveythiong in to account, his longevity his durability and his competition, howvever i feel marciano beats louis at any point in his carreer in terms of head to head competition. Marciano had dynamite in both fists and marathon runner stamina, they said that he would wake up in december and run 15 miles in the snow. I think even in louis's prime marcaino knocks him out cold while behind on the cards in a close fight. Lastly when marciano fought louis, louis was not as past it as most louis fans would like you to believe, louis was 37, look at vitali klit at nearly 39 and what george foreman and bhop are and were able to do in their mid 40's, but more than just the age it was his activity, activity is a fighters best friend, and louis fought 8 times in the 11 months prior to the marciano fight beating the likes of jimmy bivins and cesar brion( 79 -20, and 29-3 respectively) so he wasnt really that past it after all i mean 8 victories in 10 months , 2 over very good comp, the myth of him being completely past it was created to protect his image and rightfully so. Louis was an amzing champion, who is deservingly one of the 3 greatest heavys of all time, but he really wasnt that past it when he got knocked out against marciano, and the result would have occured at any point in his career.
I reckon Marciano is one of the top heavies ever in terms of head to head, but you're going to catch a lot of shit for that post i think.

[GazOC]

I reckon Marciano is one of the top heavies ever in terms of head to head, but you're going to catch a lot of shit for that post i think.

You'd be catching some of it off me if it wasn't gone midnight and I have to be up early to get to the game tomorrow!!!;)

[teeto]

You'd be catching some of it off me if it wasn't gone midnight and I have to be up early to get to the game tomorrow!!!;)
Hahahaha, i'm not going mate but i'm watching at my nans. I really laughed out loud then.

[My2Sense]

Lastly when marciano fought louis, louis was not as past it as most louis fans would like you to believe, louis was 37, look at vitali klit at nearly 39 and what george foreman and bhop are and were able to do in their mid 40's, but more than just the age it was his activity, activity is a fighters best friend, and louis fought 8 times in the 11 months prior to the marciano fight beating the likes of jimmy bivins and cesar brion( 79 -20, and 29-3 respectively) so he wasnt really that past it after all i mean 8 victories in 10 months , 2 over very good comp, the myth of him being completely past it was created to protect his image and rightfully so. Louis was an amzing champion, who is deservingly one of the 3 greatest heavys of all time, but he really wasnt that past it when he got knocked out against marciano, and the result would have occured at any point in his career.

In that case, Louis must've been completely ruined after four years of INACTIVITY in the military and another two years inactive before fighting Charles.

[teeto]

It's began.

[My2Sense]

It's began.

It's Ended. :nono

:D

[teeto]

:lol::lol:

[TheGreatA]

I have to say that Louis looked very beatable in his fight against Cesar Brion previously. He was not the Louis of old although he was still a capable fighter who went about even with Marciano until running out of stamina after 6 rounds.

[Caponecartels]

It's Ended. :nono

:D

Damn. :lol:

Couldn't let the guy have have more fun huh?

[MRBILL]

when he fought marciano.
First let me start by saying ali was the greatest heavy of all time, but i feel like marciano has grown very underapreciated/ undrrated over the years. I would place marciano as 4 or 5 on an all time heavys list, probably 4. That list being, 1. ali, 2. louis, 3. Dempsey, 4. Marciano, 5. johnson followed closely by the likes of foreman holyfield tyson lewis. However over the years people have become so quick to discredit marcianos achievements because they feel his best comp was past their prime when they fought. First of all if that was the case their is nothing he could do about it and secondly he did retire undefeated which with an amazing ko percentage which in terms of accomplishment still has not been matched. Lastly i rank louis ahead of marciano on my all time list because i take eveythiong in to account, his longevity his durability and his competition, howvever i feel marciano beats louis at any point in his carreer in terms of head to head competition. Marciano had dynamite in both fists and marathon runner stamina, they said that he would wake up in december and run 15 miles in the snow. I think even in louis's prime marcaino knocks him out cold while behind on the cards in a close fight. Lastly when marciano fought louis, louis was not as past it as most louis fans would like you to believe, louis was 37, look at vitali klit at nearly 39 and what george foreman and bhop are and were able to do in their mid 40's, but more than just the age it was his activity, activity is a fighters best friend, and louis fought 8 times in the 11 months prior to the marciano fight beating the likes of jimmy bivins and cesar brion( 79 -20, and 29-3 respectively) so he wasnt really that past it after all i mean 8 victories in 10 months , 2 over very good comp, the myth of him being completely past it was created to protect his image and rightfully so. Louis was an amzing champion, who is deservingly one of the 3 greatest heavys of all time, but he really wasnt that past it when he got knocked out against marciano, and the result would have occured at any point in his career.

Dude,

Christ, split that notion up into a few graphs for cryin' out loud......... Geez.........

Joe Louis at age 37 in 1951 still had some zip and fight left in him.... Despite being KO'd by Rocky Marciano, Joe Louis would've hammered a lot of other mo-fo's on that night in Oct. of '51...... Louis could've carried on, but boxing and the promoters were different then......... Louis did the right thing by saving face and just retiring after the KO loss........

Then Louis comes back to wrestle....... That was horse-shit.... Louis was all fat and acting a fool just for being in debt to that goddamn Uncle Sam bastard......... Sad........

MR.BILL:deal

[Bill Butcher]

when he fought marciano.
First let me start by saying ali was the greatest heavy of all time, but i feel like marciano has grown very underapreciated/ undrrated over the years. I would place marciano as 4 or 5 on an all time heavys list, probably 4. That list being, 1. ali, 2. louis, 3. Dempsey, 4. Marciano, 5. johnson followed closely by the likes of foreman holyfield tyson lewis. However over the years people have become so quick to discredit marcianos achievements because they feel his best comp was past their prime when they fought. First of all if that was the case their is nothing he could do about it and secondly he did retire undefeated which with an amazing ko percentage which in terms of accomplishment still has not been matched. Lastly i rank louis ahead of marciano on my all time list because i take eveythiong in to account, his longevity his durability and his competition, howvever i feel marciano beats louis at any point in his carreer in terms of head to head competition. Marciano had dynamite in both fists and marathon runner stamina, they said that he would wake up in december and run 15 miles in the snow. I think even in louis's prime marcaino knocks him out cold while behind on the cards in a close fight. Lastly when marciano fought louis, louis was not as past it as most louis fans would like you to believe, louis was 37, look at vitali klit at nearly 39 and what george foreman and bhop are and were able to do in their mid 40's, but more than just the age it was his activity, activity is a fighters best friend, and louis fought 8 times in the 11 months prior to the marciano fight beating the likes of jimmy bivins and cesar brion( 79 -20, and 29-3 respectively) so he wasnt really that past it after all i mean 8 victories in 10 months , 2 over very good comp, the myth of him being completely past it was created to protect his image and rightfully so. Louis was an amzing champion, who is deservingly one of the 3 greatest heavys of all time, but he really wasnt that past it when he got knocked out against marciano, and the result would have occured at any point in his career.

Louis was a shell of himself v Rocky, did you ever stop & think that Louis only managed to beat those contenders in the 1st place at that stage of his career BECAUSE he was so great in the 1st place ?

[MrMarvel]

Marciano was also lucky to meet Charles at the end of Ezzard's long career.

[The Mongoose]

Bullshit, Charles gave one of his all time best performances against Marciano in their first meeting. He foolishly took a more aggressive approach in the rematch and paid the price.

[MrMarvel]

Bullshit, Charles gave one of his all time best performances against Marciano in their first meeting. He foolishly took a more aggressive approach in the rematch and paid the price.

I don't know why you say bulshit. Damn straight Charles gave Marciano a hell of a fight. Just imagine if Marciano had met Charles in Ezzard's prime! That was my point. Charles was not the same fighter when he faced Marciano.

Marciano and Charles were in different classes. Charles was the transcendent fighter. Marciano was a product of a notch in time.

[Rise Above]

I have to disagree, Louis was definitely past his best w'hen he fought Marciano. Also sports science plays a big part in prolonging fighters careers these days. It was totally different in Louis' day.

However I do think Marciano had the right style to have a great chance of beating Joe in his prime.

[Flea Man]

Poor thread.

[Unforgiven]

Joe Louis was badly over-the-hill.
Charles was way past his best too.

For the vast majority of fighters, 37 is just plain old. Then, now, whenever. 37 is generally OLD OLD OLD for any boxer. And Louis was a typical case.
Maybe Walcott was an exception, perhaps Archie Moore too. But Louis was clearly little more than a shell at 37. And Ezzard Charles had lost his mobility in the legs, at 32/33. Clearly.

[Dempsey1238]

Charles look pretty mobile when he ko Wallace imo. 2 fights before his clash with the Rock.

I think Marciano beats Charles, regardless when they ment imo.

[apollack]

The fact is that Louis WAS completely past it when he fought Marciano... FOR HIM. The thing about Louis is that he was so damn great that even being way past it, he was still better than most everyone except for a few guys, so he looks like a competitive fighter. But he was a shell of what he once was. Most of the guys he fought on the comeback he would have quickly drilled in his prime.

Just watch the prewar footage on him and then watch the post war footage. The difference is marked, IMO. He is way faster, more active with feet and hands, more blazing with his speed and reactions pre-war than post. But he was still a solid boxer, so yes, he was at least competitive against Marciano even being relatively slow, with few punches, no combos, and his power punches, particularly his vaunted right, almost gone.

[ChrisPontius]

Dude,

Christ, split that notion up into a few graphs for cryin' out loud......... Geez.........

Joe Louis at age 37 in 1951 still had some zip and fight left in him.... Despite being KO'd by Rocky Marciano, Joe Louis would've hammered a lot of other mo-fo's on that night in Oct. of '51...... Louis could've carried on, but boxing and the promoters were different then......... Louis did the right thing by saving face and just retiring after the KO loss........

Then Louis comes back to wrestle....... That was horse-shit.... Louis was all fat and acting a fool just for being in debt to that goddamn Uncle Sam bastard......... Sad........

MR.BILL:deal

Joe Louis had seen better days, but he was still a contender and he meant business. Have a look!


[Only registered and activated users can see links] ([Only registered and activated users can see links])

Louis destroys Savold



[Only registered and activated users can see links] ([Only registered and activated users can see links])

Louis knocks down Pat Valentino in 10 round exhibition during the early 50's


[Only registered and activated users can see links] ([Only registered and activated users can see links])

Louis holds off a motivated Brion to a decision win

[mcvey]

when he fought marciano.
First let me start by saying ali was the greatest heavy of all time, but i feel like marciano has grown very underapreciated/ undrrated over the years. I would place marciano as 4 or 5 on an all time heavys list, probably 4. That list being, 1. ali, 2. louis, 3. Dempsey, 4. Marciano, 5. johnson followed closely by the likes of foreman holyfield tyson lewis. However over the years people have become so quick to discredit marcianos achievements because they feel his best comp was past their prime when they fought. First of all if that was the case their is nothing he could do about it and secondly he did retire undefeated which with an amazing ko percentage which in terms of accomplishment still has not been matched. Lastly i rank louis ahead of marciano on my all time list because i take eveythiong in to account, his longevity his durability and his competition, howvever i feel marciano beats louis at any point in his carreer in terms of head to head competition. Marciano had dynamite in both fists and marathon runner stamina, they said that he would wake up in december and run 15 miles in the snow. I think even in louis's prime marcaino knocks him out cold while behind on the cards in a close fight. Lastly when marciano fought louis, louis was not as past it as most louis fans would like you to believe, louis was 37, look at vitali klit at nearly 39 and what george foreman and bhop are and were able to do in their mid 40's, but more than just the age it was his activity, activity is a fighters best friend, and louis fought 8 times in the 11 months prior to the marciano fight beating the likes of jimmy bivins and cesar brion( 79 -20, and 29-3 respectively) so he wasnt really that past it after all i mean 8 victories in 10 months , 2 over very good comp, the myth of him being completely past it was created to protect his image and rightfully so. Louis was an amzing champion, who is deservingly one of the 3 greatest heavys of all time, but he really wasnt that past it when he got knocked out against marciano, and the result would have occured at any point in his career.

Louis had 9 fights after being beaten by Charles, he scored 3 stoppages ,over Andy Walker , Freddie Beshore , and Lee Savold.

Walker and Beshore had both been stopped 3 times at that point and Savold had been stopped 8 times.
Louis was a greatly diminished fighter when he fought Marciano,his reflexes were half of what they had been and his ko right hand was sheathed in rust.
Because he had been so great in his prime he could still dominate a lot of average contenders.
Anyone who thinks he was even 60% of what he had been is kidding themselves.

Marciano had to walk through the Louis jab, and weather a few left hooks to acheive his victory, but he was not subjected to blazing combinations or pole axe right hands ,and once inside his youth and strength told on the older man ,until eventually Louis's aging legs betrayed him.

Whether Louis, in his prime could have defeated Marciano is open for debate,though I think he would have.
What is not open for debate is that the man facing Marciano that night was no longer the Brown Bomber


Glimpses of that fighter were last seen against Walcott in their return fight.

[janitor]

The fact is that Louis WAS completely past it when he fought Marciano... FOR HIM. The thing about Louis is that he was so damn great that even being way past it, he was still better than most everyone except for a few guys, so he looks like a competitive fighter. But he was a shell of what he once was. Most of the guys he fought on the comeback he would have quickly drilled in his prime.


Could you imagine putting Cesar Brion in with a prime Louis.

[mcvey]

Joe Louis had seen better days, but he was still a contender and he meant business. Have a look!


[Only registered and activated users can see links] ([Only registered and activated users can see links])

Louis destroys Savold



[Only registered and activated users can see links] ([Only registered and activated users can see links])

Louis knocks down Pat Valentino in 10 round exhibition during the early 50's


[Only registered and activated users can see links] ([Only registered and activated users can see links])

Louis holds off a motivated Brion to a decision win

Savold was 36 years old and had lost 37 fights at that stage ,he only had one more ,against Marciano ,and of course also lost that by stoppage.

[janitor]

Savold was 36 years old and had lost 37 fights at that stage ,he only had one more ,against Marciano ,and of course also lost that by stoppage.

You could make the observation that Louis did a better job on him than Marciano.

[guilalah]

On a ten-point scale (5= average heavyweight), I reckon the Louis Marciano beat was about a seven. It was a decent win for the Rock.

[The Mongoose]

I don't know why you say bulshit. Damn straight Charles gave Marciano a hell of a fight. Just imagine if Marciano had met Charles in Ezzard's prime! That was my point. Charles was not the same fighter when he faced Marciano.

Marciano and Charles were in different classes. Charles was the transcendent fighter. Marciano was a product of a notch in time.

I call "bullshit" because Ezzard Charles does not get much better than this.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


[Only registered and activated users can see links]


[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Lazy terms like "Past Best or Prime" gets thrown around way to loosely while actual anaylsis is completely disregarded. Charles lost to the ingenius Walcott after giving him one too many fights, was possibly robbed in their 4th meeting, and as result shut out of the Championship scene as long as Jersey Joe was on top. Nobody wanted a fifth match between the two. However, he was very motivated by the chance to meet Marciano and took apart two top contenders to earn his number one contendership as the inconsistent Valdez fumbled down the rankings. Most writers at the time observed Charles looked as great as he ever did in the first Marciano meeting. Its only now that we have boxrec armchair experts claiming Marciano beat a Charles who was past it, shot, or whatever. Charles was quick as ever and executed his gameplan to stay off the ropes and counter to perfection...just not enough to fend off Rocky for 15 rounds.

[mcvey]

You could make the observation that Louis did a better job on him than Marciano.

Marciano looked very sloppy against Savold, but that doesn't change the fact that Savold was 36 when he fought Louis,and had nearly 40 losses on his record.

[Unforgiven]

Charles didn't have the leg speed in the Marciano fight or in those two fights posted above (Wallace and Satterfield).
Yes, he was still a very good fighter but he's a more static fighter than he'd been 4-5 years earlier.

It's not at all controversial or worthy of debate. Charles was past his best, clearly. He just didn't move the same as he had at age 27 or 28. So he had to absorb more punishment and stand and slug more.

[MrMarvel]

You could make the observation that Louis did a better job on him than Marciano.

You could and you should.

[MrMarvel]

Charles didn't have the leg speed in the Marciano fight or in those two fights posted above (Wallace and Satterfield).
Yes, he was still a very good fighter but he's a more static fighter than he'd been 4-5 years earlier.

It's not at all controversial or worthy of debate. Charles was past his best, clearly. He just didn't move the same as he had at age 27 or 28. So he had to absorb more punishment and stand and slug more.

Yep.

[Brit Sillynanny]

Every one of those ATG notches on Rock's belt were against less than optimal versions of those fighters, without exception.

[The Mongoose]

Charles didn't have the leg speed in the Marciano fight or in those two fights posted above (Wallace and Satterfield).
Yes, he was still a very good fighter but he's a more static fighter than he'd been 4-5 years earlier.

It's not at all controversial or worthy of debate. Charles was past his best, clearly. He just didn't move the same as he had at age 27 or 28. So he had to absorb more punishment and stand and slug more.


By most accounts Charles was an aggressive offensive fighter at 27 or 28, which would make him an even worse match up for Marciano. Some of the earliest available footage is Charles run and gun win over Joe Louis at the age of 29, he does not look any slower than he did in the Marciano fight. Do you perhaps have footage of Charles/Moore that your holding out on us?

[Bummy Davis]

I call "bullshit" because Ezzard Charles does not get much better than this.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


[Only registered and activated users can see links]


[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Lazy terms like "Past Best or Prime" gets thrown around way to loosely while actual anaylsis is completely disregarded. Charles lost to the ingenius Walcott after giving him one too many fights, was possibly robbed in their 4th meeting, and as result shut out of the Championship scene as long as Jersey Joe was on top. Nobody wanted a fifth match between the two. However, he was very motivated by the chance to meet Marciano and took apart two top contenders to earn his number one contendership as the inconsistent Valdez fumbled down the rankings. Most writers at the time observed Charles looked as great as he ever did in the first Marciano meeting. Its only now that we have boxrec armchair experts claiming Marciano beat a Charles who was past it, shot, or whatever. Charles was quick as ever and executed his gameplan to stay off the ropes and counter to perfection...just not enough to fend off Rocky for 15 rounds.


I agree. Charles was just coming off 2 electric KO's over top big heavys and punchers. Most of Charles losses were close or disputed decisions but he came back strong and was on a high going into the Marciano fight. When it comes to Marciano, white and undefeated and a lot of people look to tear down his compitition...but that Charles would have given any heavy ATG a great fight including Ali and Joe Louis

[TheGreatA]

Charles just doesn't look as good in my eyes against Marciano, Satterfield or Wallace. He looks completely shot against John Holman although he still managed to pull out a decision in the rematch.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Bummy Davis]

Yep.


Marciano had a lot to do with that. His leg movement was fine in his 2 previous electric KO's and so was his power

[Unforgiven]

By most accounts Charles was an aggressive offensive fighter at 27 or 28, which would make him an even worse match up for Marciano. Some of the earliest available footage is Charles run and gun win over Joe Louis at the age of 29, he does not look any slower than he did in the Marciano fight. Do you perhaps have footage of Charles/Moore that your holding out on us?

No. If you seriously think Charles looks as good and as fresh against Marciano as he does against Louis then I can only disagree.
The Louis and Valentino footage should suffice.

[The Mongoose]

Charles just doesn't look as good in my eyes against Marciano, Satterfield or Wallace. He looks completely shot against John Holman although he still managed to pull out a decision in the rematch.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

A great deal of that footage is actually leading up to the Marciano fight though. You even have the Wallace knockout in there. Either way I don't see a shot fighter in there against Marciano, if there's any decline its very minimal and splitting hairs. Those highlights are covering most of hisheavyweight run before Rocky and there is no shortage of elusiviness and explosive power. I would love to see the Valdez fight, who claimed it was his best and hardest win.

[The Mongoose]

No. If you seriously think Charles looks as good and as fresh against Marciano as he does against Louis then I can only disagree.
The Louis and Valentino footage should suffice.

Really? Charles didn't fight a smart fight against Louis, perhaps pressure from the fans, no idea. He mixed it up at close quarters much more than usual and got busted up pretty good by the end of the fight. Joe was also a stationary target while Marciano was swarming with 90 punch outbursts.

Closing rounds of Charles/Louis

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


Closing rounds of Charles/Marciano

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[hhascup]

Charles was a Great fighter in his day, no question about it, BUT, he did loss to Nino Valdez and Harold Johnson less then a year before he fought Rocky. A prime Charles would not have lost to either of them. Bob Satterfield was stopped 9 times before he fought Charles and one was against Harold Johnson just 15 months before. I am not saying that a prime Charles would have beaten Rocky, BUT he would have given a better account of himself. Joe Louis was past his prime before he fought Marciano. His record was 61-1 with 52 KO's in his 1st 62 bouts (Ring Record Book). In his last 9 bouts before he fought Rocky, Louis was 8-1 with only 3 KO's. He was still a pretty good boxer and puncher BUT his reflexes and speed weren't what it once was.

[Dempsey1238]

I thought Charles was robbed vs Johnson.

I score it 5-3-2 for Charles.

[TheGreatA]

A great deal of that footage is actually leading up to the Marciano fight though. You even have the Wallace knockout in there. Either way I don't see a shot fighter in there against Marciano, if there's any decline its very minimal and splitting hairs. Those highlights are covering most of hisheavyweight run before Rocky and there is no shortage of elusiviness and explosive power. I would love to see the Valdez fight, who claimed it was his best and hardest win.

The gif. didn't really have anything to do with my post, it's just a KO highlight reel, and the Wallace KO is not there. Only the Satterfield KO and Charles was taking a beating until landing that left.

Charles was hardly shot but I think any objective viewer can see that Charles was far more stationary by 1954 than he used to be. He had actually turned from a boxer into more of a slugger.

[The Mongoose]

The gif. didn't really have anything to do with my post, it's just a KO highlight reel, and the Wallace KO is not there. Only the Satterfield KO and Charles was taking a beating until landing that left.

Charles was hardly shot but I think any objective viewer can see that Charles was far more stationary by 1954 than he used to be. He had actually turned from a boxer into more of a slugger.

Its not a matter of being objective, I just see Charles being painted as something he was not prior to the Marciano meeting. He was never a speedy dancer, he was the Cobra, using head and upperbody movement to slip and counter from the midrange. He wasn't dancing circles around Louis anymore than he was Marciano, just not how he operated. If you want to make a case for him being more of a slugger thats fine, but the implication of him being an easier target I can't agree with. Unlesss were discussing the second Marciano meeting, where he had no interest in going the distance and gambled on beefing up and looking for the stoppage. I'd say his decline starts with that loss.

Charles was deflecting most of Satterfield's punches with his glove and arms, the added sound effects are pretty devestating though.

[Minotauro]

Charles wasn't at his best when he fought Marciano but he was still a quality fighter. His speed and reflexes had gone down but he could still box well and his upper body movement was still great. His prime was at light heavy before the Baroudi tragedy. In his second fight with Marhsall he looks notably lighter on his feet and has more bounce to him then in the heavyweight fights mentioned above. Either way it was a very good win for Marciano unlike the Louis win who was totally shot. Rocky said himself he was surprised how light Joe's punches felt, I doubt anyone said that about Louis in his prime.

P.S I also feel Charles beat Johnson it was a close fight but Ezzard should have got the nod and the ref should have scored the knockdown.

[TheGreatA]

Its not a matter of being objective, I just see Charles being painted as something he was not prior to the Marciano meeting. He was never a speedy dancer, he was the Cobra, using head and upperbody movement to slip and counter from the midrange. He wasn't dancing circles around Louis anymore than he was Marciano, just not how he operated. If you want to make a case for him being more of a slugger thats fine, but the implication of him being an easier target I can't agree with. Unlesss were discussing the second Marciano meeting, where he had no interest in going the distance and gambled on beefing up and looking for the stoppage. I'd say his decline starts with that loss.

He was never a dancer but he did move a lot more against Louis than he did against Marciano. He also got hit more by 1953-1954 than previously.

Charles was deflecting most of Satterfield's punches with his glove and arms, the added sound effects are pretty devestating though.

And occasionally with his face as well.

Feel free to mute the video:

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[hhascup]

Charles wasn't at his best when he fought Marciano but he was still a quality fighter. His speed and reflexes had gone down but he could still box well and his upper body movement was still great. His prime was at light heavy before the Baroudi tragedy. In his second fight with Marhsall he looks notably lighter on his feet and has more bounce to him then in the heavyweight fights mentioned above. Either way it was a very good win for Marciano unlike the Louis win who was totally shot. Rocky said himself he was surprised how light Joe's punches felt, I doubt anyone said that about Louis in his prime.

P.S I also feel Charles beat Johnson it was a close fight but Ezzard should have got the nod and the ref should have scored the knockdown.

Back then they scored the matches by rounds not points, so a knockdown would only win him the round,

Here's the scoring of the Charles/Johnson bout:



Referee Buck McTiernan - 6-3-1 Johnson
Judge Joe Capristo - 5-4-1 Charles
Judge Lou Tress - 7-3 Johnson
Unofficial AP scorecard - 5-3-2 Johnson

[TheGreatA]

Ezzard Charles vs Harold Johnson was a close fight that I've seen people score either way, never by wide margins. Would the Charles of 1947 truly go to a close decision with the Harold Johnson of 1953?

[MrMarvel]

Marciano is so wide open and ponderous. It's surprising to see a heavyweight who is so small be so ponderous.

[The Mongoose]

He was never a dancer but he did move a lot more against Louis than he did against Marciano. He also got hit more by 1953-1954 than previously.



And occasionally with his face as well.

Feel free to mute the video:

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

If Charles was never a dancer, than the question of his supposed decrease in mobility is drifting into tedious irrelvance..its what you would call a "stretch." Now a noticable slide in defense however as you suggest would be more telling. However I would certainly say Walcot and Louis hit Charles more frequently than Wallace, Satterfield, and Layne combined in 53-54. We both know this is because of the considerable difference in punching talent in his opponents moreso than varying defense on Charles' part.


Now, the Satterfield fight you described as Charles being "more of a slugger who took a beating before landing a knockout blow." Sorry, but I don't see it. Maybe could describe "Layne/Satterfield" that way. I see one of the best and most dangerous starters in heavyweight history going for broke while Charles slips and deflects most of his attack, waiting for an opening and finding one fairly easily. Of course, Satterfield snuck in a few punches...he's going to. Credit to the crafty Charles for avoiding most of them and not letting him string anything together. He looks like a boxer too me in this and the first Marciano fight.

You also ask if 47 Charles would lose a disputed decision to a fellow all time great in Harold Johnson. Well he did lose a disputed decision to Elmer Ray in a close fight where Ring thought he was the more effective fighter but the judges didn't see it that way. Save the third Walcott meeting and the Marciano fights, the same can be said for his most of his losses from 47-54. Maybe if Johnson and Valdez gave Charles' rematches the judges would see it different...Valdez' people flat out refused after scoring the upset in the big Cuban's quasi hometown.