Ezzard Charles of Louis fight vs Ali/ winner?

[burt bienstock]

How would the, twenty nine year old Ezzard Charles, who beat Joe Louis,for title in 1950, fare against Ali? Not the thirty three year old Charles,fighting Marciano, four years later...Your opinions please....

[McGrain]

Ali by a late KO.

[mcvey]

How would the, twenty nine year old Ezzard Charles, who beat Joe Louis,for title in 1950, fare against Ali? Not the thirty three year old Charles,fighting Marciano, four years later...Your opinions please....
Ali by dec or late tko.

[Duodenum]

Ali by clear decision. That combination of mobility, reach, speed and endurance would have been too much for Ezz to overcome. Walcott shared the ring with both (Ali when he refereed Liston II), when they were at their peaks, knew each of them well (along with Louis and Marciano), and Jersey Joe was the foremost exponent of the opinion Muhammad would indeed have beaten all the other great heavyweights among the other champions in the division. (Walcott and Louis had a public debate over this issue after Manila, the Bomber disagreeing with Walcott's assessment.)

Ezz could have some success replicating the approach Folley took in 1967, but it would ultimately be too much of a task to successfully complete. I do think Charles had sufficient skills and toughness to remain upright to the final bell.

[choklab]

which ali? the ali who laboured against jones would have lost on points to charles who beat Louis. The ali who aced foley would outpoint charles though. The ali who spinks and norton beat would lose to charles also. The ali who beat quarry would stop charles.
and by the way, there is no diference between the louis charles and the rocky charles.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

This is the charles rocky fought. this is no shopworn former champ, this is a razor sharp former champ hungry for his title back! in great form!

[teeto]

Ali by a late KO.
Agreed.

[Mr Butt]

ali ud

[Flea Man]

As much as I'd like to formulate a plan for Charles to win, you have to think that Alis size advantage, his phenomenal speed and own ability to evade/absorb Charles' bombs/nullify his jab point to Ali's head attack getting Charles out of there late.

[itrymariti]

Don't know why everybody makes such a big deal out of the Jones fight.

[burt bienstock]

Choklab, I think there HAs to be a difference between a prime twenty nine year old Ezzard Charles, who beat a faded Louis in 1950, and a thirty four year old Charles who fought Rocky Marciano, in 1954...Age always takes it's toll...I think the 29 year old Charles has an excellent chance of defeating an Ali, of any age...Really do...

[mr. magoo]

Ezzard was a great fighter, and probably one of boxing's pound for pound best, but when it came to greatness at heavyweight, he was out of Ali's league. This is probably a mismatch..

[Russell]

and by the way, there is no diference between the louis charles and the rocky charles.



:rofl:rofl:rofl

[mcvey]

:rofl:rofl:rofl

Nor the Louis of Schmeling 2, and the Louis of Marciano :lol:

[choklab]

:rofl:rofl:rofl



charles never looked beter on film than against satterfield and wallace. Now, I know nobody wants to hear that- but tell me where he looked more impresive? he fought marciano after those fights. sure in the actual fight he didnt look as effective since marciano bore him down but the proof that charles's a-game was there in the early rounds until marcianos power took its toll.

[choklab]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


hmmmm, Isnt it odd that the guy who put this together chose to use this footage of charles to demonstrate his class rather than other fights?

[burt bienstock]

No great fighter is expected to be as good at the age of 33 years old, as he was at the age of 29 years of age...Regardless of film clips showing Charles looking impressive,against the likes of Bob Satterfield and Coley Wallace,at the age of 33...Satterfield and Wallace were not the calibre of Louis, Walcott,Archie Moore etc...So the analogy is not valid...Father time, always takes its toll....

[Longhhorn71]

The mature Ali is just too big for Charles.

If Charles put Clay down like Cooper did....maybe.

But 6 months later Ali had matured and was taking Liston's shots.

[djanders]

The prime Ali would beat the prime Charles, in my opinion.

[choklab]

No great fighter is expected to be as good at the age of 33 years old, as he was at the age of 29 years of age...Regardless of film clips showing Charles looking impressive,against the likes of Bob Satterfield and Coley Wallace,at the age of 33...Satterfield and Wallace were not the calibre of Louis, Walcott,Archie Moore etc...So the analogy is not valid...Father time, always takes its toll....


the likes of satterfield and wallace were at least as good as the clevland williams and brian london ali looked so impresive against..

[Unforgiven]

For me, this is a pick 'em fight. 50-50.
I'd expect a very close fight with a very close decision, and perhaps a lot of controversy and debate over the decision.

[dpw417]

The mature Ali is just too big for Charles.

If Charles put Clay down like Cooper did....maybe.

But 6 months later Ali had matured and was taking Liston's shots.
The mature (slower) Ali may have had problems with Charles. But I definitely see our point. I'd take Ali by decision, and one of the reasons was his physical strength, as well as his skills.:good