Greatest Light-Heavyweights?

[buddha_master]

Greatest LightHeavies???

Got to "The Mongoose" on top.....Foster #2

[Saban]

Ezzard Charles was the best of the light heavyweights in my humble opinion. After World War II, Charles was devastating, knocking out one fighter after another. He beat the great Archie Moore 3 times including a KO in their last fight. After that fight, Charles KO'd a fighter named Sam Baroudi. Baroudi died after the fight. That bothered Charles quite a bit.

After that, Ezzard changed his style in a way to settle with just winning and not necessarily getting a KO. Because Charles could not get a title shot, he moved up to heavyweight and fought Jersey Joe Walcott for the title after Joe Louis retired. He won and became the Heavyweight Champion.

So, Ezzard Charles was so good that he won the heavyweight title while trying not to hurt anybody.

[Willie Pep 229]

Ezzard Charles was the best of the light heavyweights in my humble opinion. After World War II, Charles was devastating, knocking out one fighter after another. He beat the great Archie Moore 3 times including a KO in their last fight. After that fight, Charles KO'd a fighter named Sam Baroudi. Baroudi died after the fight. That bothered Charles quite a bit.

After that, Ezzard changed his style in a way to settle with just winning and not necessarily getting a KO. Because Charles could not get a title shot, he moved up to heavyweight and fought Jersey Joe Walcott for the title after Joe Louis retired. He won and became the Heavyweight Champion.

So, Ezzard Charles was so good that he won the heavyweight title while trying not to hurt anybody.

Why then in the couple of years after (49-50) does he have as many KOs after Baroudi as before him? Everytime a fighter kills someone in the ring, and then his career begins to slide (usually because of age) we hear how he was affected by the death and just couldn't fight the same . . . Mancini; Baer; Griffith; Ramos. I don't think so . . . . Anyway it is hard to call someone the GOAT who suffers 30 KDs over 12 fights.

[GhostofDempsey]

It's difficult to quantify any one best at any division, or any one best or greatest of all time. It's all subjective. We all have our lists, and from time to time I see myself altering those lists. One can definitely make an argument for Ezzard Charles, and arguments could also be made for Moore, Harold Johnson, Tunney, Spinks, Jack O'Brien, and several others.

[Saban]

Why then in the couple of years after (49-50) does he have as many KOs after Baroudi as before him? Everytime a fighter kills someone in the ring, and then his career begins to slide (usually because of age) we hear how he was affected by the death and just couldn't fight the same . . . Mancini; Baer; Griffith; Ramos. I don't think so . . . . Anyway it is hard to call someone the GOAT who suffers 30 KDs over 12 fights.

Of course, Charles was not so good later in his career when he was clearly over the hill. Besides, who knows when the ALS started to affect his boxing.

His KO"s after the Baroudi fight were mostly against boxers that were not so good. He took some easy fights leading up to his first fight with Walcott.

I believe he was the best light heavyweight. Who do you think was better?

[Willie Pep 229]

Of course, Charles was not so good later in his career when he was clearly over the hill. Besides, who knows when the ALS started to affect his boxing.

His KO"s after the Baroudi fight were mostly against boxers that were not so good. He took some easy fights leading up to his first fight with Walcott.

I believe he was the best light heavyweight. Who do you think was better?

I don't - I try, as tempting as it is, not to do that sort of thing - it is quite popular around here: you got your head-to-head arguments; you got your triangle theory; they love to argue the 'styles makes fights' argument; evaluation of competition; evaluation of the era; expert picks, and of course 'legacy' (which I have not, as of yet, figured out what that means).

I'm waiting for Bill's 'magic machine' then we'll know for sure.

See billeau2 for details on magic machine.

P.S. wait I got to give you a hard time on this . . . he was distraught over the death so he adjusted by taking on ham and eggers and then protected them by knocking them out?

Anyway, I just wouldn't put a fighter who hits the deck 30 times in his career at the top.

[Willie Pep 229]

Oh! I forgot 'ducks' you always got to argue ducks.

[billeau2]

I don't - I try, as tempting as it is, not to do that sort of thing - it is quite popular around here: you got your head-to-head arguments; you got your triangle theory; they love to argue the 'styles makes fights' argument; evaluation of competition; evaluation of the era; expert picks, and of course 'legacy' (which I have not, as of yet, figured out what that means).

I'm waiting for Bill's 'magic machine' then we'll know for sure.

See billeau2 for details on magic machine.

P.S. wait I got to give you a hard time on this . . . he was distraught over the death so he adjusted by taking on ham and eggers and then protected them by knocking them out?

Anyway, I just wouldn't put a fighter who hits the deck 30 times in his career at the top.

This division... Its like an Air B&B for a lot of guys... Lol. They come into it and fight in other divisions, etc. Right now today here is how I see it:

1. Tunney,
2. Spinks, Archie Moore Ezzard Charles
3. Rosenbloom, Michael Moore,
4. Foster, Montell Griffin
5. Choyinsky/ Usyk

I know I forgot a few

[Saban]

According to The Boxing Register, " Baroudi's death affected Charles deeply, and observers saw a change in his style from that point on. Although he was criticized for being too conservative, Charles no longer possessed the desire to finish off his opponents in the manner which had earned him the nickname, "The Cincinnati Cobra."

That was one of my sources for my post about Ezzard Charles. I think that I read something about that somewhere else too.

[Anthony342]

I don't - I try, as tempting as it is, not to do that sort of thing - it is quite popular around here: you got your head-to-head arguments; you got your triangle theory; they love to argue the 'styles makes fights' argument; evaluation of competition; evaluation of the era; expert picks, and of course 'legacy' (which I have not, as of yet, figured out what that means).

I'm waiting for Bill's 'magic machine' then we'll know for sure.

See billeau2 for details on magic machine.

P.S. wait I got to give you a hard time on this . . . he was distraught over the death so he adjusted by taking on ham and eggers and then protected them by knocking them out?

Anyway, I just wouldn't put a fighter who hits the deck 30 times in his career at the top.

So who DO you put at the top spot all time at light heavy?