Where do you rank Ezzard Charles on P4P lists?

[BennyST]

Honestly, as to the topic, I don't and have rarely given a great deal of thought as to a top ten specifically, rating each guy exactly, but I do have my general preferences.

Charles, for me, is a flat out definite top ten. His one let down, arguably at that (a bit like Hearns) is his chin. To me, his chin was not a let down at all. When you fight that many great fighters, sometimes you are going to lose, possibly by KO when you are fighting guys above your natural weight...see Duran/Hearns for example.

However, all the chin business aside, when you beat in your 9th fight a veteran of a 100 fights, you clearly show something special. If you then beat guys like Teddy Yarosz and Ken Overlin, both about 120-15 with wins over great fighters, in around your 20th fight it means you're more than special. It means you're scary good.

Simply put, when you have a resume that consists of wins over fighters from middleweight to heavyweight that includes ATGs from each weight, often numerous times mind you, such as the aforementioned plus Charley Burley, Jose Basora, Joey Maxim, Archie Moore, Lloyd Marshall, Jimmy Bivins, Jersey Joe, Joe Louis, Gus Lesnevich, and many more, you not only deserve ATG status, you deserve that ATG status that puts you up among the very great of all the greats from boxing. He truly deserves that special status of top ten ATG.

Thing is, he also fought nearly all of them when they were at their best. Note I said 'nearly all'.

[Boxing Bob]

I wasn't trolling when I made my statement. I just don't have as high of an opinion of Charles as the rest of you. Is that alright? While I rate him third at LHW (behind Foster and Spinks), he's not in my top 10 at HWT. He has a great resume, but he is not a top 10 p4p in my opinion.

[NChristo]

I wasn't trolling when I made my statement. I just don't have as high of an opinion of Charles as the rest of you. Is that alright? While I rate him third at LHW (behind Foster and Spinks), he's not in my top 10 at HWT. He has a great resume, but he is not a top 10 p4p in my opinion.

Other then 'possibly' being better h2h what does Foster have over Charles ?, also where do you rank 46 Losses Langford ?.

[IronDanHamza]

I could die laughing at the thought of Bob Foster being ranked above Ezzard Charles.

[JAB5239]

I could die laughing at the thought of Bob Foster being ranked above Ezzard Charles.

I use to rank Foster above Charles before I understood the significance of resume. I'd still pick him to beat Ezzard h2h though.

[IronDanHamza]

Honestly, as to the topic, I don't and have rarely given a great deal of thought as to a top ten specifically, rating each guy exactly, but I do have my general preferences.

Charles, for me, is a flat out definite top ten. His one let down, arguably at that (a bit like Hearns) is his chin. To me, his chin was not a let down at all. When you fight that many great fighters, sometimes you are going to lose, possibly by KO when you are fighting guys above your natural weight...see Duran/Hearns for example.

However, all the chin business aside, when you beat in your 9th fight a veteran of a 100 fights, you clearly show something special. If you then beat guys like Teddy Yarosz and Ken Overlin, both about 120-15 with wins over great fighters, in around your 20th fight it means you're more than special. It means you're scary good.

Simply put, when you have a resume that consists of wins over fighters from middleweight to heavyweight that includes ATGs from each weight, often numerous times mind you, such as the aforementioned plus Charley Burley, Jose Basora, Joey Maxim, Archie Moore, Lloyd Marshall, Jimmy Bivins, Jersey Joe, Joe Louis, Gus Lesnevich, and many more, you not only deserve ATG status, you deserve that ATG status that puts you up among the very great of all the greats from boxing. He truly deserves that special status of top ten ATG.

Thing is, he also fought nearly all of them when they were at their best. Note I said 'nearly all'.

I can't see how he could logically be ranked lower than #10.

[IronDanHamza]

I use to rank Foster above Charles before I understood the significance of resume. I'd still pick him to beat Ezzard h2h though.

I'd probably lean on him in a H2H match, maybe.

But in terms of who they beat and what they achieved Bob Foster pales in comparison.

[Ray Corso]

Honestly some of you guys are just totally green when it comes to the veteran boxers from different eras! I'll explain very simply how a fighter with 25 losses gets a high overall ranking.
First your career lasts 20 years.
When your 18 - 0 and need to be tested you foght someone like Ken Overin who at that time was 122-19-6!!!
Losses are part of being a "Full Time Fighter"!! You young people think that Mayweathers record is incredible where as I think its ok considering the best fighters hes fought were old and beyond their prime or pumped up welters. Its not his fault theres not a great amount of competition but the one guy whocan be a challenge hes avoided for some time.
Back to Mr. Charles the Heavyweight Champion of the World 93 (52ko) 25 losses-7 draws!! He has MORE KO wins then most fighters today have TOTAL fights. Mr. Charles was a well schooled fighter who could box and fight and was always in shape and more than willing to win.
Undefeated fighters simply haven't stuck around long enough in my view. Marciano was caught in an era that was weak but things might have changed with Liston and Williams and Paterson getting ready to knock on his door.
When you fight for 19 years and have 125 fights thats being a career pro fighter, being the champ with 50 fights is being an Entertainer!!

[NChristo]

Honestly some of you guys are just totally green when it comes to the veteran boxers from different eras! I'll explain very simply how a fighter with 25 losses gets a high overall ranking.
First your career lasts 20 years.
When your 18 - 0 and need to be tested you foght someone like Ken Overin who at that time was 122-19-6!!!
Losses are part of being a "Full Time Fighter"!! You young people think that Mayweathers record is incredible where as I think its ok considering the best fighters hes fought were old and beyond their prime or pumped up welters. Its not his fault theres not a great amount of competition but the one guy whocan be a challenge hes avoided for some time.
Back to Mr. Charles the Heavyweight Champion of the World 93 (52ko) 25 losses-7 draws!! He has MORE KO wins then most fighters today have TOTAL fights. Mr. Charles was a well schooled fighter who could box and fight and was always in shape and more than willing to win.
Undefeated fighters simply haven't stuck around long enough in my view. Marciano was caught in an era that was weak but things might have changed with Liston and Williams and Paterson getting ready to knock on his door.
When you fight for 19 years and have 125 fights thats being a career pro fighter, being the champ with 50 fights is being an Entertainer!!

You didn't explain anything about Charles' ranking ?, all I got from your post is that you think you think we're green to the history of the sport and you tried to bundle us all together / stereotype us (using Mayweather of all people), which doesn't exactly go down well in this section.

[IronDanHamza]

Honestly some of you guys are just totally green when it comes to the veteran boxers from different eras! I'll explain very simply how a fighter with 25 losses gets a high overall ranking.
First your career lasts 20 years.
When your 18 - 0 and need to be tested you foght someone like Ken Overin who at that time was 122-19-6!!!
Losses are part of being a "Full Time Fighter"!! You young people think that Mayweathers record is incredible where as I think its ok considering the best fighters hes fought were old and beyond their prime or pumped up welters. Its not his fault theres not a great amount of competition but the one guy whocan be a challenge hes avoided for some time.
Back to Mr. Charles the Heavyweight Champion of the World 93 (52ko) 25 losses-7 draws!! He has MORE KO wins then most fighters today have TOTAL fights. Mr. Charles was a well schooled fighter who could box and fight and was always in shape and more than willing to win.
Undefeated fighters simply haven't stuck around long enough in my view. Marciano was caught in an era that was weak but things might have changed with Liston and Williams and Paterson getting ready to knock on his door.
When you fight for 19 years and have 125 fights thats being a career pro fighter, being the champ with 50 fights is being an Entertainer!!

Why are you addressing "People" as if more than 1 person has stated the stupid argument you are replying to?

Other than the one person, pretty much everyone in this thread considers Ezzard Charles to be a minimum Top 5-10 ATG.