RJJ vs Ezzard Charles LHW Title who wins?

[THE REED]

Well slow is relative. I know that Charles is not a slow fighter in general, but we are talking about versus Roy Jones. Here he will be slow, relatively speaking. Jones has distance that is better than Charles' jab with his hooks because they are leaping hooks. As for his ability to land them on Charles, he has landed them repeatedly on fighters as defensively slick as James Toney. Roy also had excellent defense against the jab because of his two armed defense that was perpetually out far in front of his head at different distances, enabled by his very wide stance. Ofcourse he hasn't faced a Charles jab, but jabs have not been very effective against his style. Charles would have height to assist his attempt to get the jab through though.

i couldnt agree more with what you said

roy holds that right hand out purposely to block your jab... and when he fought tarver he switched hands to block the jab... jabs dont land easily on roy AT ALL... prime roy is asbolutely something rare

[wmute]

Well slow is relative. I know that Charles is not a slow fighter in general, but we are talking about versus Roy Jones. Here he will be slow, relatively speaking. Jones has distance that is better than Charles' jab with his hooks because they are leaping hooks. As for his ability to land them on Charles, he has landed them repeatedly on fighters as defensively slick as James Toney. Roy also had excellent defense against the jab because of his two armed defense that was perpetually out far in front of his head at different distances, enabled by his very wide stance. Ofcourse he hasn't faced a Charles jab, but jabs have not been very effective against his style. Charles would have height to assist his attempt to get the jab through though.

As I said, Jones will be faster than Charles. Jones would be faster than anyone at 175 in history. I dont think anyone can dispute that, but he is not going to look like he did, when fighting any of the fighters he faced in his career.

The problem with leaping left hooks, is not landing them (well for humans not called Roy Jones, that would also be a problem) is being out of the way, when you are done with them. Unless Charles had to dehydrate 40 pounds like Toney did (hard to imagine when fighting 10 times a year), I doubt Jones will get the luxury to land many without having to eat the counters. And once he eats some of those, it's going to be a new world for Jones. Sure Charles is going to get hit, but his chin should be quite ahead of Jones' (and no I am not one of those who thinks Jones has a glass chin)

[cuzfozzy]

well we'll never know will we ? ... I've always said it
if there is a fighter that could hang with dem fighters of the past
it would be roy jones jnr.

[robjr]

And when you decide,

remember that all of Charles fights come after he killed a man in the ring, and they are all HW fights,in which Charles was the smaller man.

In the first fight Charles gave away 14 pounds (181-195)
In the second 6.5 (182-188.5)
In the third 8 (185-193)
In the forth 7 (188-195)
In the last he has a 9 pound weight advantage (189-190)

Roy Jones highlights are all from fights between 160 and 175, except from the Ruiz fight.

yep dont really change my decision... charles never stepped in the ring wiht someone who fights like that.

[cuzfozzy]

but has anyone ?!

[wmute]

yep dont really change my decision... charles never stepped in the ring wiht someone who fights like that.

With that avatar and that signature, that is not surprising.

I wanted to remind the viewers of the videos you posted, of the weights and time at which those fights took place.

[res]

As I said, Jones will be faster than Charles. Jones would be faster than anyone at 175 in history. I dont think anyone can dispute that, but he is not going to look like he did, when fighting any of the fighters he faced in his career.

The problem with leaping left hooks, is not landing them (well for humans not called Roy Jones, that would also be a problem) is being out of the way, when you are done with them. Unless Charles had to dehydrate 40 pounds like Toney did (hard to imagine when fighting 10 times a year), I doubt Jones will get the luxury to land many without having to eat the counters. And once he eats some of those, it's going to be a new world for Jones. Sure Charles is going to get hit, but his chin should be quite ahead of Jones' (and no I am not one of those who thinks Jones has a glass chin)

Agree with you about the chin comparison. I must say though that Jones has used this hooking technique on many other fighters and although they do not remotely match Charles in any other area, many of them were atleast as fast as he was.

[wmute]

Agree with you about the chin comparison. I must say though that Jones has used this hooking technique on many other fighters and although they do not match Charles in any other area, many of them were atleast as fast as he was.

Jones was spectacular when he hooked and right after was already ducking under the possible counter left hook, even if when it did not arrive! His timing was superb, but in Charles he would meet someone with a lot of cards up his sleeve. A big problem Jones would have is what he would do if Charles decided that he wanted to clinch. Another problem is that Jones needs that superb timing of his to land his looping shots. Charles like many fighters of the era and a few from the present was able to change tempo and movements. A recent example of that would be Mayweather adjusting to Judah. That type of adjustment, which today has us go "wow", was much more common back then (dem was real fighters back then ;P ).

If you look at Jones' most dominating performances (at 175, because at the lower weights he would just overwhelm his opponents at times) he is often just doing a couple of drills, he can do that because of the lack of flexibility and boxing IQ of his opponents. As he repeats the routine, he is hurting his opponent, drowning them in deeper waters, and perfecting the shots he lands. That effective repetition is lacking from his toughest fights (Hopkins, Griffin) and would surely lack if he faced another well schooled fighter who can make those changes (Hopkins and Griffin are both very skilled and smart in the ring), Charles with his multiple victories over Burley, Moore, Bivins, Walcott is definitely one of those. On top of that wide skillset, he was a murderous puncher at 175.

It's this combination of size, skills, power which makes me believe very strongly that Charles would win a wide majority of the fights between the two (which would inevitably happen if they fought "back then").

[robjr]

With that avatar and that signature, that is not surprising.

I wanted to remind the viewers of the videos you posted, of the weights and time at which those fights took place.

fair enough. its no secret RJJ is my all time fave.. but its how I honestly see it. Prime.. he was just somethin else.

[Benny Leonard]

fair enough. its no secret RJJ is my all time fave.. but its how I honestly see it. Prime.. he was just somethin else.

Here is something to help
Also note, my comment is in blue


THE SCHOLAR CONSIDERS:
An Interview With Boxing Historian Herbert G. Goldman

http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/w42x-kd.htm

WHY ROY JONES, JR?

KD -- Some of the questions put forward by the CBZ scholars come to mind at this point.They’ve sent them to me by e-mail and I’ve printed them out and have them here. May I run a few by you?

HG -- Well, I’ll see what I can do, sure.

KD -- A couple of years ago you published your own greatest pound-for-pound list in International Boxing digest. You had Roy Jones Jr. at the top of your list. You’ve received much criticism from historians and others—typically older folks—What about Jones’ abilities and accomplishments prompted you to make such a bold statement? And how do you compare greatness in boxers? And would you still put Jones up at the top?

HG -- OK. My ranking of Jones in such a dramatic fashion, had to do not with his accomplishments but simply with his skills. He has more and greater skills than any fighter I’ve ever seen in my life. The way he can hook and go immediately to a straight punch, the way he can fire shots from all angles, his domination of every opponent he faces. I’ve never seen a comparable fighter in my life. I went out on a limb in making that pronouncement at that time. I don’t think I was that overboard. Now it’s true that Mr. Jones’ accomplishments in terms of being in great fights, in terms of being a super-star of his period do not begin to equal his skills. That’s the down side. Of course to make great fights it takes two to tango and Mr. Jones is so far above his competition that there are no great fights out there for him, certainly within his own weight classes. Now in terms of looking at the careers of certain fighters, certainly there are a number of men who outshone him in that respect. But I still maintain that Mr. Jones is the most skilfull, is the most over-powering man, pound-for-pound, in the history of boxing. I don’t think even Sugar Ray Robinson was as dominant over his opposition as Roy Jones has been. That takes nothing away from Sugar Ray. But I have never seen a phenomenon like Roy Jones. Of course Roy Jones knows it, too. He knows what he wants, what he doesn’t want. He’s a star. He won’t fight here. He will fight only here. He’s his own promoter, more or less. So he’s certainly not everyones’ ideal of what a fighter should be. But in terms of skills I think he’s the greatest.

NEW VS OLD

KD--What about the general quality of the new guys vs the old guys? Many fans believe that old time boxers were infinitely better than modern boxers.

HG -- Well, boxing historians are traditionally, I think, expected to favor the old-timers. I’m not of that make. I do believe that there’s been an evolution in boxing styles. You can almost trace it, in fact. I do not, for example believe that Jim Corbett would beat Joe Frazier. I do not believe that Joe Walcott or Mysterious Billy Smith would beat Tommy Hearns.

I believe that boxers definitely have evolved into better athletes. There’s been an increase in skills, certainly in combination punching. See, in the old days the main requisite for being a fighter was that you were tough. And there’s no doubt these old time fighters were tough. But for example, if you study the films, we don’t see sustained combination punching, really. George Dixon, .to break off for a moment, seems like a very skilled fighter, up on the balls of his feet. And there were, definitely, talented, skilled boxers in the old days. However, we do not see sustained combination punching until Benny Leonard, circa 1920.

There have been generations of trainers who have profited by their associations with each other. Each generation of trainers, although owing a debt to the preceding generation, has kept up with the times.

One thing I have to emphasize is the increasingly potent influence of amateur boxing on professional boxing. In the old days, say 1910’s and so forth, most fighters turned pro with no amateur experience. These kids were turned pro at 16 years of age and sometimes less. They would gather their experience as professionals. Today boxers of note gain the vast bulk of their experience in the amateurs, where you have bouts limited to three rounds, necessitating sustained action. There is no such thing as feeling-out your opponent in an amateur bout. You go out there and you throw combinations to the head, as quickly and fanatically as you can. And the emphasis is on sustained combination punching all the way through. As a result your skills improve. This has led to professional boxing of a very similar nature.

.................................................. ..............................



SOME OF THE BEST MODERNS

KD -- We discussed your controversial stance that Roy Jones Jr is one of the greatest boxers of all time. Would you care to mention any other of today’s fighters who you consider to be among the best?

HG -- I don’t think there’s any denying Naseem Hamed. Now here’s a small featherweight, when you look at him. He’s 5’3. He was European bantamweight champion. I think if he moved up to Jr. Light or Lightweight, he’d be very hard pressed because of his size. I would never put him in with Floyd Mayweather, Jr. I think Mayweather would just…unh! Would really knock him flat and give him a terrific beating. But at featherweight I don’t see anyone today capable of beating Naseem Hamed. I had to leave that in there to make things fair. Guess he never consider Hamed wouldn't train properly and didn't have certain intangibles against a solid fighter.
Fighters of today develop tremendous reflexes, they learn to punch from all angles. This is the new style. It’s replaced even the Muhammad Ali move-and-jab style. It’s not just Hamed, it’s the same basic style you see from Roy Jones, Jr. –shooting these punches from nowhere. The way Roy Jones can turn a straight jab into a hook is something I’ve never seen any fighter do. When I was watching boxing as a kid I used to imagine fighters who could do that, but I never saw anybody do it until I saw Roy Jones. I think that’s part of my fascination with the man. This is a new development. By the way, one fighter of the old days who really, to a large extent, fought like that, was Jimmy Wild, the greatest flyweight of all time. I mean traditionally regarded as such, a Welshman active from 1911 to 1923.

Oh Floyd Mayweather, Jr. My god! Ability like nobody’s business.