Ezzard Charles Versus Evander Holyfield- Who wins & Why?

[billeau2]

The best version of Holyfield pre heavyweight was probably as a brawler with boxing skills. The best version of Holyfield as a heavyweight was as a boxer. It is how he beat Bowe and Tyson... it was drilled into him Turner. Given whom Charles encountered I don't see a version of Holly that wins. He loses in close fashion imo but losses never the less. Charles was one of those guys, like Rosenbloom, and the other maxie (bauer) who decided that he did not want to punch people murderously... So we tend to see what a fine boxer puncher he was in his later fights... However he could also do what Holly did as a puncher and then some! Just something to consider.

Ill also say this: Holly on his best nights had that next gear... and so did Charles...lol.

[them_apples]

The best version of Holyfield pre heavyweight was probably as a brawler with boxing skills. The best version of Holyfield as a heavyweight was as a boxer. It is how he beat Bowe and Tyson... it was drilled into him Turner. Given whom Charles encountered I don't see a version of Holly that wins. He loses in close fashion imo but losses never the less. Charles was one of those guys, like Rosenbloom, and the other maxie (bauer) who decided that he did not want to punch people murderously... So we tend to see what a fine boxer puncher he was in his later fights... However he could also do what Holly did as a puncher and then some! Just something to consider.

Ill also say this: Holly on his best nights had that next gear... and so did Charles...lol.

I kinda figured Holy beat Tyson by backing him up and brawling. He found out Mike can’t fight going backwards nor inside. What do you think?

[billeau2]

I kinda figured Holy beat Tyson by backing him up and brawling. He found out Mike can’t fight going backwards nor inside. What do you think?

There are more specifics... Just backing the man up does not give the results. What Turner taught Mike to do was a martial arts principle called "triangulation." Im sure that is not what Turner called it lol. So: When you are standing and squared up, imagine if you had a tail and where it would d****. that would be at a third point behind your two legs that would form the apex of a triangle. A person has no leg, no tail... and hence, no balance at tis point. So what one has to learn to do is push on this point when backing someone up. This is exactly what Holly did. He made sure that even when Tyson caught him, Mike was off balance and could not set into the shots.

In martial arts this is the point I drive one towards to throw, or to step into to take their center. No fighter, no man can fight going backwards when they have o balance to set... BTW the same point exists in the front. When you take a piss, where that piss is going? that is about where the apex of the triangle would be in the front.

Many grapplers use this point, without even knowing what it is they are doing. Musashi in the Book of the Five Rings said "keep the opponent in flight" because when we look at this approach psychologically its fundamentally the same... Don't let balance come to the opponent and the opponent cannot attack you, Football: "the best defense is a great offense" same idea.

[QueensburyRules]

There are more specifics... Just backing the man up does not give the results. What Turner taught Mike to do was a martial arts principle called "triangulation." Im sure that is not what Turner called it lol. So: When you are standing and squared up, imagine if you had a tail and where it would d****. that would be at a third point behind your two legs that would form the apex of a triangle. A person has no leg, no tail... and hence, no balance at tis point. So what one has to learn to do is push on this point when backing someone up. This is exactly what Holly did. He made sure that even when Tyson caught him, Mike was off balance and could not set into the shots.

In martial arts this is the point I drive one towards to throw, or to step into to take their center. No fighter, no man can fight going backwards when they have o balance to set... BTW the same point exists in the front. When you take a piss, where that piss is going? that is about where the apex of the triangle would be in the front.

Many grapplers use this point, without even knowing what it is they are doing. Musashi in the Book of the Five Rings said "keep the opponent in flight" because when we look at this approach psychologically its fundamentally the same... Don't let balance come to the opponent and the opponent cannot attack you, Football: "the best defense is a great offense" same idea.

- - Fight turned on a butt, likely the first time Mike was ever butted significantly as a pro.

Blood banks will tell you men are most likely to faint upon seeing their own blood than women are, and Mike visibly melted. Ironically Vander did the same when Holmes sliced him nice and nasty with an elbow.

I prefer reality over theory.

[them_apples]

- - Fight turned on a butt, likely the first time Mike was ever butted significantly as a pro.

Blood banks will tell you men are most likely to faint upon seeing their own blood than women are, and Mike visibly melted. Ironically Vander did the same when Holmes sliced him nice and nasty with an elbow.

I prefer reality over theory.

thats a good point and could have actually played a role, if it wasn’t manifesting itself beforehand that is. “Looking for a way out” is the old term

[QueensburyRules]

thats a good point and could have actually played a role, if it wasn’t manifesting itself beforehand that is. “Looking for a way out” is the old term

- - Tooth and nail before the butt, and the 2nd fight turned on a butt as well as U becoming the butt of derision if U don't wake up and smell the coffee.

[billeau2]

- - Fight turned on a butt, likely the first time Mike was ever butted significantly as a pro.

Blood banks will tell you men are most likely to faint upon seeing their own blood than women are, and Mike visibly melted. Ironically Vander did the same when Holmes sliced him nice and nasty with an elbow.

I prefer reality over theory.

The fact that Holly fought dirty with his head at times does not negate other elements of the fight.

[QueensburyRules]

The fact that Holly fought dirty with his head at times does not negate other elements of the fight.

- - It was a surprisingly great fight given how shot Vander had been previously looking, ahem, the other elements!

[Willie Pep 229]

The fact that Holly fought dirty with his head at times does not negate other elements of the fight.

Gotta disagree, it does. Too powerful of a weapon. Can end a fight; fear of that cheat occuring can dramatically alter how a fighter has to fight because of the threat.

Not sure how to evaluate what I am about to share but try this . . .

In the London Prize Ring Rules, rules #15, #16, #17, and #18, deal with hitting a man when he is down; low blows, biting and gouging; and kicking, respectively. All are deemed fouls.

Rule #14 deals with head butting. It's also deemed a foul but has the added sentence "and the party resorting to this practice shall be deemed to have lost the battle.

That final sentence does not appear in the other four rules.

Question: Did they recognize head butting as a bigger cheat than, kicking, biting, gouging, and low blows, and therefore allowed the referee to decide how the other four fouls would be punished, but consequently saw head butting as a greater crime and demanded a fight be stopped?

I think its selective inclusion strange if not telling.

[billeau2]

Gotta disagree, it does. Too powerful of a weapon. Can end a fight; fear of that cheat occuring can dramatically alter how a fighter has to fight because of the threat.

Not sure how to evaluate what I am about to share but try this . . .

In the London Prize Ring Rules, rules #15, #16, #17, and #18, deal with hitting a man when he is down; low blows, biting and gouging; and kicking, respectively. All are deemed fouls.

Rule #14 deals with head butting. It's also deemed a foul but has the added sentence "and the party resorting to this practice shall be deemed to have lost the battle.

That final sentence does not appear in the other four rules.

Question: Did they recognize head butting as a bigger cheat than, kicking, biting, gouging, and low blows, and therefore allowed the referee to decide how the other four fouls would be punished, but consequently saw head butting as a greater crime and demanded a fight be stopped?

I think its selective inclusion strange if not telling.

well there was a ref and he made certain decisions regarding any allegations about butting. I trust refs, even bad refs a lot more than judges... I can only assume his discretion and understanding, vis a vis his proximity allowed him to make a judgement of sorts.