Which all time great should not be there?

[Anthony342]

Yeah, but Naz was not liked by a lot of fans for his antics too. They'll probably both get in though. Man, almost done with my Barrera set and just watched his UD win over Naz. Closer fight than I remembered, but down the stretch, Barrera won about the last 4-5 rounds to take it.

[atomicsad]

Why is Ezzard Charles rated so high? His greates win was against Louis who was far past his prime.

[StarshipTrooper]

Why is Ezzard Charles rated so high? His greates win was against Louis who was far past his prime.

Because he's the consensus pick among boxing historians as the GOAT Light-Heavyweight. Louis was his greatest win? How about sweeping a series over Archie Moore (an consensus top-3 Light-Heavyweight)?

Poet

[IronDanHamza]

Why is Ezzard Charles rated so high? His greates win was against Louis who was far past his prime.

Why don't you research and learn before you post nonsense like this? I don't understand. Why would you comment on something you clearly have no clue about? Joe Louis was his best win? Does Charles LHW and MW resume not exist?

He went 3-0 with a prime Archie Moore. You know, that Top 10 ATG?

He went 2-0 with a prime Charley Burley.

He beat Bivins, Maxim, Marshall, Jersey Joe Walcott ALL multiple times each and that's only the tip of the ice berg.

Beat ATG's from MW-HW.

Has a case for having THE best resume in the history of the sport.

[SlySlickSmooth]

Claimed ATG's that aren't ATGs: Lennox L. & Joe C.

[mickey malone]

I'd say in order to answer this question, you need to go looking for the dominant champions of weak divisions [eras]

That's why Bob Foster's godda be in with a shout.. The light-heavyweight division was notoriously devoid of much talent throughout the 70's decade in which he was champ. No doubt, i'll be slated for putting the 'great' BF into this catagory, but lmo he does.. I'm well aware of the brutal fashion in which he dispatched most of his opponents that included legendary atg Dick Tiger to win the title but when you take into consideration, Tiger was way past prime, heavilly outweighed and physically dwarfed by the towering Foster, it bears to insignificance really because other than that, he beat a whole bunch of nobodies really. Unless that is, you rate Vincente Rondon.. As is common knowledge, Foster would've had huge physical advantages over virtually every lhwt to ever lace em up.. For example, he'd have been a lot bigger than Mike Spinks, Ezzard Charles and Gene Tunney who all went on to win titles at heavy thus, fully deserving their status as atg's. However, this did'nt apply to Foster who despite his size, simply could'nt hack it and got iced every time he went there.. And to illustrate my point further, Archie Moore,Jimmy Bivins and Georges Carpentier were all absolute midgets in comparison to big Bob, but all 3 of them were considerably more adept than him when outweighed..

[jabsRstiff]

Corrales won wars over excellent guys....guys like Castillo who would have totally destroyed Arturo Gatti. Gatti went to war with guys like Ivan Robinson and Micky Ward- good fighters who never beat the best.

[SBleeder]

Why is Ezzard Charles rated so high? His greates win was against Louis who was far past his prime.

Wow, man. You are really in need of some boxing education.

His best wins were against a prime Archie Moore... he achieved this three times.

Charles' light heavyweight resume is head and shoulders above anyone else's... including three decisive wins ovr Archie Moore (who is generally considered the second greatest LHW of all time). Burley, Marshall, Ray, Bivins (Charles beat a heavyweight version of Bivins while only weighing in himself as a LHW... and that's at LHW.

Charles also had an outstanding, albeit brief, middleweight career.

All of this was well before he won the heavyweight crown... and keep in mind that Ezzard weighed in at 175 or less for most of his heavyweight fights.

Top 5 P4P all timer; there is no valid argument otherwise.

[Scott9945]

I'd say in order to answer this question, you need to go looking for the dominant champions of weak divisions [eras]

That's why Bob Foster's godda be in with a shout.. The light-heavyweight division was notoriously devoid of much talent throughout the 70's decade in which he was champ. No doubt, i'll be slated for putting the 'great' BF into this catagory, but lmo he does.. I'm well aware of the brutal fashion in which he dispatched most of his opponents that included legendary atg Dick Tiger to win the title but when you take into consideration, Tiger was way past prime, heavilly outweighed and physically dwarfed by the towering Foster, it bears to insignificance really because other than that, he beat a whole bunch of nobodies really. Unless that is, you rate Vincente Rondon.. As is common knowledge, Foster would've had huge physical advantages over virtually every lhwt to ever lace em up.. For example, he'd have been a lot bigger than Mike Spinks, Ezzard Charles and Gene Tunney who all went on to win titles at heavy thus, fully deserving their status as atg's. However, this did'nt apply to Foster who despite his size, simply could'nt hack it and got iced every time he went there.. And to illustrate my point further, Archie Moore,Jimmy Bivins and Georges Carpentier were all absolute midgets in comparison to big Bob, but all 3 of them were considerably more adept than him when outweighed..

I agree with all of that...except that Spinks was almost a physical match for Foster. He was a big, strong lightheavy.

[SBleeder]

Claimed ATG's that aren't ATGs: Lennox L. & Joe C.

Calzaghe? Maybe, although he sneaks onto my ATG list by a hair.

Lennox? C'mon man. I know many people found him "boring" for some reason, but look at his resume. If Rocky Marciano is an ATG, Lewis is a downright legend.