Joe Louis vs Ezzard Charles-who ranks higher?

[Suckmedry]

I'm sure I've heard a few experts say Charles was the best fighter they'd ever seen

[TBear]

Why do you think that?

I was kidding by copying your response IronDan. Respectfully I was jumping to the other side I suppose.
Personally I do hold Louis higher my All time list, partially because of his amazing consistency on top and partially for his accomplishments in and outside the ring. But please don't misunderstand me, I do also hold Charles very high. I just don't think he bypassed Louis.

[LacedUp]

I was just wondering which one of these greats ranks higher in the ATG list?

Overall? Charles I'd say. By some distance.

Ezzard Charles has one of the best 3-4 resumes in boxing history.

[billeau2]

heavyweights generally can't do what other fighters can on a side by side comparitive basis. If we take Two physcial phenomes: Ali and Robinson, and compare them this is what happens:

a) because most human beings are towards the middle weights, and because a great boxer comes from the normative population....there will be more great competitors in the middle divisions. Ali fought some of the greatest comp, but Robinson fought better.

b) because of weight differences, even though Ali could move back, make people miss and show phenominal speed, Robinson could also fight while moving backwards, punch faster...etc.

In Thai boxing, where sobering realities are a feature of the sport....not only do guys retire before 30....BUT the world champion, the most venerated champion is the middle weight champ of the world. Nobody could even tell you or cares about the big boys.

The point is we have to look at Louis in the context of the heavyweights to compare him to Charles. The smaller Cincinnati Cobra could of course physically do most of what Louis could...with the exception of that one caveat that makes the heavyweights so sublime.....PUNCHING!

Louis used strategies and set ups that were doable and effective against heavyweight fighters....He paid a dear price for it when he almost lost to Conn. Charles had to deal with more varieties of fighter because he crossed the upper weight threshhold of the middle weight into the heavyweight division. But Charles...good as he was was not really a heavyweight. Just lkie Louis good as he was was always in for a dangerous fight against a defensive specialist who could avoid him.

People often don't see the irony when we banter here on the boards: guys like Louis, Dempsey and Ali never had problems against big heavyweights, like Klitschko! they had difficulty against guys who were smart. Tunney, Conn, Schmeling, Jimmy young (examples consecutively for Dempsey Louis and Ali).

[10,000 Days]

^
So basically Charles should be rated higher because he fought in a more versatile weight class?

[billeau2]

^
So basically Charles should be rated higher because he fought in a more versatile weight class?

When comparing fighters we should be aware of differences that do not compare.