Can anyone make an argument for Charles being p4p goat?

[billeau2]

I know it's silly to get too invested into Boxrec ratings but while taking I look and seeing Ezzard still on top I thought to myself I wonder if anyone actually feels that way though.

I always felt like we use this distinction to mark the archetype more than the fighter per se: On the one hand we have Robinson, who could do everything... he was well ordered, methodical, had natural gifts... Robinson was the consumation of what a pure boxing machine should be, when all the technology and talent came together... he was boxing's Apollo, the sun cometh out everyday, it goes back the same time... It sustains the systems that sustain human beings.

Yet some people feel the honor should go to, or at least be shared, by Hank Armstrong. Armstrong was relentless, a battering ram that pressed the talent out of opponents, a disorderly mess of bobbing head, punches at all angles, with no let up. No great innovation, no great speed, just pure unrelenting force applied consistently. Armstrong was our Dionysus... a disordered mess of pure bad intentions and fight, and woe to who had the keys to drive Dionysus home!

To me these two fighters best represent these two themes that make boxing a hybrid, not simply a sport. When we look at the ascent of a great fighter... there is always the challenge of the Brute Gilgamesh meets in the Epic of Gilgamesh. In that tale, Gilgamesh eventually embraces the brutish world of Enkidu, and realizes the human condition... Boxing is made complete the same way when a technical marvel like Jones, meets a sudden right hand that reminds one... there is another aspect of the game here... likewise for the brute, the Tyson, who is tamed by technical steps, followed through with perfection.

So Charles? Great fighter, def ATG. But there is a reason why the GOAT and the fighter usually credited with being either an alternative GOAT, or, even better... are such a stark contrast. And no matter how great a fighter is, he cannot be both: Apollonain, and Dionysian.

[GhostofDempsey]

He's in the top 5 of my ATG list.

[them_apples]

- -Ez a p4p fighter at his peak, but never in the SRR level with the public.

wow you finally said something smart for once, you must have ran out of JD

aside from that though, Charles doesn't get his credit because the general public, even some educated boxing fans don't rate him high on the eye test. The reason for this is because he is possibly one of the most underrated fighters in a category that often is overlooked, ring generalship aka fight IQ. He fights very smart and is very patient. One of the least flashy fighters out there.

From a contemporary standpoint, Mayweather takes the same hit. No he's not the most skilled fighter out there (of all time), he's not the best fighter - but he's quite smart when it comes to boxing.

An example of being relatively skilled but not smart is Evander Holyfield, hes a well polished fundamental boxer, but the second he gets tagged he goes right into brawl mode no matter how big the dude is. And if you read his book he has a problem impregnating every woman he meets and squandering large sums of money.

Charles is a very patient and crafty fighter, throws 80 percent bait punches to set up accurate effective well timed punches. He puts most of his energy into defense and setting you up. It's very boring to watch unless you love boxing.

[Marchegiano]

To be fair, I'm sure plenty have him ranked in their top five. I wouldn't bat an eye at Ez in the top five p4p atgs, but, GOAT? Never seen that list or talked to that person.

Maybe he should be considered more often? I can really think of a reason why Ez isn't in there with the sugars and floyd and such folk.

Anyone willing to stake that claim? Not just tell me Charles was great, but, the greatest?

[NChristo-]

Can make a case for any of the top 7 or so really, there isn't much between them when it's reached that height.

[billeau2]

Can make a case for any of the top 7 or so really, there isn't much between them when it's reached that height.

Well Said! Exactly

[Willie Pep 229]

I know it's silly to get too invested into Boxrec ratings but while taking I look and seeing Ezzard still on top I thought to myself I wonder if anyone actually feels that way though.

To make this claim does it not necessiate the belief that Marciano best him twice solely because of his size?

After all if we call you P4P the best then we assume that you would only lose to men too big to fight.

That to me doesn't look to be the issue with him losing to Marciano.

No I don't think he is the GOAT!

[Anthony342]

To make this claim does it not necessiate the belief that Marciano best him twice solely because of his size?

After all if we call you P4P the best then we assume that you would only lose to men too big to fight.

That to me doesn't look to be the issue with him losing to Marciano.

No I don't think he is the GOAT!

How about GOAT light heavy?

[Willie Pep 229]

How about GOAT light heavy?

No I don't believe that works either, I can see some ATG LHWs taking him; Spinks, Tunney, more . . .

[Anthony342]

No I don't believe that works either, I can see some ATG LHWs taking him; Spinks, Tunney, more . . .

You mean taking him head to head or do you feel they have better resumes?