Only a fool would discount Foster's chances against any Light-Heavy in history ---& Charles was no fool. What he was was a smart fighter, as well as a talented one. Jab, feint, step-in, right hook downstairs & the uppercut inside, slide to the flank, one-two as you step out & circle...this was a particular motion of offense Charles was shown on some old footage in an impromptu exhibition for some youngsters. It's one technique I always fancied against punchers. I like his chances by decision over Foster, anyway.
fixed for accuracy. :kidcool: Gimme Charles. he proved that he could hang with great heavyweights and prevail. Foster never proved any such thing.
Wouldn't have mattered. Any version you like. Guys don't become GLASS chinned overnight, his chin was always a vulnerability - one he avoided having exposed by taking on very few threatening opponents. Charles woulda knocked him spark out. Foster too most likely.
I dunno about that.. Leonard got hurt badly by Norris when he got older...the same Leonard, when he was young (and in Prime) took Hearns' Bombs. Reconcile these things for me please. opcorn:
In fairness, Ray wasn't knocked cold by 1 punch in that fight though. He got dominated by a younger, faster, stronger man and saw the final bell. Roy took very few clean shots in his prime then when we see him take a couple of real beezers he takes a snooze. Im not saying his chin wasn't diminished by the time Tarver/Johnson got to him, just that guys with good chins don't suddenly start taking naps from single shots slightly post prime. And you'll need a good chin to beat the likes of Charles or Foster at light heavyweight.
I favor Charles slightly because I think he could box his way ot of trouble against Foster but make no mistake, Foster is THE MOST DANGEROUS Light Heavy of all time... simply an astonishing puncher... Charles is maybe the only 175er I'd make a favorite over him... not even Spinks, who I rabnk as "Greater" than Foster all-time because of his resume, would beat Foster in my opinion
