View Single Post
Old 10-01-2007, 07:35 PM   #51
East Side Guru
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,310
vCash: 1000
Default Re: How many does Liston win vs...

Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY
The point of these head to head is that they are only opinions-and they have two flaws:
1. They are totally unsubstantiated opinion
Wrong. The good ones are based on informed opinion, and informed opinion is formed on patterns observed, styles observed, and objectivity.

Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY
2. I notice that normally one picks a few bouts at his own guys peak and then tears down the opposition on the basis of much longer top-level performances. We had a classic of this with Liston and Louis where one poster kept bringing up Louis' loss to Schmeling. Louis was two years into his pro career and 22 years old. Could Liston in 1955 have beaten Schmeling? I doubt it, and I don't think anyone has any proof he could. So claims that Liston would do better are based on a peak Liston, but a peak Louis slaughtered Schmeling in one erasing the whole point.
Well, those that offer selective examples that bolster their man and tear down the other are not objective are they.

Perhaps you read selective posts --I think that most posts have sense enough to take each man at their peak and hypothesize from there.

Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY
Your reasoning is no more or less objective than anyone elses. And spare the psychobabble about why someone might not concur with Liston sweeping the top ten heavies in history. Their reason might be that they just don't see him as being quite as overpowering as you do. Personally, I find Liston the most interesting and sympathetic of heavyweight champions. That does not mean he is the best.
I am as objective as I can be and if I am not, I admit it --and others out here will attest to that. You will not read many opinions out here from me that are not backed up by argument.

At the same time, others make no bones about their bias -and if you are paying attention out here you could name them. You're coming off like an old fogey.

The psychobabble you accuse me of was not about why he isn't ranked higher, it was about the threat that society -both black and white found in him. The NAACP did not want Floyd to fight Liston for the title. Pscyhobabble? Try historical fact.

Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY
You rate Liston "on top of the hill" over even Ali, who badly defeated him twice. Ali was green in 1964. He clearly improved later, but Liston lost badly in 1964. Even in 1960 he was unable to catch the not nearly as fast moving Machen. I don't see him ever catching a top Ali.
You misunderstood the post. I said that when you take all of the HW champs and have each man fight his peers, Liston would have the best record in my (informed) opinion. Ali is second. Also, If you have been reading what I have written, you would have read that I don't believe that Liston should be favored against Ali, prime for prime.

Anyway, you state that Ali was green in 1964 and say nothing about Liston's age in 1964. Someone needs an objectivity check.

Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY
As for his detracters focusing on his brief reign. I would focus more on Liston only defeating three men, Folley, Machen, and Patterson, who were rated in the top five when he fought them. All lost to others at their peak at about the same time Liston beat them--Patterson was ko'd by Johansson, Folley beaten by Cooper, and ko'd by Lavorante and Jones, Machen ko'd by Johansson, and outpointed by Folley and Johnson.

I would say there is just too wide a gap between his accomplishments and the level some are putting him at, as a likely winner over Ali, Louis, or Lewis, especially. With Lewis, for example, Liston was ko'd at 37 by the ordinary Martin. At 38, Lewis defeated the much, much bigger and more skilled Vitali Klitschko.
Again, Liston does not have the greatest scalps in HW history. You need to look at what his strengths were in the ring, how he dealt with different styles, and his level of skill. Styles make fights, indeed, and although it is true that Liston had some trouble with speed and particularly large men with demon speed, he could handle swarmers, punchers, and boxers.

Originally Posted by OLD FOGEY
I have just been watching Liston on film, to refresh my memory, and I must say his supporters have one good point. He is more impressive on film than his resume would lead one to think.
---this has been the crux of what I've been saying! What took you so long?
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote