Sonny Liston vs Rocky Marciano - Who wins?

Who says he was?:huh Satterfield knocked out a 20 years old Williams was came in as a late substitute.OH WOW! Williams was knocked down twice by Sylvester Jones prior to his fight with Satterfield who else dropped him?

 

The agenda is with the poster not Simmons ,I should have thought that was self evident.:huh
I don't believe Moore had an agenda, he did say Marciano didn't know enough about boxing to feint anyone out of position.
Take that and give it whatever credence you wish.
I think this is about Liston V Marciano?
Maybe we can confine ourselves to that?

 

Because Archie got up to win that one against Durelle could not rise from the Marciano onslaught. So the one he won was better than the fish that got away

 

Once again personal interpetation/ opinion is not fact .

 

But you know it's true :yep

 

The facts are Simmons says Rocky hit harder than Williams and also a fact is Moore says Durelle hit harder than Rocky. Either Durelle hits hardest of all or we are led to check how many world class fighters Rocky, Durelle and WIlliams knocked out to decide who hit hardest at world level.

 

Sly Jones who was 7-3 dropped 27-0 Big Cat 2X, Satterfield dropped him 2X and KO'd Big 31-1 Williams, Liston 4 X in 2 fights, 6-4-0 Mel Turbow knocked him down 2X, Ali KO'd Big Cat,Al Jones dropped him 2X and stopped him in 8, Mac Foster Ko'd by 2X,Al Blue Lewis KO'd by

seems a little chinny for the most part

 

I know I left an R out of interpretation.

 

Tyson 71" reach vs Carl The Truth Williams 85" reach - Tyson WKO1 - reach per sa is not insurmountable by any means

 

Williams was 36 for the Jones and Foster fights, and 37 against Lewis.I think it is generally accepted that after his run in with the cop and his magnum pistol he was never the same fighter, but you knock yourself out making cheap ponts.
BTW. This has to do with his power precisely what?

 

I might be sticking my neck out here but I would hazard a guess that Tyson was a teensy weenzy bit faster than Marciano?

ps .it's per se.

 

Tyson was arguably the fastest heavyweight ever.

 

On its own it means very little.

If multiple opponents of a given fighter corroborate each other however, it becomes significant.

What I would suggest is that we put it in a box for now, and wait to see if any other testimony emerges.

 

I think what he's saying is that people over rate Willaims by going solely and only solely on his physique and power - example: I watched a documentary from the early 80's about the build up to Frank Bruno versus Jumbo Cummings and one of the sparring partners in Bruno's camp at the time was interviewed and he was saying Bruno was one of the hardest punchers he was ever in with and said words to the effect of "I've been in with some big punchers - Big Cat Williams, Foreman and a few others and Bruno's punching is very comparable to those guys!"

So yes Williams punching power was seen as amongst the very best by his peers but look what happened when Bruno stepped up to the top level he kept getting blasted out - his power started to become ineffectual because he wasn't a good enough fighter around at the top level to still make that power count - Bruno probably hit harder pure power than Tyson but When actually fighting Tyson looked the far harder hitter - because he was the FAR better fighter.

And the same tug applies with Big Cat - at the lower levels his power blitzed a lot of guys - but when he fought at the top level he got his ass handed to him mostly