Cleveland Williams

..does anyone have the stats on williams? i'm interested in his height.
in just watched the two fights with liston again and noticed he was taller than liston, who was over six feet. while i'm at , ali was also taller than liston. maybe my question should be "how tall was liston?"

i'll appreciate any answers.

 

6 feet and ahalf ( 1.85m )

 

A great fighter is as good as his greatest win. Therefore Williams chances could realistically be only 50-50 against that bunch.

For all the hype Billy Daniels and Miteff were Cleveland Williams' best wins. ...And Terrell beat him back.

Actually the Billy Daniels fight film is not so convincing.

Ultimately LIston, Clay and Satterfeild wiped the floor with him.

But Williams really looked good and exciting. Win or lose he was a lot of fun. Often spectacular. And his career spanned and overlapped contrasting eras in boxing history.

 

All the tools were there with Williams speed, size, athleticism and power, he had bad footwork and defense. If he ever learned good fundamentals with his balance and defense we would be talking about him as a champion possibly. His athleticism and size let him get away with it until he fought pretty technically solid fighters like Liston and others you would be hard pressed to find another fighter who could bang up and bloody Liston like he did.

 

Williams was not the same man when he fought Ali and he was a 20 years old last minute replacement when he fought Satterfield.We didn't see Williams for long when he reached his prime.Which of those I named would you pick over Williams?

 

Williams was in his absolute prime in the Billy Daniels film. It was a 50-50 fight and hard to tell what guy was supposed to be the superstar. On that form I would pick any guy that ever knocked out Daniels to cream Williams.

That would absolutely include mildenburger who did knockout Daniels BETWEEN both times he met Williams. In fact Jack Bodell did as well against Daniels as Williams did. On paper there is nothing between Williams and Brian London. They fared as well against Ali and London even beat Rischer that Williams fought and did a better job.

So there isn't enough evidence on paper to really back Williams against many actual contenders with any real confidence.

There are aspects of Williams fighting that did look good but you really could not bank on anything with him. Not at any real level. Williams was just a fair contender for a short time in the 1960s. Nothing to get excited about.

 

I can basically agree with this.

I would compare him to someone like Razor Ruddock in terms of style and quality - both big punchers (left-hookers), but somewhat one-paced/one-dimensional and limited in other areas.

His loss to Terrell provides a good study of his strengths and weaknesses - he very clearly rocked Terrell in three separate rounds, but in the rounds where he wasn't catching and rocking Terrell, he was clearly outboxed/outworked IMO.

 

Williams v Daniels was not a 50-50 fight. Daniels made a bright start but Williams dominated the later rounds and was a clear winner.

You're digging up Daniels' embarrassing stoppage loss to Mildenberger to suggest that any half decent contender should have been able to do the same thing, but it doesn't work like that. Daniels also went the distance with top contenders like Zora Folley and Doug Jones - splitting a pair of close decisions with Jones and losing to Folley by about the same margin as he did to Williams.

 

Billy the Barber Daniels was a good fighter. Always competative. Watch the fight.

http://m.youtube.com/index?desktop_uri=/&gl=GB#/watch?v=tI4AqJs5SCY

This really is Williams at his best. This was the period between losing to Liston that the big Cat actually began to chalk up wins over live opponents with winning records like Ernie Terrrel, Alonzo Johnson and drawing with Eddie Machen. It is before he lost to Terrell in the rematch and the gunshot wounding that halted his progress.

Against a live rated contender Billy Daniels (whom I was impressed with in his New York fight with a young Cassius Clay) Williams must be at his best.

Billy the Barber Daniells was coming off his two best wins against Mike DeJohn and Tony Alongi and later beat a still decent Doug Jones. He was no clown.

Of the filmed rounds I only gave Williams two of the first five rounds and round one was a 10-8 round for Daniels. That means if Daniels won only just one more round the worst he could lose by is just one point. It is no domination. A 50-50 fight. Watch it.

Going from film Daniels looks taller.

There certainly was no clue that Williams power and 21lb advantage would begin to tell in the second half from what there is of the first half is there? Perhaps it did, but at this point it is still a good competitive fight.

On another thread a poster who has the full film says the fight remained close until the end. The official scorring seems way off.

IMO, if Daniels wins just one more round from what we have it would make a very tight points decision from what there is to view. I think the first round is a solid 10-8 for Billy the Barber.

 

I've seen it, and it's actually just the first four rounds plus a fragment of the fifth. It's a little disingenuous to use it to criticise the decision in a fight where, as I've said, Daniels made a good start which he couldn't sustain.

The first round is the only one Daniels clearly won, and it's a hell of a stretch to give him 2 points for it. He did land some hurtful punches towards the end but never looked close to scoring a knockdown.

As for the second half, we can't see it, but the Miami News describes Daniels "clutching at Williams' waist in a frantic effort to keep his feet" in the sixth, and "in trouble throughout the last five rounds".

https://news.google.com/newspapers?...AAIBAJ&sjid=wOkFAAAAIBAJ&pg=738,3627133&hl=en

 

One of the most overrated Heavyweight contenders ever... at least on this forum.

He went 78-13-1 (58KOs) overall and was stopped 8 times. He went 0-1 in world title fights. 6'3" with an 80" reach and a solid 210-215 Lbs. at his best.

He had a lot of impressive wins vs. lower level fighters. He did not do as well vs. the better heavyweights he fought.

Notable fights-

Ernie Terrell KO7 and LSD10
Eddie Machen D10
Bob Satterfield LKOby3
Sonny Liston LKOby3 and LKOby2
Muhammad Ali LKOby3

His first 33 opponents (December of 1951 thru 1954) combined for 222 losses (at the time Williams fought them), 5 of his opponents were making their pro debut. He went 31-2 (27). He lost to Sylvester Jones L4 and was stopped by Bob Satterfield LKOby3 (who Williams outweighed by 25 Lbs.). He beat Jones in a rematch, KO7.

He beat somewhat notable trial horses like Omelio Agramonte W10, Bob Albright KO7, John Holman KO7, Frankie Daniels W10 x2, Dlck Richardson WDQ4, Ernie Cab KO3, Wayne Bethea W10, Alex Miteff KO5, Billy Daniels W10 x2, and Sonny Banks KO6 among others. These fighters combined for 111 losses (at the time Williams fought them).

I just don't understand the obsession with Cleveland Williams. He had the look, he was aggressive, somewhat quick, and had decent power... but it takes much more than that to actually be good.

 

I thought Daniels gave Cassius Clay a pretty decent fight too.

 

Just **** off. Seriously.

 

I don't know who wrote that but the film proves Daniels was ahead after 5 rounds. That's not just my interpretation it was also the comon view the last time this fight was discussed on a thread on this forum.


http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=542533


This is a very "pro Williams" report from the Miami news where Williams was based during some of his career. It says Daniels suffered with cuts over the last five rounds, that the judges made Williams a big winner and most telling of all that "except for the blood it could have been a close fight"

Now maybe Williams Did beat the pants off Daniels in the rounds we don't see. It could have happened. It still does not discount the rounds we do see.

There certainly is no clue judging by the first half of the fight that this was about to happen. neither is there evidence from the judges score that Daniels was awarded for his work in the first half of the fight that is clear and obvious from the film.

We also have testament from Klompton who has viewed the entire rounds that the fight remained close in both halfs. Perhaps the fight was close but this guy was carried away by the blood from Daniels cuts?

 

Well, the film doesn't actually prove anything about who was ahead after 5 rounds, because as I've said it only shows the first 4 rounds. Also, what you describe as the "common view" in that thread consists of two people (other than you) saying that they thought Daniels was slightly ahead after those early rounds.

I notice you've ignored Woller's statement that he's seen the whole fight and scored it 98-93 with Williams, as the ringside report says, dominating the second half. Klompton, while giving Daniels more credit for fighting to the end, agrees that the second half was better for Williams.

So to go back to the reason I posted in the first place, this was not a 50-50 fight. The referee, both judges, every press report that anyone's been able to find, and both posters who say they've seen the whole thing all agree on it.