Are Liston's 2 first round kayos of Patterson underrated?

Liston came at Patterson with a sheer belief in himself both times. They were his easiest two fights and yet Patterson was the greatest fighter he beat.

So why was this? Why did Sonny have an easier time against Floyd than say Bert Whitehurst or Eddie Machen?

Was it so simple as it being a bad style match up? It could be, but Floyd coped better against other big guys with a big punch. Against Liston there was nothing he could do.

I've heard Patterson troubled himself with responsibility, he felt an incredible duty and pressure to do the right thing. Too many thoughts. Too many troubles. Focus on the wrong thing. Maybe he just could not get his mind right both times? What ever it was don't blame Sonny for honing in on it. He did a number on Floyd both times.

Tyson and Liston really had an instinct for the right moment. Knowing when they had a guy's number. and this instinct could elevate them to a frightening level, but they both needed to see that weakness to unleash it.

I don't think anybody could deal with a Tyson or a Liston on the rampage once they felt they had that green light.

For whatever reason Floyd was Listons green light. He just brought the best out of Sonny and there seemed to be nothing Floyd could do about it. And Floyd is a great fighter.

I have considered a lot if things why this could be and none if them are Sonnys fault. He showed up for both fights and took care of business.

 

I'd say it's pretty comparable to what Foreman did to Frazier.

Just a poor stylistical mesh for Floyd.

 

These are phenomenal wins for Liston and Foreman but I think the "styles card" gets played far, far too much.

Liston and Foreman were greater fighters than the other guys both Floyd and Frazier beat. It's not like they lost to all guys of one type of style. Greatness and career timing factors into it a lot more.

 

I disagree.

There is no way that the Foreman-Frazier fight is truly representative of the level both men were at. I'd say the same, but to a smaller extent about Liston-Patterson.

 

The first one yes, the second one no!

Patterson entered the ring like a fluffy white kitten that been thrown over the fence to the junk yard dog.

Style wise, and confidence-wise, this was the very definition of a mismatch.

 

I don't think it is truly or entirely representative of a style advantage either. Maybe partly but not entirely.

If it were entirely representative of a style advantage Patterson and Frazier would have lost to every taller powerhouse they ever fought and this is simply not the case.

Liston and Foreman were however better than the other versions of powerhouse, bombers or any other characterization of the style you could label them and that's how they did better given the career timing of their meeting Patterson and Frazier.

I understand the necessity of characterizing styles but there are grey areas and each case is unique with individuals doing things slightly different from each other using different strategy, punching range, combinations, work rate, fight rhythms and punching power.

This end all argument "style advantage" rule has,become an overused, over simplistic tactic for far too long.

 

He beat him down pretty bad.

 

The only other occasion when a reigning lineal heavyweight champion was taken out in the first round, was the Tyson Spinks fight.

I don't think you can dismiss them based on either the size of Patterson, or the stylistic advantage of Liston.

 

I sometimes wonder what would have happened had they met for a third time in the autumn of 1968 or in 1969. I don't think we'd be seeing a third one round blowout. I wonder if Floyd would've been able to pull off a Leotis Martin type late KO over a depleted Liston.

 

I think that Floyd would have survived the 1st round, but whether he would have won or not, I don't know. I do believe that surviving the 1st round would have been a moral victory for Floyd, and I think he even said that it would.

 

A thoroughly objective post, but a little too cerebral for me.