Sonny Liston vs. Vitali Klitschko

Yes, but the whole thing is sort of like watching a man drive a golf ball and trying to judge how far he can drive it just on the way he swings.

Sort of just guess work.

How can one tell how far a guy can drive a golf ball? By noting how far the ball actually goes.

I think it is the same with punching power in boxing. One can't tell by looking at a guy or by his build or strength. The muscular Jake LaMotta and Gene Fullmer could dominate the tall and thin Sugar Ray Robinson inside and in the clinches, but they were not anything like the puncher he was. Kid Gavilan was built like Sugar Ray but he wasn't a great puncher either.

Basically you are making a judgment about something we don't know and can't know except by studying the record of what they did in the ring.

I think it a nonsense argument to maintain that this or that guy can punch as hard as anyone but it never showed in the ring.

 

Well that's the thing, Vitali uses his size in the best possible way. He maximizes the advantages of his size by fighting relatively cautiously, keeps his balance and rarely throws wild punches costing energy and leaving him open to counters. Smaller guys have to work hard for the openings, and as they come in he pots them with solid, if not devastating shots. He's like a meat grinder, and by the end of the fight his systematic approach has usually tenderized the opposition while taking minimal risks.

I'm a big Sanders fan, and even though Sanders may still have had the handspeed and power to pop Vitali, it was clear that his footspeed was no longer up to the challenge. Never have I seen Corrie miss with so many shots and take so many in return. And it's been the same story with most of Vits' other opponents. He's a nasty prospect H2H.

 

That's also true. If you look at Pipino Cuevas, he looked like a stringbean who couldn't punch worth a damn ... until he let fly with his missiles. Technique > build.

 

"he didn't fight many ranked fighters" "the weakness of Vitally's opposition" "fighting guys in the top ten, which Vitally rarely did"

"You have to put size on a pretty high pedestal as a variable, to rate them over any all-time greats opposition" (from your post 267)

All this raises the issue of how strong was Liston's opposition. You seem to consider it way up there like we are comparing what Vitali did to what Louis or Ali did.

I looked at The Ring Magazine's yearly rankings for both Liston's and Vitali's careers.

Liston defeated six men who were ever rated champion or a top five contender in these ratings (covering 1957 to 1970)

Cleveland Williams, Nino Valdes, Roy Harris, Zora Folley, Eddie Machen, and Floyd Patterson. He fought all of them between 1958 and 1963.

He lost to two others, Muhammad Ali and Leotis Martin (Martin made #4 in 1969 mainly by KO'ing Liston)

He did not fight these men who were ranked in the top five between 1957 and 1970--Willie Pastrano, Pat McMurtry, Ingemar Johansson, Henry Cooper, Alejandro Lavorante, Bob Cleroux, Doug Jones, Ernie Terrell, George Chuvalo, Karl Mildenberger (through 1965)

Thad Spencer, Joe Frazier, Jimmy Ellis, Manuel Ramos, Jerry Quarry, Oscar Bonavena, Mac Foster (from 1966 to 1970)

What is clear is that Liston in fact did not defeat most of the top men.

His defenders point out that at his best he could have beaten many of these men. Okay. But Vitali's defenders can make the same argument and with the same justification.

Only three men--Folley, Machen, and Patterson--were in the top five when Liston beat them. Only Patterson was a champion.

What about Vitali?

He also is pretty weak on this basis, but no more so than Liston.

Here is the men who were in the top five at one time or another whom Vitali defeated-

Shannon Briggs, Kirk Johnson, Corrie Sanders, Samuel Peter, Thomasz Adamek

plus Orlin Norris and Juan Carlos Gomez at cruiser.

He lost to Chris Byrd and Lennox Lewis.

At least three--Sanders, Peter, and Adamek, were in the top five when he fought them.

Weak as Vitali's opposition is, he actually defeated more top five men than Liston did, and fought more, just not in such a concentrated time.

What about cruisers. Well, as Patterson, Machen, and Harris were never anything but cruisers, unlike the cruisers Vitali defeated, I can't see any point about putting Vitali's victims down for their "smallness" at all.

As for weak era talk, how strong is an era which has Roy Harris and Pat McMurtry among the top five contenders? Could either manage a winning record against Vitali's career opposition? I don't think so.

My bottom line is that you certainly have a point about Vitali not fighting many of the best out there. But the same point is equally valid concerning Liston which you totally ignore.

Just curiously, which heavyweights that Vitali did not fight (Wlad aside) do you favor over him?

 

Ed makes a valid point,

If you're going to pick a head to head winner based exclusively on wins over "ranked men", then you have to accept the fact that Liston's resume is very thin in that department, particularly when looking at the top 3 or top 5 variety of contenders. Vitali Klitscko's win list over such opponents is equally thin.. About the only thing that separates their credentials is Liston's win over a prime ATG in Patterson. But I don't see how such a dissimilar opponent in virtually every way could possibly be used to bolster an argument for Liston beating Klitschko. We're comparing a man with one of the shakiest chins in division history to a man with one of the sturdiest.. We're talking major differences in styles and most obviously a whole world difference in size. I acknowledge that size isn't everything. We've seen plenty of cases of smaller men overcoming larger ones and in some cases much larger ( Dempsey over willard, Louis over Carnera, etc, etc.. ) But these are the exception, not the norm. There is an obvious reason why we don't see men who range from 5'10" to 6'1" and weigh 180-210 knocking around the giants of recent times, and no I don't believe its because there was something in the water back in the 50's and 60's that made these smaller men immortal.

 

"Vitali's opponents are virtually weak in everything except size"

Power punching? Strength in the clinches?

My own take is that Vitali should be a huge favorite over any opponent Liston fought except Ali, and a prohibitive favorite over any opponent Liston actually defeated.

"talking about his brother"

Interesting comparing these two. Wlad has defeated far more top-ranked opposition, but there is one big caveat

I looked up common opponents--

Chris Byrd, Ross Purrity, Corrie Sanders, Samuel Peter

(I didn't find any others but if there are some, it can't matter much as both brothers would have defeated them)

Vitali defeated three of these men. His one loss was by retirement against Byrd in a fight in which he was ahead (I had it close, but the actual ringside judges didn't)

Wlad defeated two of these men, and lost to two, and had a lot more trouble with Peter than Vitali did.

Common opponents favors Vitali, and rather strongly,

despite his not fighting nearly as many top men.

 

I was around when Patterson was active, and remember how he was judged by many of the boxing writers in his own day,

and I think he is a very weak ATG if one rates him up that high,

and at about 190 lb. not likely to do much in the modern heavyweight world.

 

Its certainly difficult to envision him accomplishing much unless one has quite the vivid imagination.

 

We have one for certain, since September 2010.

 

Good balanced post.

 

Interesting how of Liston's 54 pro fights, 28 of them were against men who weighed less than 200 lbs including two who beat him.

 

There is also testimony from common opponents.

I am usually pretty dismissive if a fighter says A hit me harder than B, but when multiple fighters say the same thing, I start to take notice.

 

Interestingly Vitally Klitschko and his best opponents don’t have an outstanding record against smaller heavyweights.

Vitally Klitschko himself lost to Chris Byrd, who was able to make the light heavyweight limit years later.

Sam Peter arguably should have lost a decision to James Toney, who was a former middleweight.

Thomas Adamek was himself a former light heavyweight, who lost to Chad Dawson.

Why is it a stretch to say that somebody like Eddie Machen could beat these guys head to head?

 

I didn't realise he fought that many above 200! He's just gone up a place on my list.