Sonny Liston vs. Vitali Klitschko

Reading comprehension is obviously not your strongest point.

The claim by the Kleechko fan was Vits KO percentage " proved " he was the best Heavy ever.

This stupid claim was countered by someone pointing that Clark has a higher KO percentage than Vits at Heavyweight, but no one in their right mind would consider him as anything special.

Nothing more, nothing less.

As for your cobblers about greed being more important than bigotry in institutionally racist 50's Murica, it is just that, cobblers.

Liston was considered a surly " uppity " black guy with no respect for law and order, or anything else, who was proud of that opinion of him.

At that time the Heavyweight champion of the world was still something of a " role model " for Muricans, and Liston was the last guy they would have wanted to fill that position.

Again, I don't care what Vits achieved in his career. I am saying his opponents up to and including Hide don't hold a candle to the guys Liston fought on his way to the World Title. More reading comprehension problems from you there.

If you disagree, whoopee doo. I couldn't give a toss.

 

Liston wasn't the number one contender, though, until the late summer of 1960.

If Johansson hadn't defended against Patterson because of the return bout clause and had defended against his number one contender, he would have defended against Folley.

It is conceivable Liston could have gotten his shot in 1961, but he really didn't wait all that long after becoming the #1 contender.

At what point Liston was good enough to win the title would be another question.

 

I am not claiming Listons resume was full of ATG's or was " better " than Vits overall career.

My point is Liston's resume up until Patterson is in my opinion as good if not better than anyone amongst

Hide
Youla
Spinelli
Schiesser
Kennedy
Ribalta
Ryan
Francis
Billups
Monaco
Beinski
Rhode
Willis
Delgado
Williamson
Hinton
Haynes
Woods
Roddy
Jones
Roberts
Aklie
Sargent
Sumina
and
Bradham.

I believe that is merely a lot of fights against a lot of dross.

If the best of that lot is,

Jose Ribalta 38 14 1

or

Levi Billups 21 16 1

then surely Listons opponents must stack up well against them.

 

Then I would agree with your first point.

1 ) Vitali's resume was a bit better overall

2 ) Liston's 33rd fight was Patterson's. Vitali's 33 fight was Lennox Lewis

 

I think that stopping a fighter of proven durability, is a much more reliable diagnostic of punching prowess than having a high KO%.

To that extent you have a point.

My cautionary note would be that not all great finishers are also heavy punchers.

 

Liston could argue that he at least won.

 

why is it not suprising? clark never fought liston.

 

Size isn't everything.. But this is one match where I DO believe it would make all the difference in the world.. And before anyone mentions his name, Vitali kiltschko wasn't Gerard Zech. Liston was a fighter who relied on being the bigger stronger and more imposing man in most of his fights. And this is one instance where he'd face someone who had a significant advantage in most of those categories to go along with a solid chin, plenty of power and a pretty good outside fighting game.. I can understand the criticisms and comparisons of their competition but honestly, does it really matter that Floyd Patterson rates higher than corrie sanders on an all time list? Such comparisons do nothing to address the chemistry here or the obvious physical issue that would arise.

 

"Vitali's resume was a bit better overall.

Yes. Any attempt to split the two fighters' resumes in half is a de facto admission of that.

 

Why exactly?

 

Because if the resume in total favors your guy,

why split it?

It is a much stronger argument that the entire resume favors your fighter.