Cleveland Williams is nowhere near even Ingemar Johansson in any OBJECTIVE metric.

Remember when we present a mythical matchup were usually taking each fighter from their peak years, unless otherwise stated.
Ingamar can have the better credentials and the better resume. When they are face to face in ringcenter getting the referees final instructions trust and believe they will not be comparing resumes but skills, talent, etc.

 

That's why I picked Ingo

 

ETM you are correct, it's not like the old commercial, my dog is bigger than your dog moment. It is only about the two people in the square ring and their skills.

 

I think that all of us respect Liston as a fighter. He was a level above just about everyone. Sonny had all the tools, power, he was at this peak. I dont recall Liston being an asskisser or buttering up his opponents after he beat them.
So when Liston comeback after winning a short explosive fight says " that man is bad! Sonny got rocked and had to dig a bit deeper than he normally did. Any fan that knows his A$$ from his elbow has to concede that carries some weight.
I'm not necessarily picking Big Cat to win but if he can hurt Liston he can hurt the Swede, all the (Ingamar slobber)..aside. Let's keep these posts at least somewhat realistic.

 

That's the way to dig deep. Dont give up

 

If he loses to Terrell, nothing changes. If he wins, he's the guy who briefly held the WBA title in the 60s before losing it to Ali, assuming he successfully defends it against Chuvalo, Jones and Machen (not a given). Terrell did that and he's not that highly regarded these days.

 

Ernie Terrell is ridiculed because of his one side defeat by a prime Muhammad Ali on Feb 6 1967, and his embarrassing defeat to Thad Spencer in the WBA Tournament also in 1967. Ernie was tall and lean, he had a good left jab, and wore out his opponents with his clinching, grabbing type style. He did have good wins against Machen,Chuvalo, and Doug Jones.

 

Williams was a decent contender. Never an outstanding one. Certainly never a threat to a title. But he was a feared puncher. A big live guy. Certainly one to give the best guys a run for their money. Who always gave his best. A live opponent.

Ingemar Johansson was more than a notch higher than this. A real world champion who in back to back fights flattened a prime undisputed champion and an unbeaten #1 contender. When you knockout the two best heavyweights in the world, both never having never been knocked out before, then there isn’t ever anymore to do to prove superiority over the division. When at his best.

The introduction of the Brian London bout in the final fight of Ingos career is not really relevant in a discussion about prime vs prime between Williams and Ingo.

However, London is an interesting fighter in comparison to Williams. Against common opponents Brian London is quite comparable to Williams. London did better against Rischer than Williams did. Williams did better against young Jack Johnson than London did. Neither of them beat Machen. They both suffered a similar fate against Muhammad Ali.

Actually Brian knocked out Pete Radmacher And Zora Folley. You could say these are better wins than Williams ever had. London also beat Willie Pastrano when Willie was rated among the Worlds best heavyweights at that time.

it’s pretty much what Satterfeild did with Cleveland Williams isn’t it? I mean, Satterfeild lost to middleweights, he was never really a heavyweight even though he could beat them.

I have seen this fight. Or what there is to see of that fight. To win in a one sided manner a fighter presumably wins more than 6 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. With only the first five rounds available its confusing anyone could score seven rounds toWilliams?

we certainly saw what happened when Williams fought the best fighters. He drew or he lost by split decision or he was knocked down multiple times on the way to kayo defeats.

Under a linear ranking system Williams barely ever made the top 20.

I accept by the 1960s (after losing twice to Liston) Williams did deservedly make the boxing magazine ratings of the day..but with the evidence now of who beat who it is easier to trace the legitimacy of earlier ranking systems.

Williams was a good live win for better fighters. He just falls short of being everything he is made out to be because there is a lack of important wins.

Nothing wrong with that. It is just how it is.

 

There's no reasoning with someone who thinks a draw and a one-sided 5-round beating are basically the same thing.

 

Choklab, with all due respect, it was not I who brought up London. He was named in the OP as one of Ingo's greatest wins and I sought to illustrate one of his 'greatest' wins due to the unevenness of the original post. It was clearly scraping up everyone who Ingo beat, whilst omitting a number of William's best wins. Now, although you are the foremost Cleveland Williams-hater on this board, I still enjoy your posts. But even you have to admit, the original post was not even-handed.

 

The OP was so obviously correct in its general point.

Johansson > Williams

and it's not even close.

 

I think anyone with an ounce of objectivity sees this. Even if they think Williams is generally overrated.

 

And you think the OP was being even-handed?

 

Machen scored a definitive win over Brian London. But Williams never beat Machen did he?

I said Williams was at one time a decent contender but never an outstanding one. A feared puncher, always gave his best and A live opponent. How can you disagree with that?

 

I don't know.
OP mentions crappy fighters who Ingo beat, perhaps trying to make them seem better than they were.
But generally the OP's correct anyway.

Best wins, achievements, results v. mutual opponents .... Johansson ranks higher.