Note from Mike Tyson on most powerful puncher of all time

You show class in being decent. Especially if it is because of conscience, not just wanting to maintain prestige here.
You are likely much younger than me. Understand that especially with the anonymity of the Internet & all men, a kind of toxic masculinity seeking status through dominance & derision is a disorder to avoid.
If you care to reveal if you have been here before I'll not shame you.

Anywho it should be fine to believe either ATG is better skilled-which is not always better overall, since largely innate traits like size speed chin may make up the difference..It is just that I believe the usual arguments-like described on this thread re: Liston as a top boxer-puncher.

Ironically they both suffer from resume skepticism-but that is very common.
How well Liston would do against skilled giants is unknown.
Although with his size, power, wingspan & jab I think very well-if real movers, maybe less so.

 

I didn't know that the article about Marshall was debunked.

You could have simply answered my question about how your rate his foot and hand speed since that was in fact my original point of discussion. I am well aware of the fact that timing, body shots, etc are important.

I never said the rematches with Marshall don't count so that's a strawman. The rematches don't erase the previous loss and do not change what I said.

When did I say Machen was an elite technician/mover?

You're right, Spinks might be the only elite mover Holmes faced and that fight cannot simply be ignored because Holmes was old. Did you think I would say it doesn't count or something? Throughout this forum I have been consistent on that. Obviously you take it with a grain of salt since he was old, but we can't ignore it.

In regards to the last point about Liston vs movers and that he might struggle with them more than conventional boxers...that's literally what I said almost word for word. Not sure what the issue is outside of your disputing the significance of the Marshall loss and the article.

 

We can argue all day about these matches but the original question remains: did he have trouble with boxers with good hand speed and foot speed? Yes or no? To me the answer is yes. I am in no way shape or form saying anyone whose fast beats Liston, just that based on the results and context of those fights, Liston would sometimes have trouble with speed. That's it. And he himself stated he didn't like having to chase after guys and could get frustrated with a significant speed gap.

I honestly forgot it got debunked. I could have swore more than one source stated Marshal troubled Liston with jittery movement and speed. I clicked on one of the first results on Google.

Is there no valid documentation about that fight? I find it strange that the exact details aren't known when it's such a hotly discussed bout on forums when Liston is brought up.

I understand that, and I can allow some wiggle room if a boxer is past his prime. But if there's little data on them facing a certain style, we have to take what we can get to draw conclusions if we're going to put Liston against Holmes or Tyrell Biggs for instance.

I didn't say him laughing translated to him being troubled by movers and technicians. I said him losing to a mover (although it was admittedly close) could mean he had trouble with movers especially because it happened again in 3 other fights against Ali and Martin.

Those are the only fights he has against movers, other than Machen. Would you rather I chose sparring matches, the amateurs, or video game footage?

Well Liston's team didn't do their research on Ali and took him lightly despite the fact he was highly ranked, a hold medalist, and had plenty of very clear footage with his obvious talent and skill on display. There's even a quote of Liston saying in between rounds "nobody told me this kid was so fast...!". He predicted a 2nd round knockout and had a very dismissive attitude when interviewed in training camp.

Injured shoulder or not, that's partly his fault for underestimating Ali.

In regards to Machen, my only point in bringing up Ingo is that Liston might have trouble cutting off the ring against other movers in a h2h fantasy fight. That's it. He had no injuries or problems in that match and he won convincingly but he couldn't quite make it the rough fight he wanted it to be or knock him out.

Just like Liston, I look at all of Lyle's showing against movers and technicians. I'm aware Ellis was past it.

Not sure why you're asking pointless questions about his fights with Young. We were comparing how Liston did against movers and technicians compared to fellow sluggers Lyle and Foreman and you claimed he did way better than them which is very hyperbolic.

Norton tried to use lateral movement against Foreman but still got steam rolled.

Oh ok I didn't see the 77 before that makes sense.

I also make it a point to separate a boxer into various versions just like basketball players. You have Afro Kobe, 24 Kobe, and Old Kobe. You have contender Liston (arguably the best version before he even won the belt), champion Liston, and apathetic drunk veteran Liston.

I think we should have started the conversation off there because we're actually on the same page for many things. I do not think the Liston who was tearing through the rankings knocking guys out silly waiting for his title shot would "always" struggle with movers. I still think he may struggle with very fast guys, but it depends on the style and matchup.

 

You simply could have refuted my point of discussion instead of going off on a tangent about foot and hand speed ratings. My point of discussion pulled from your post was about Marshall and Machen being used so prominently against Liston per having trouble with movers. I explained at length why it was being vastly overblown and in fact the subsequent victories over Marshall completely shoot down your efforts to fixate on the first fight. Liston's hand and foot speed is irrelevant to what i put forward.

Fixating on the first fight as proof Liston struggles with movers absolutely is affected by Liston's performance in rematches. You are categorically putting Marshall in the movers bracket.

You even quoted the hit article talking about how much trouble Liston had with his movement etc. This was Liston's 8th fight. so he comes back 2 fights later and is wholly unaffected by Marshall's tricks, speed and movement and makes an absolute mess of him. Five fights later he is treating Marshall with disdain. These two results show that Liston well and truly overcome any perceived struggle and drama against Marshall and his style. This is actually a plus for Liston as i really don't think anyone is matching the 7 fight version of him against anyone in dream fights. It's bizarre that you don't seem to grasp this regarding Marshall. How far does one want to take it? Larry Holmes was beaten by Nick Wells twice in the ams. Larry sure wasn't going to struggle with him a few years later.

Weaver was getting beaten by Larry Frazier and Rodney Bobick at a similar stage to where Liston was at. They sure weren't beating him later.

You said it literally two days ago in this very thread.

"Machen is the only elite mover/technician Liston beat."

I'm pretty sure there's no way out of that one.

I'd certainly take it with a grain of salt just like i would the crazy notion Liston struggled with movers partly based on Marshall beating him in his 8th fight. The developmental stage he was at and next two battles just destroy it.

Don't forget Eddie Machen, beaten comprehensively by Liston who barely lost a round.

It's utterly bizarre, Swag quoted you multiple times using the same arguments and more that he has put forth to you in this thread and you had been accusing him of throwing excuses forward. Like what the heck?

 

It wasn't a tangent. That was the original discussion I was having with Swag. So don't flip it around like I'm changing the subject because I'm not. We were discussing his hand and foot speed as well as how he didn't against movers. There's a reason I asked and it is directly tied to the discussion. So I would appreciate if you just answered questions next time or say you'd rather not have the conversation instead of getting on your high horse.

I used Marshall and Machen as examples because other than Ali and Martin they are the only movers he fought. The fact Liston won subsequent rematches doesn't just get rid of the elephant in the room because he continued to have trouble with movers. You didn't shoot down anything.

What Larry Holmes, or any fighter did in the ams is irrelevant to a discussion of pros.

Read above regarding marshall. If there is any truth to the notion that he can be categorized as a slippery mover then beating him in a rematch doesn't dispel the move Liston could struggle with movers if he continued having trouble with other movers. It's a non-sequitur.

I did not know the article was debunked.

I misread your post I thought you said Marshall was an elite mover.

It doesn't destroy anything other than that he no longer had trouble with the boxer named Marshall. It doesn't in any way destroy the notion he had trouble with movers when he went 1-3 against movers not named Marshall.

You were saying something about how "there's no way out of that one"?

Nothing is bizarre about it. I suppose it can be if you lack critical thinking and objectivity.

In every instance I brought up of Liston facing off against a mover, the discussion became "he was a novice" (against Marshall) or "he had a pre existing injury and was past his best" (against Ali) or "he was completely washed up and was beating Martin before he got caught with a nasty shot after being gassed" (against Martin).

Those are excuses whether they actually happened or not. An excuse is an "explanation" for why a fighter lost. But I do understand if a fighter is in fact past his best, to which I would agree to an extent.

The issue is that aside from Machen, those are the only movers he faced. We can only judge Liston's ability to deal with movers by looking at footage of him fighting movers.

So I'll ask the same question I asked Swag: Should I look at sparring videos, amateur matches, or video game footage instead?

 

Well the thread is actually about Tyson's hardest puncher so everyone is well away from that. The discussion you and i are having is about your claims that Liston struggled "3x" against movers, obviously Marshall, Machen and Ali. I'm debating the legitimacy of the weight you place on your claims and certainly the extent of Listons "struggles". That's where our discussion is at. You've got it back on track below by the looks, good. The topic is below

Well i haven't seen every one of his fights but there'd be a fair chance there are other "movers" in there. Lets focus on the higher quality guys as we are tho for obvious reasons.

The fact that Liston won subsequent matches not once but twice most certainly shoots down all the relevancy you place on Marshall himself especially given Liston was in his 8th pro fight and utterly green. The fact that he had no problems whupping Marshall a short time down the track shows he adapted and improved. Given you call Marshall a mover this is actually a plus for Liston against movers. How it can be seen any other way is indefensible. It's just plain common sense.

You say he continued to have trouble against movers post Marshall. You are talking Machen and Ali. Given you've said yourself Liston beat Machen convincingly i'm not quite sure why he's being given such importance. Liston certainly didn't have "struggles" against Machen when you yourself has said it was a convincing win. Color me confused.

Ali is Ali, everyone is having trouble with a young Ali's movement. He's something else.

Well you are placing a big importance on Marshall beating Liston in just Liston's 8th pro fight. So let me know, how low do you want to go? Is the 8th fight the cut of for credibility? Do we go as low as their 5th fights? Someone's debut? Some guys like Roy Jones and SRL are probably more advanced in their debut than Liston was in his 8th fight so that context further murkies the water.

Summing up what Liston did in his 8th pro fight has next to zero relevance of the fighter he became 4-5 years later. It's a nice snapshot of how fast he was able to overcome a guy like Marshall's style tho and just how fast he was improving.

Marshall is irrelevant as Liston improved fast and belted him thereafter, and not long thereafter. His continued trouble has already been addressed - you believe he beat Machen convincingly which doesn't sound like "trouble" to me via your own words. So we are, again, left with Ali.

Sure.

Already addressed at length. Trying to hold onto Marshall 1 in Liston's 8th pro fight as proof he would struggle with movers at his peak is clutching at straws.

It's even more bizarre because you attempted to excuse it/fob it off on the grounds you were comparing Liston to a 137yo Marciano. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny whatsoever. It's just arguing for the sake of arguing and not being able to concede given you yourself have previously strenuously supported the exact arguments you were fobbing off from Swag.

No amount of critical thinking leads to anything else. You've been called on it before.

Martin is irrelevant.

Yes the discussion with Swag became that, ironically and tellingly the exact same excuses you have put forth and supported in previous debates. Simply be consistent.

Even if Ali beat peak Liston with no "excuses" it's not such an immense thing anyway. Not much shame losing to The Goat. No-one's calling Liston the GOAT.

You haven't seen footage of Liston - Marshall despite the importance you've placed on it. So again we have Machen who you said he beat convincingly and we are left with Ali.

But boxers are tough to beat and make people look awkward. That's what they do. Even a brilliant technician like Toney can be totally embarrassed by a pinnacle level speedster like Jones.

Well you've already brought up his sparring with Bugner earlier in the thread as an indication he struggles with movers (he was cursing like a sailor) so there's that.

You've also mentioned his first match with Marshall multiple times as proof of his struggles with movers and you absolutely haven't seen any of that fight so there's that as well.

The question becomes more one for you. At what stage of infancy is it fair game to pluck a performance and place such value on it as you have Liston - Marshall 1?

Sanchez lost his 19th pro fight so should we be trying to find out more about the type of opponent Becerra was in order to formulate an opinion on what sort of fighter might trouble Sanchez? Or should we look at his prime years, fights against the likes of Patrick Ford? Pedroza lost his 10th pro fight, Hopkins his first etc.

I'm going to place very little weight on results when a guy is well and truly pre or post prime and the further removed the less weight.

I was watching Liston - Machen last night. Liston kept plenty of pressure on Machen and kept up a nice workrate throughout. He also invested in the body early and his stamina was quite surprising given his output. A very nice win over a guy moving and spoiling.

 

I guess it bears repeating that Liston continued to have problems with movers? Winning the rematches with Marshall is great, but they don't erase the prior loss. It's no different from Ali having trouble with left hooks at multiple points in his career. It doesn't matter that he defeated Frazier in subsequent rematches, he had trouble with left hooks all the time.

He couldn't stop Machen from just running away. Some sluggers can. I wasn't saying that it was a close match.

Frazier and Norton didn't have as much trouble with Ali's movement so that's a cop out excuse. I'm aware Liston had to face a pre exile Ali, but even some die hard Ali fans admit it's possible he struggles with those opponents.

I look at all examples of a boxer dealing with x type of style and see if they manage to adapt and improve. If the discussion is strictly on prime years then of course I'm not going to look at the Marshall or fights where he's ancient.

But he needed another attempt at Marshall which indicates he obviously doesn't have an easy time with that style. Not sure why you think rematches just erase stylistic problems.

Well, no, I'm not just talking about Marshall so I'm not clutching at straws. He struggled with Ali too.

The only reason I brought up fights of Liston's when he was younger and older was because we were discussing how he fared against a certain type of boxers: guys with quick feet, technicians, etc. I'm not "arguing just for the sake of arguing". You and Swag are of the opinion those fights are irrelevant because Liston was green against 1 guy and won the rematches, Ali was extremely hard to beat, and Martin was when he was past his prime. So yes, it has everything to do with a lack of objectivity if you're going to ignore any instances of him having trouble with those kind of boxers.

That is completely different from Choklab comparing an ancient Louis to a prime Liston. Totally different conversation. In this discussion I was making an observation that Liston would sometimes struggle with movers and technicians and I was willing to have a conversation on how valid that is based on the footage we have of him against those kind of fighters. But we can't even get past square 1 because you insist those fights don't count. So if you're just going to dig your heels in an erase the only relevant fights, then the discussion can't go anywhere.

I didn't say Liston didn't have any excuses.

We can use the Ali fight as a blueprint to speculate how he'd do against someone like Holmes or Biggs, or am I being too unreasonable???

Duh, which is why I tried to find articles discussing the fight.

No, not everyone has trouble with that style. Pressure fighters who can cut off the ring give them nightmares.

Well that makes far more sense than erasing fights that actually happened or looking at the amateurs.

Anytime that boxer, as a professional, struggles heavily with a certain kind of style, the fight should be analyzed when discussing how they would do h2h against that style. It gives us a better understanding of their overall growth as a boxer and helps us determine if they could adapt or not.

If we're strictly talking about prime vs prime, then the Marshall fight is irrelevant. I said that already with Swag.

Yes, it's a great win. Never said he looked bad in it.

 

You know what, I’ll take the word of Emanuel Steward and Freddie Roach on the most powerful puncher that they both held the mitts for. And that’s Wladimir Klitschko. Also a couple of guys who sparred both him and Lennox said Wlad had more pop.

 

LeRoy Caldwell was knocked out by both Foreman and Shavers, said Shavers hit much harder.

Are there comments by Ken Norton on this?

 

Dustin Nichols, he was able to drop Deontay Wilder with a single check jab.

 

He was amazing, he lost his prime at 23 years of age. At age 23 I was young, strong, and healthy, amazing.

 

What is a ch

What is a " check" jab? Is it like a "check" hook ?

 

It’s more like a checkbook.