Is Sonny Liston A Top Ten HW ATG?

Yeah, his legend is greater than his achievements. He was certainly a great fighter but there are quite a few ahead of him.

Top 10 all time? On the fringes for mine...somewhere between 9-12.

 

That he's up there with the best Louis beat, absolutely. And possible even better, yes. I think his record probably is better than anyone conquered by Louis.

Now tell me why this isn't so? Who among the guys Louis beat had a better record?

 

Oh, c'mon now.

Muhammad Ali was an 8-1 underdog in February 1964 for a reason. (Ali was even the underdog in the rematch, if I'm not mistaken.)

Clay had just turned 22 (as he famously said). He'd just come off two very tough fights in which he nearly lost both (against Henry Cooper and Doug Jones - neither of whom were world beaters). He'd only been a pro for three years and three months.

And Muhammad Ali sure as hell wasn't in his prime.

Ali on the way up had almost as hard of a time as Ali did on the way down in the late 70s.

Ali on the way up was floored twice in 19 fights. Ali on the way up had already won a controversial decision where the announcement was booed.

And Sonny Liston had just tore through the whole division and beaten the heavyweight champion in one round twice.

Sonny Liston was supposed to win that fight.

There was a reason it was the biggest upset in heavyweight history to that point. Clay was given no more of a chance to win than Jim Braddock was against Baer.

Sonny Liston was supposed win.

It's just more of the nonsense that goes with Liston.

Everyone in boxing history would NOT have lost to the just-turned-22 Cassius Clay. Clay wasn't in his prime until YEARS later after he beat Liston twice.

Liston arguably did worse against Ali in their rematch than EVERYONE Ali fought in Muhammad Ali's entire career.

Go ahead and try to name someone who did worse against Ali than Sonny Liston did in their rematch?

Sonny Liston did worse than any boxer you ever saw fight Muhammad Ali.

Ali didn't stop people in one round. How did Liston lose in ONE? Cleveland Williams did better against Ali than Liston did in his rematch with Ali?

Liston QUITTING TWICE against an underdog everyone (EVERY ONE) expected him to beat is one reason why he doesn't rate in the top 10 for me.

Clay wanted to quit and didn't. Liston wanted to quit AND DID.

If Liston "sucked that hard" against Ali "before Ali reached his prime" how bad would Liston have done after Ali actually entered his prime?

 

He didn’t look that great in the first Liston fight. Not until Liston was ready to quit.

 

Floyd Patterson wasn't even the toughest heavyweight Jerry Quarry beat, let alone Joe Louis.

This thread is ridiculous.

 

To clarify, yes or no - not being sarcastic, at the time Liston beat Patterson you consider him better than anyone Louis beat?

 

As usual you write a huge wall of text that ignores the obvious. I write a lot, but there's an actual point I'm making connecting various dots and I do it without ignoring common sense.

-Nobody said Ali wasn't the underdog against Liston. Has nothing to do with the fact he was in his prime and a dangerous h2h HW.

-Ali coming off 2 tough fights is irrelevant. Is a boxer only in their prime if they came off easy wins? Is that your criteria? Unless a boxer is easily winning and dominating he can't be in his prime?

-Ali was 22 years old and a pro for 3 years? So what? Tyson had only been a pro 2 years and 20 years old when he was knocking out contenders and winning belts. Was Tyson not in his prime because he was young and hadn't been a pro very long? Another dumb argument if we're being brutally honest.

-Ali had just as hard of a time on the way up in the 60's as he did on the way down in the 70's? This is by far the dumbest argument you've ever made on the site. Ali was undefeated in the 60's and had basically cleared out the division. He took 3 losses in the 70's. Ali only had one close decision in the 60's against Jones, Ali had 5 in the 70's: Norton, Frazier, Shavers--not to mention the Young fight that some people thought was a robbery. How the hell did was Ali having just as difficult of a time in the 60's as he did in the 70's...?

-Ali was floored twice in the 60's and twice in the 70's so that doesn't help your argument at all.

-Ali was given no chance to beat Liston? He was the underdog? What's your point? Foreman was the underdog against Frazier when he obliterated him, would you say Foreman wasn't in his prime? Douglas had even WORSE odds and written off worse than Ali vs Liston. Was Douglas in his prime when he beat Tyson? Yes or no?

-Nobody said Liston wasn't supposed to win, he should have. But having to defend his belt against a prime Ali while being inactive for years and only getting 3 round of activity certainly didn't help his chances of winning. That was the original discussion in case you forgot before going on a huge tangent.

-I never said Liston was better 7 years before he fought Ali. You are attacking a straw man.

-I absolutely stand by what I said. Nobody is beating that version of Ali with 3 years of inactivity outside of 3 rounds of action. Name the fighters you think would keep their titles against THAT version of Ali with only 3 rounds of action in 3 years.

-When do YOU think Ali was in his prime?


Do not skip the bolded or I will not reply.

 

Serious question: Are you a psychopath? Why do you have such a hard time answering simple direct questions without deflecting?

This was my question:

"Other than the Williams fight (a completely washed up guy who didn't offer much resistance), in which fights in the 60's did Ali look BETTER than he did against Liston when he won the title?"

 

You're talking about everyone except Ali.

Who cares about Tyson? People peak differently. And Mike Tyson wasn't floored and also coming off a controversial decision win entering his first title fight.

The Muhammad Ali who just turned 22, who had just come off two fights - one againt Cooper where he got floored hard and the other against Jones which was a controversial decision win where everyone booed - WAS NOT yet in his prime yet.

Those fights aren't irrelevent.

That's why he was the underdog. Those were the fights he was coming off of as he entered the ring against Liston.

Ali was still a young fighter still struggling to get wins, and Liston was the dominant heavweight champion IN HIS PRIME who had cleaned out the division.

The 8-1 odds weren't a shock. Liston was supposed to destroy him.

Liston was the dominant heavweight. Ali was lucky to win the two fights before Liston.

And, as for Liston's inactivity, it's not like Ali took him into the "deep water" and then stopped him in the 14th round or something, with Liston dog tired because he had't gone the distance in a while.

Their rematch lasted two minutes-plus. If anyone was supposed to last two minutes, it was Ali. Not Liston.

Ali entered his prime when his body actually filled out in 1967. The "boy" who Liston fought in no way resembled the "man" he'd become by 1967 (at 25).

Cooper talked about how much better Ali was the second time around in 1966. Doug Jones was clamoring for a rematch with Ali until they had a sparring session in 1966 and the more filled out and mature Ali "toyed" with him. Ali was improving by leaps and maturing.

Ali was much better years after the Liston fight than he was at the start of 1964.

You're the one who said Liston fought a "prime Ali." That is utter nonsense.

Ali had NO BUSINESS winning that fight based on where he was entering that fight ... compared to how dominant Liston had been between 1960 and 1963.

Ali even wanted to quit, because he was little more than a kid, his eyes were burning and he hadn't been under that kind of pressure before.

But Liston ended up quitting in both.

They were two terrible lossses. And Liston wasn't even fighting Ali at his best.

 

I’d like another instance where it’s claimed that a fighter would beat everyone else at a certain weight while young and having struggled with two fringe contenders in consecutive fights. Then I’ll dig through Ali’s resume.

It’s funny that you mention psychopaths bc they are known for going into fits of rage at having been undermined.

 

You missed several bolded points. Address them or I'm not replying.

 

Muhammad Ali lost more rounds on the official cards after six rounds in that first Liston fight than he did in 15 rounds against Terrell.

One judge - Bunny Lovett - scored the fight 3 rounds Liston, two rounds Clay, one round even ... and even gave Liston a 10-8 round in the frame where Ali couldn't see.

Then Liston quit.

 

They're not on topic. We're talking about Liston and Ali. Not Buster Douglas.

Focus.

You said Ali was prime when he turned 22 and was coming off a controversial decision over Doug Jones and getting dropped by Henry Cooper.

YOU'RE WRONG.

Liston never should've lost to that kid. Liston was the dominant champ. Ali was struggling to beat guys who weren't world beaters ... which is why he was an 8-1 underdog.

The fact that Liston did worse against him in their rematch than anyone who ever fought Ali ... is ALL ON LISTON.

Ali certainly wasn't at his best either night Liston quit against him.

 

Delusions of self importance are another sign of psychopathy. You aren't important enough for me to get angry. In fact, I think you're funny.

Imagine being so obtuse that you prove someone right by once again refusing to answer a simple direct question while attempting to appear cool and in control. Your lack of self awareness is more proof that I am considerably more intelligent than you.

I didn't ask you to dig through Ali's entire resume. You made a claim that there was "zero evidence he was prime against Liston". This means you obviously think there was a period of time in the 60's other than the Liston fights when Ali was "prime". When was he? You further claimed: "He didn't look that great in the 1st Liston fight". If Ali "didn't look that great against Liston", it means you obviously think there are fights where you believe he looked better. Hence why I asked you:

Name a fight from the 60's where you think Ali looked better than he did when he beat Liston?

 

When you're ready to reply to my bolded points I will respond. Until then, by all means continue to write long posts with contradictory criteria and failing to back up your claims.