1919 Jack Dempsey vs 1960 Sonny Liston

To reiterate what I said earlier in the thread, I think it’s a fascinating match up that’s high stakes for both men. I’m not even picking Dempsey as favourite, let alone calling Liston some sacrificial lamb for him. I think it’s a coin toss.

Liston was famous for his cardio workouts? Liston was lazy if anything, from everything I’ve read. But if you’ve contrary info, by all means I’m happy to be proven wrong.

I give the advantage to Dempsey at close quarters. That’s not the same as saying Liston was hapless at that range. Lesser than doesn’t equal hopeless at.

 

Liston did not have better uppercuts nor was he a better body puncher.

Willard was not a bad fighter at all. He had a good gas tank, was powerful and was courageous. He fought and knocked out Jack Johnson (who was past it but still decent) in what was a 26-round chess match. If he hadn't been inactive he might've put on a better performance against Dempsey.

There isn't any footage of Fulton so how would you come to that conclusion? Fred Fulton has one of the best knockout percentages in HW boxing history. From the little I've read online he wasn't a dumb slugger.

Nobody came at Liston with that sort of ferocity so its hard to say for sure how he would've responded. As I've said size differences didn't bother Dempsey. Liston had difficulty with both faster and powerful opponents.

 

Yes he did. Liston was snapping guys heads with his uppercuts and was bludgeoning people with body shots. Show me the Dempsey fights where you can confidently say he is better than Liston in these areas.

Willard hadn't fought in 3 years and wasn't that good to begin with. He wasn't half as good as Liston.

I never said Fulton was a dumb slugger. I said he wasn't as good as Liston, which is a fact.

 

The Willard fight, the Brennan fight and even the Firpo fight, Vicious uppercuts and body shots.

Watch the Willard v Johnson fight. He was very good, Dempsey wrote positively about his abilities in his books, not an ATG or anything but a good solid fighter. He wasn't much worse than Liston as far as technique is concerned, Liston wasn't exactly a master boxer.

You said he wasn't as skilled as Liston which we can't tell because there is no footage of him. You may be right but you are guessing.

 

He mostly used hooks against Willard. The Firpo fight was a mindless brawler and Dempsey violated the rules numerous times standing over him and hitting as soon as he got up.

Liston did literally everything better than Willard: Jab, combinations, body shots, defense, timing, accuracy, etc. He had better coordination and timing. Willard was an oaf who became champion with the good ol' Homer Simpson method of absorbing tons of punishment against an old Johnson before Johnson ran out of steam.

I'm not "guessing". There is absolutely nothing written on Fulton that would indicate he was as good as Liston. A boxer that good would surely get praise from historians and writers at the time. Once again, you don't seem to understand how evidence works. We can't assume Fulton is as good an an ATG just because there isn't a ton of evidence on him, that requires action proof. His record doesn't remotely suggest he was as good as Liston. Who did Fulton beat who was as good as Patterson, Machen, etc?

 

Right there with you! I've been watching a lot of Sonny's fights--he had great balance, blocked punches very well, and had deceptive foot and head movement--really quite skilled! None other than the venerable Ray Arcel stated the following:

“Sonny Liston was a great boxer. Lot of people never recognized that, because of his power, but Sonny really could box.”

 

That wasn't a violation of the rules. That was completely legal in that time.
Dempsey's knockout of Carpentier was also an uppercut.

You clearly haven't watched the Johnson film. Willard didn't take much punishment. Willard used feints to set up his knockout blow which is something you rarely see from Liston or HWs in general.

I didn't say he was as good as Liston, I said we don't have any footage to compare it to. Fulton beat Carl Morris, Gunboat Smith, Willie Meehan, Frank Moran and Sam Langford and drew against Billy Miske. Good tough fighters.
He was the only white contender who bothered to fight Harry Wills. He had an almost 90% KO rate.

Floyd Patterson was overprotected and would have been a washout in any tough era. Outside of playing spoiler on a couple of occasions what did Eddie Machen ever do to be considered a great fighter?

 

What are you talking about? Dempsey did break the rules:

"Dempsey stood directly over him in violation of the rules while Referee Gallagher began the count. Firpo attempted to rise and Dempsey lunged a right at him, the blow grazing Firpo’s head just as he was getting off the canvas. The referee overlooked this unintentional violation of the rules. Firpo sank back again. The referee warned Dempsey to beat a retreat and as he did so, the Argentinian arose".

As for Willard:

After the fight, referee Jack Welch said: "If I had been compelled to give a decision at the end of the twenty-fifth round, it would have been Johnson's by a wide margin. Up to the twentieth round, Willard had won only one round by a real margin and two or three others by the slightest shade. In the thirteenth and fourteenth, I was almost sure Johnson would knock Willard out, but Willard showed that his jaw and body were too tough. Johnson put up a wonderful fight to the twentieth round, but age stepped in then and defeated him."



So Willard did indeed Homer Simpson his way to a championship win. Willard absorbed a ton of punishment and lost nearly every round until the aging champion Johnson gassed out in the intense heat, and then took over.

As for Fulton, if we don't have any footage then there's really no point in bringing him up. Again, if he were that big a deal old school historians would certainly hype him up with their generous, flowery words. Dempsey barely even talks about Fulton in his book and considered him a minor footnote.



Patterson a washout in any tough era? Nonsense. Patterson continued to perform well with a bad back well into his 30's and nearly regained the championship for the 3rd time in the deeply competitive 70's (arguably getting robbed against Ellis). He was a gold medalist and the first 2x champion.


Eddie Machen was good enough to become the #1 contender so he was obviously doing something right.

 

There was no rule that about going to neutral corner at that point. What Dempsey did was completely legal as far as the ref was concerned. If it wasn't legal the referee would and should have prevented him from doing it. After all it is the referee's job to enforce the rules, that's on the referee not on Dempsey:

Dempsey was permitted to stand over the fallen Firpo and immediately knock him down again, as there was yet no rule about going to a neutral corner. The referee, Johnny Gallagher, was still supposed to prevent the fighter from scoring the knockdown by standing directly over his floored opponent. In the aftermath of the fight, Gallagher was suspended after an investigation and never refereed again. 2 months after the fight, the New York Boxing Commission adopted the neutral corner rule.

Pretty funny. Only you can turn a gutsy performance into a negative. Johnson did not dish out much of a beating, Willard was still full of energy and barely had a mark on his face. Johnson thought he was going to be in with a big clumsy oaf but found the opposite was true. Johnson didn't beat him up the entire fight as you seem to suggest, he had a few rallies were he hit him with multiple punches but was unable to take him out. They mostly fought at range. Johnson was winning on the scorecards but Willard was winning the war of attrition:

Willard continued to jab effectively during the first two minutes of round 20 but the challenger’s right hand to the side of the head ignited a fury within the champion. His flashing fists bulled Willard across the 20-foot ring and while Johnson’s punches landed accurately, they lacked the power that had left the mighty Jeffries in a heap five years earlier. The rally was short-lived, as was the one Johnson produced in the next round after another Willard right to the temple stoked his fire. This time, however, Willard answered with his own assault in the round’s final minute that caused several ringsiders to leap joyously to their feet.

From that point forward, Johnson barely had the energy to hold up his gloves, much less hold off a 238-pound giant. Suddenly, the once-invincible Johnson appeared far older than his 37 years.

“Time had done its work,” the Associated Press reported. “It had been the opinion of Johnson and many of his friends that he did not have to be in the best of condition to whip Willard, underrating the latter’s splendid condition and youthful stamina.”

According to a New York Times account, Johnson asked Curley following round 22 to “Tell my wife I’m tiring and I wish you’d see her out.”

I only brought Fulton up to illustrate the point that Dempsey beat bigger men than Liston, that's all. You were the one who questioned his ability. A win against Sam Langford is nothing to sneeze at.

There is no other era of boxing - maybe outside of this wonderbread era - in which Patterson would be a champion. The only reason he was champion as long as he was is because he was kept away from Liston, Williams and Folley. Eddie Machen's biggest achievement was going the distance against Liston, he didn't beat anybody. There's no reason to include him in any discussion on top heavyweights.

 

Proof is in the pudding. As soon as he fought the top contender, he got obliterated.
Perhaps there are a couple of other eras he could have had some success in (i.e. barren eras like now or the early 2000's, or the pre-Tyson era) but I certainly don't see him being a champ in any era that was before him.

 

Why do you keep repeating this. Its absolutely untrue.

 

That isn't from my most recent comment. Catch up.

The neutral corner rule was only imposed after the fact.

In any case it is the referee's job to enforce the rules, if the referee failed to do his job properly then why blame Dempsey?

 

It's kind of funny how a discussion about whether Dempsey threw uppercuts gets morphed into an argument about whether he broke the rules or not in the Firpo fight as if that has anything to do with his ability to throw uppercuts. But hey, anything to 'win' an argument.