I've seen two highly polarized sides on this forum regarding this particular boxer; those who believe he's worthy of being deemed one of the best of all time, and those who believe he wasn't all that good compared to other greats. I would like to see which side is more popular/real.
A great enough heavyweight top 15 undeniably but not truly “great” as an overall fighter P4P; only Joe Louis is a genuinely great boxer of the HW champions he’s the only one who had a style transferable to the lower divisions 147lbs and under, only he and Muhammad Ali rank well P4P IMO. As a fighter Sonny Liston is a little unproven he didn’t have much depth to him in his resume those fighters like Machen, Patterson and Folley aren’t good wins for the open weight at all, I don’t think much of them. Against the best fighter he fought - without tinfoil he lost in a one sided way, all the other guys he fought just weren’t that good he beat them how you’d expect though. When I watch Liston he was a decent enough boxer for the heavyweight division fundamentally solid but he always had a strength and size advantage over the only reasonable boxers he beat, he was cumbersome looking and fought in straight lines - in short he fought like someone who was big but at 6ft-6ft1 210-215lbs that wouldn’t cut it as early as the 80s and late 70s -Sonny wouldn’t look exceptional relying on just his boxing skills look what happened when he declined and fought his only live body, his skills weren’t to be relied on.
The greatest ever. You 2 people who voted overrated better reply to this so I can forcefully educate you.
While I wont argue Liston a P4P ATG he definitely isnt stupid in the ring. Definitely a better ring sense and strategic mind than most HWS.
Overrated, he is rated based on what he could do but not on what he actually did, same goes for Tyson. If Liston fought Bonavena, Chuvalo, Frazier, Terell, Jimmy Ellis, Quarry, Mac Foster, Buster Mathis...maybe I would have different opinion but since he only fought small Patterson who was scared and Williams who was as overrated as Liston because they want to boost Liston resume with him, I do not think he should be rated in top 10 I think he belongs in top 15 more.
Always depends on who is doing the rating. So, he should hung on and done all his significant fighting pushing 40 or beyond?
Foreman and Holmes ducked no one at that age, and at that same age Lewis was still fighting, same goes for Klitchko.
At that age... Sullivan was long retired. Dempsey had been retired for 8 years. Tunney had been retired 9 years. Joe Louis was retired for 2 years and hadn't been the same fighter for at least 7 years. Marciano had been retired for 8 years. Joe Frazier hadn't won a fight in 15 years. So, we are to judge Liston on his abilities at that age? And insist he should be judged on fighting the generation after his and not his own? Especially when the powers that be wouldn't have allowed him a fight against any of the fighters mentioned.
Him and Terrell had an exhibition, and Ernest obviously didn't want much more after that- Especially considering he had very tight fights with Williams. All of the other names are pretty much non factors since Liston peaked far before they were relevant.