Rate the quality of Sonny Liston's resume

Brilliant!

As to Leotis, is that a same day weigh in weight or * 3 days prior with room for rehydration and added lbs/ounces by fight time?

* I’ve never had much respect for baby weight bullies who go off the milk in order to make weight only to fatten up their little bellies immediately afterward.

 

This was reported in the press at the time. Despite putting a brave face on his fighter's chances, Viscusi acknowledged that he'd done no sparring since his previous fight.

https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-miami-news/70468728/

Have you allowed yourself to consider the possibility that you're not totally unbiased about this, and that the headscratcher is why someone would devote so much time to insisting that Williams was a "mature and experienced fighter" at the age of 20?

Of course, if someone was determined to believe that Williams was easily beatable it's not hard to see why they'd obsess over the Satterfield fight. It's the only time he was ever counted out, the only time in the first 17 years of his career he was stopped by an opponent who was not a prime ATG, and the only time he was ever stopped by an opponent under 210 lbs. It's hard to sustain the myth of his vulnerability if you acknowledge that he was nowhere close to his prime.

 

This newspaper clip is a good find. Fascinating to me.

 

There's no limit to what Solomon Deedes can dig up. He's an absolute beast on this stuff.

 

Did any great HW lost his last fight against journeyman LHW?

I don't think so, especially when that HW is in reality 40 pounds bigger.

We have Joe Louis losing against Ezzard Charles and Dempsey against Tunney, but those two were the greatest LHWs of all time, not joruneymans.

 

Fortunately I've had this argument before, so I already know where to look for a lot of this stuff.

 

Puts even me to shame.

 

Thanks for posting another article. I appreciate this as I am learning a lot about Williams early career.

"Despite putting a brave face on his fighter's chances"

Odd spin. I see nothing in his quotes that indicated Viscusi didn't think Williams had an excellent chance.

"I decided to take Satterfield. I'm as anxious to see this one as you are. We've brought Cleveland along slow for three years and this fight will give me a real line on him."

"We took the gamble. I know Satterfield is a hellavu puncher, and he's got a big edge in experience. But Cleveland hits as hard as he does and if he gets in there first he'll be all right."

Viscusi wasn't an outlier in thinking Williams had a good chance.

"Satterfield . . . is a 7-5 favorite."

So hardly an out fight. Williams had shorter odds by far than Marciano against Layne, or Johansson against Patterson. Satterfield, after all, was a puffed up light-heavy who had been stopped himself 10 times in 51 fights, and by men much smaller and in most cases far lesser punchers, than Williams.

"Viscusi acknowledged that he'd done no sparring since his last fight."

No. That is not exactly what he said.

"Lou Viscusi, Cleveland's manager, says his fighter is in perfect physical condition but has had little sparring. Cleveland had done plenty of road work since beating Jones two weeks ago, but did not do any sparring until Sunday."

The fight was on Tuesday. (one can find out almost anything on the internet)

So Williams had sparred on Sunday, and possibly some on Monday. He had been doing his road work and so remained in "perfect physical condition." It is not accurate to claim he was not training at all.

What about Satterfield. He had been training, but for an entirely different sort of opponent.

"Bernstein had Satterfield train to fight a "runner" in order to cope with the furious back-peddling efforts of Doc Williams. Now he has to change his style for Williams who never steps back."
-------------------

At some point every fighter has to step up in class. Williams appears to have had at least 40 fights. He had at least one victory over a formally rated fighter--Agramonte--who was still fighting reasonably well. Satterfield was dangerous, but had himself been KO'd ten times and was 25 lbs. lighter. The much taller and heavier Williams was given a good chance at 5-7. His manager thought it was time to test Williams in deeper water.

"obsess over the Satterfield fight"

Williams stepped up and lost badly.

"prime ATG"

Who also twice knocked out Williams inside of three rounds.

"myth of vulnerability"

I didn't know there was such a myth. Williams clearly demonstrated he had a fair chin. Prior to his shooting, he was only stopped by top level punchers. But, arguably, he only fought two. Holman would be close at his best, but was at the end of the line. Miteff was not in that class, Nor Bethea. Machen deserves a mention. Also Agramonte. (am I missing someone?)

Anyway, thanks again for the very informative newspaper posts. I am learning a great deal.

"easily beatable"

I never posted that. It is obviously not true. It is however also true that Williams almost always lost once he fought someone at the "top five" level. The exception would be the draw with Machen.

 

"ali against Cooper" "Johnson against Choynski"

These analogies would only mean something if Williams had the sort of post-Satterfield career Ali did after Cooper or Johnson after Choynski. Williams didn't.

"Ali's team knew to steer clear of the seasoned, rough/tough Chuvalo duing his march to the title"

Chuvalo--who had lost two of three to Cleroux? Was he even rated at that point?

"I also believe that post fight, Satterfield himself cited a greater potential and future for Williams given more maturity and experience--he could see that and you can't."

Well, that is because I know the "future" Satterfield was predicting. It is the distant past for me. Williams never achieved that much. He never lived up to the potential Satterfield saw in him. Nothing for me to crow about. Hindsight is always 20/20.

"So you are contending . . . that he was already as good as he would ever be."

No. What I would maintain is that Williams did not show a great deal of improvement until 1961 when starting with Bethea he began to be matched tougher. One could spin that if matched tougher sooner he would have done better earlier, possibly even against Liston. But that is not the Williams of history. He was matched very carefully until 1961 against a majority of tomato cans. Not being consistently thrown into the deep water until he was 28 and 14 years after turning pro might have been poor management, but it is what happened.

"he had very good wins going into the Satterfield fight"

Well, how do you evaluate the Agramonte win? Who was a better opponent other than Satterfield prior to the Liston matches? Holman? Agramonte had beaten him badly back in 1950, when Holman was on a tear and was rated #5 by the NBA. Frankie Daniels.? Never rated at heavy and dubious at light-heavy. Richardson? A DQ and what had he done to that point. Agramonte was losing only to good men and still able to win 5 of his last 8 going into the Williams fight? Tell me who of the pre-Liston opponents you judge better? Who of the pre-Bethea opponents do you judge better?

"Satterfield was a major step up"

Yes. And a step up test Williams failed.

 

Machen and Terrell. This notion is supported by his 1-1-1 record in bouts against them.

Chuvalo could only manage a majority decision against a shot DeJohn—hardly a dominant win. And let’s not forget, DeJohn wiped the Cleroux decisively. That same DeJohn was completely dismantled by Billy Daniels: dropped six times and stopped.


"A right to the chin in the 1st round, sent DeJohn down for a nine-count. He was floored for a 2nd time for no-count, again, in the 1st round. In the 3rd round, another right to the chin put him down for another nine-count. A right uppercut floored DeJohn for a 4th time in the 9th round, he was subsequently put down for a fifth time in the same round by a left hook; both times for nine counts. The 10th round had barely begun, when Daniels floored DeJohn for a sixth time, on a right hand. After this knockdown, the referee stopped the contest."



Daniels, in turn, was thoroughly outclassed by Williams twice.

If Cleroux and Chuvalo don’t have any case for being better than DeJohn, they certainly have no case for being better than Daniels—and definitely not better than Williams.

Chuvalo also should've lost decisively to Miteff in their first bout. He was trailing badly on the cards, when he benefitted from the most blatant hometown ****ery I've ever seen.

When he knocked Miteff down in the final round, he should’ve gained a two-point edge on the scorecards—but one judge gave him three points, and another gave him four! Even with that absurdly favorable scoring, Chuvalo had fallen so far behind earlier in the fight that it only brought him up to a draw.

He also would've lost the rematch had it taken literally anyplace else. Chuvalo won a split decision by HALF a point.... with hometown judges.

Here's how Miteff faired in his next fight.

"Cleveland (Big Cat) Williams, who shattered the title hopes of 7th ranked Alex Miteff with a 5th round TKO, set up a howl today for a shot at champion Floyd Patterson. If Williams ever looked as though he deserved a shot at the title, it was Tuesday night. He took command of the fight from Miteff from the start, opened a bad cut over his left eye in the 2nd, floored him for eight counts in the 3rd and 4th, and was beating him badly when referee Ernie Taylor mercifully ended it 1:32 deep into the 5th." -United Press International

You posted this previously in support of Williams not being green when he fought Satterfield

You point out that Holman had lost 5 of his last 6 and Miteff 3 of 4—presumably to downplay them as credible wins. Yet, in defense of Williams not being green when he fought Satterfield, you cited victories over Bob Garner, who hadn’t won a fight in four years and never would again, and Omelio Agramonte, whose 3-3 record was identical to Miteff’s at the time.

Just so I have this clear—Miteff and Holman are dismissed due to recent losses, but Garner and Agramonte are somehow meaningful wins that prove Williams was seasoned and ready?

Are you sure SolomonDeedes is being unreasonable when he questions whether bias might be shaping your take here? Because from the outside, it really does look like there’s a double standard being applied to downplay some wins while propping up others to fit a specific narrative about Williams.

Holman still had something in the tank. He'd seen better days but there was still some gas. He'd nearly knocked out Miteff in his last outing before gassing.

He retired because of the brutal nature of his KO loss to Williams. He was unconscious for at least three minutes.

Miteff hadn't recovered from the horrific beating he took from Williams when he stepped in against Cleroux. https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-times-transcript/175768709/ Even so he put up a much better fight against Cleroux, being behind only narrowly on the cards, and bruising Cleroux's body despite being handicapped.

He performed noticeably better against Cleroux and Chuvalo than he did against Williams, which speaks to the difference in class between them.

With all due respect, we’ve already gone over this. Daniels was never the same after the brutal beating he took from Williams. Suggesting otherwise would imply that Doug Jones—who split two fights with Daniels and arguably should’ve gone 2-0—wasn’t much either, and would’ve suffered similar losses to the fighters Daniels fell to after William. Is that really a position you’re prepared to defend?

 

The analogies do of course mean something when you’re trying to hang your hat so heavily on an early career loss and overweight that loss.

Williams didn’t go on to achieve what Johnson and Ali did but, as was the case for the aforementioned fighters, he wasn’t limited to that early career loss (near loss in Ali’s cas) and he most certainly did improve -

Satterfield wasn’t just a step up - he was a major step up and Williams would’ve done better to have been duly developed toward that fight (= fighting opposition of incrementally greater quality). Yet again also, he was a late sub - and it appears that you are willingly ignoring that fact.

If Chuvalo was rated or not, the point was that Ali’s team knew it wasn’t worth the risk of putting Ali in with a fighter like Chuvalo too early in his career. Ali was certainly never going to be thrown into a fight ad hoc as Williams was with Satterfield.

Of course Williams did improve after their fight, as Satterfield suspected he would.

Due respect but now it seems you’re trying to talk “up” one of Williams pre Satterfield victims in order to give credence to the claim that Williams had due experience going into the Satterfield fight - but in all instances otherwise, you’re clearly claiming a padded record.

It also seems that you’re drawing another self contradicting in line in so far as suggesting that Williams only improved when his comp. improved with Bethea in ‘61 - notably excluding the Liston fights that went down not long before - as if to grade down the Williams who Liston defeated.

One only has to actually watch the first Liston fight to see that Williams had the tools and was boxing beautifully in the first round and part way through the second - including his employment of an excellent, fast and powerful jab.

It’s already been referenced in this thread that Liston admitted that Williams nearly had him out at one point.

Williams clearly detected same and went for broke - laying some more serious leather on Sonny but leaving himself that bit more open to counter.

What transpired thereafter was far more a testament to Liston’s own durability, boxing skills and power - than it was any indictment on Williams. All be it abbreviated, it is one of the best technical slug outs you will ever see.

If anything, Williams might’ve shown more discipline and therefore enjoyed a bit more success by not opening up so soon - as it was, Cleve sniffed blood and simply went for it, for better or worse.

Additionally, Williams didn’t fold like a cheap tent - Liston landed a number of devastating shots before The Big Cat succumbed. That’s what Liston did - knock people out.

It’s a laugh when people claim that Liston didn’t have an inside game - his inside game clearly came to the fore to stunning effect in the Williams fight among others.

Liston was at his absolute best when Williams engaged him.

If I’m putting the best version of Liston against anyone, it’s going to be the 59/60 version of Sonny - not saying he wins by that version does a whole better than the ‘64 version did against Ali.

 

Okay, but all you had to to say is that you don’t know Martin’s birth weight.

I mean, I should’ve guessed as much otherwise you would’ve certainly cited that birth weight.

As they mature, fighters grow and put on more bulk naturally before they cross the line and put on excess weight/fat in later age.

At 199 lbs, Leotis Martin looked perfectly svelte and unimpaired by the weight. You disagree? That weight clearly added oomph to his punch.

It was Liston, at 219 1/2 lbs who appeared jiggly, carrying obvious excess weight/fat..

So, you take old Liston’s virtually highest career weight of 219 1/2 lb, no caveats, no qualms, but baulk on 30 yo Martin’s trim 199 lb? Wow!

Liston himself came in as low as 204 lbs for Bethea as recently as 1958. Can we lock that weight in forevermore?

In truth, Liston’s best weight was about 211/212 1/2 lbs.

Also, never mind thad Liston was likely 40 + yo and heavily dissipated due to long term drug and alcohol abuse by the time he engaged Martin.

Your bias is clear when you choose to ignore obvious and due context.

And finally, NO, Liston won his last fight against a then, oversized HW in Chuck Wepner.

You should dot you I’s and cross your T’s more carefully next time before you post.

The axe you have to grind against Liston is truly out there.

There has to be more to it that we are not yet privy to. Sonny seems to live rent free in your head 24/7.

 

On that point it's good to see you finding a bit of time to put together top quality posts. It's been a while. I wouldn't overly want to be arguing this era against you lol

 

If you remember, I said that he took the fight on two days' notice. You came back with "Okay. But he was training." I pointed out that this isn't true - when he got the call to face Satterfield he'd been out of the gym since his previous victory. You wanted evidence of this which I've now shown you.

So yes, he had a whole two days to prepare for Satterfield, as I said in the first place.

 

Viscusi also said "I would like to see Cleveland a little sharper but Chris was in a hole and i decided to take Satterfield". So obviously he would have liked a better prep.