Sonny Liston vs his biggest opponent Gehard Zech, 6'5, in good quality

DC stated Mildenberger should have won, Cooper floored him twice and out boxed him, so on what planet does that make any sense?
All ratings have isolated anomalies, but the WBA's are the norm not occasional lapses.

 

Super Heavies and southpaws - tick!

 

What a hook in the ear! It didn't help that Zech was a modern superheavyweight

 

The WBA (NBA) ratings were the boxing ratings at the time. I said that earlier.

46 of the 50 US state athletic commissions recognized the WBA ratings. Only four US states (Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, New York) recognized Frazier as champ when he beat Mathis.

Boxing has changed over the last 60 YEARS! Sanctioning bodies and their rules have as well. Posting current ratings to bash the ratings 60 years ago means nothing.

Nobody who appeared in those 1967 ratings or who was on the ratings committee is even alive anymore.

The WBA/NBA ratings were the ratings followed at the time. Mildenberger was ranked #1.

Also, I said Mildenberger deserved to beat Cooper because Karl clearly hit Cooper in the eye with a fist (I posted a freeze frame of the shot) and the fight was immediately called BECAUSE of the cut from that punch ... but the ref ruled it a headbutt.

IT clearly was NOT a headbutt. It came from a punch.

And Cooper initiated the clinch after the punch landed, because it hurt him, and when the ref broke them, the ref saw Cooper was cut and ruled Karl Mildenberger intentionally BUTTED Cooper.

It was absolute nonsense.

If you don't believe me, watch the fight yourself.

It would be like ruling Hagler headbutted Minter ... and handing the fight to Alan. It was BULL.

And you just seem to want to argue with me without actually seeing the fight (or having not seen it in 60 years)! Watch it with a fresh pair of eyes.

IF you do, there isn't really anything to argue about.

 

Except he didn't?

Liston and Ali were dead even on the cards when Liston retired. In fact, Liston won more rounds against Ali than Mildenberger did. The only metric by which Mildenberger performed better is that he lasted longer, and that's largely because Liston was fighting with an injured shoulder.


And for what it's worth, in The Ring magazine’s “Best I Faced” section, when Ali was asked about his toughest opponent, he responded: “The toughest would be my fight with Sonny Liston, when I won the title in 1964.”

I can't really respond to this because I have no idea what point you're trying to make. It's just a statement that they had different styles.

Again, how many of those men were actually ranked when Mildenberger beat them?

You keep listing names, but when you look at the rankings, the résumé starts to look a lot less impressive.

1964 Ring rankings:

Sonny Liston
Floyd Patterson
Ernie Terrell
Cleveland Williams
George Chuvalo
Zora Folley
Karl Mildenberger
Roger Rischer
Eddie Machen
Doug Jones

Mildenberger fought one of them and beat none of them.

1965:

Ernie Terrell
Floyd Patterson
George Chuvalo
Karl Mildenberger
Zora Folley
Amos Johnson
Thad Spencer
Doug Jones
Hubert Hilton
Brian London

Mildenberger fought none of them.

1966:

Ernie Terrell
Zora Folley
Thad Spencer
Floyd Patterson
Karl Mildenberger
Joe Frazier
Oscar Bonavena
George Chuvalo
Johnny Persol
Manuel Ramos

Mildenberger fought none of them.

1967:

Joe Frazier
Thad Spencer
Jimmy Ellis
Manuel Ramos
Jerry Quarry
Oscar Bonavena
Floyd Patterson
Eduardo Corletti
Karl Mildenberger
Ernie Terrell

Mildenberger fought one of them—Bonavena—and lost.

1968:

Joe Frazier
Jimmy Ellis
Oscar Bonavena
George Chuvalo
Sonny Liston
Jerry Quarry
Leotis Martin
Manuel Ramos
Alvin Lewis
Floyd Patterson

He fought one of them—Leotis Martin—and got knocked out after being dropped three times.

You mention all of these names but conveniently leave out where they were at the time of their careers. For example, Machen hadn't been ranked in two years and was a shell of himself after coming out of the looney bin. Rademacher was completely washed up by then, riding a three-fight knockout losing streak and having to rebuild his confidence against a hand-picked tomato can before stepping in with Mildenberger.

Beyond that, a cursory look at the rankings shows there are plenty of notable names missing from Mildenberger's résumé, not just in the years I listed but throughout his career. He never fought Chuvalo, Terrell, Spencer, Patterson, or Jones, among others. So no, I don't think it's accurate to say he fought "all the usual suspects." In reality, many of the division's leading contenders never shared a ring with him, while a number of the recognizable names he did face were either past their best, unranked, or both.

You also slipped Folley into the list of guys Mildenberger supposedly "smacked around," which is pretty generous considering Folley escaped with a draw that many felt he deserved to win. The fight was in Germany, in Mildenberger's backyard, and even the hometown crowd was surprised by the verdict.

That's not what I said.

I never said Mildenberger himself was ducking Liston. I said his management wisely avoided the fight. There's a difference.

Liston had already called Mildenberger out before the title shot materialized anyway, but that's beside the point.

My point was that fighting Liston made no business sense whatsoever. It was all risk and virtually no reward. Even if Mildenberger genuinely believed he could beat him, why take the fight? At that stage nobody wanted anything to do with Liston. Promoters didn't want him, sanctioning bodies didn't want him, and managers certainly didn't want their fighters standing in front of him.

At least during Liston's prime there was an incentive to take the risk. If you beat him, you beat one of the most feared men in boxing and a top-ranked contender. By 1966, much of that upside was gone, but the danger was still very real. There were safer fights available against higher-ranked opponents that offered more reward and less risk.

Frankly, if a manager had voluntarily matched his contender with Sonny Liston under those circumstances, I'd question whether he should've been managing fighters at all.

I do disagree, largely because I'm not convinced Mildenberger's chin would've held up against Liston in the first place.

But that's not really the issue here.

I wasn't debating whether Mildenberger would beat Liston. I was pointing out that Mildenberger's team turned down an offer to fight Liston. Everything else is a separate discussion.

 

Excellent breakdown!

 

Cooper wasnt having any trouble with Mildenberger.

You are trying to present this verdict as an example of ,"home cooking",when in fact the referee was Italian!
If you want some examples of ,"home cooking",look no further than Germany!
Ottke v Reid

• Referee Roger Tilleman was widely criticized for a clearly biased performance that heavily favored the hometown hero Ottke. After ignoring a knockdown in round 6 for Reid, instead ruling it a slip, Tilleman deducted a point from Reid for a phantom headbutt. Tilleman repeatedly warned Reid for initiating clinches when Ottke had charged in headfirst leaving him with no option but to hold. The referee also warned Reid on numerous occasions for landing clean punches. Reid was worried about being disqualified so couldn't box to the best of his ability. [1]

• The decision was also highly controversial decision

Mildenberger v Folley.
Veteran Zora Folley gave young Karl Mildenberger a boxing lesson Friday night but the judges evened it up and called it a draw - a verdict that stunned most of the 12,000 fans that jammed the Messehalle here to watch the two highly ranked heavyweights in what was billed as an elimination match. Folley carved out cuts under Mildenberger's eyes and repeatedly scored with solid left jabs and straight right hands over the southpaw efforts of the German challenger. By the end of the 7th round Mildenberger had cuts under both eyes while Folley bled from the nose as a result of Mildenberger's left. Referee Otto Nispel took it upon himself to stop the fight time and again to warn Folley on butting and in the 8th round Nispel stopped the fight while he took Mildenberger to his corner and wiped the blood off his face so a doctor could come to the ringside and examine the cuts. Mildenberger, although clearly outclassed, never stopped trying and absorbed a tremendous amount of punishment from the American. He was still trying gamely in the 9th and 10th while Folley was content to coast and that was all the judges seemingly needed." -European Stars & Stripes

• Unofficial Stars & Stripes scorecard - 7-2-1 Folley
• The UPI reported that Folley, "appeared to have the upper hand against his 26 year old opponent." While the AP reported that Folley, "appeared to have piled up a good margin. He gave the German a battering in the 7th and 8th rounds."

Post fight comments

• "When the referee stopped the fight to examine the cuts, that gave Mildenberger time to recuperate." -Bill Swift, Folley's manager, claiming that Folley had hurt Mildenberger with a flurry of hard shots to the head just before the referee intervened."

MIldenberger v Machen
"The sensation of the evening came in the interval to round seven, when the Bundes Deutscher Berufsboxer official, Gerhard Seewald, the appointed third man, had caught up with Machen's elbow when trying to part the boxers and fell backwards landing on his back. Helmut Bertram then took over the duties of third man on the grounds that Seewald was not fit enough to continue after his fall. Whatever the cause of this switch, Werner's decision saved the fight and the promotion. The crowd was not very pleased with Seewald's officiating up to this point. They had been calling for more action but whenever Machen went in close and proved superior at infighting, Seewald would pull him off. Machen, 33, was facing his first southpaw in 57 fights, and it certainly worried him. there were times when he did not know what to do. It also was his first fight since July 1965. Mildenberger, 28, was not prepared to take any chances. He couldn't afford to after his disappointing bouts with Dave Bailey and stable companion Gerhard Zech. He was content to coast along for a points win."

Post fight comments

• "My strong point is infighting at the ropes. I just don't understand why the referee pulled us apart every time." -Eddie Machen

 

You seem to want to bring up any fight except Cooper-Mildenberger, which you're arguing with me about.

Watch the Cooper-Mildenberger fight. It's available. Karl hits him with a hard punch in the head, Cooper clinches because he's rocked, they break, Cooper is bleeding, the ref rules it an intentional headbutt and awards the fight to Cooper.

IT was a BAD call ... at minimum. At its worst, it was awarding the fight to the home fighter. Because Cooper was about to lose yet another fight on a bad cut.

Just watch it. Instead bringing up any other fight that comes to your mind.

There isn't anything to argue if you just watch the film.

 

In the US, all the state athletic commissions recognized either the WBA/NBA ratings (90+ percent of the states - or 46 of the 50 states recognized the WBA) the rest fell in line with the NY State Athletic Commission.

Ring was a magazine. No state athletic commission recognized Ring's ratings as the official ratings.

Over the last 60 years, things have changed when it comes to ratings. Back then, it was different.

But even Ring Magazine ranked Karl Mildenberger #1 when the tournament began.

The Ring ratings ending July 1967 (The September 1967 issue) were:
Clay (Champ)
1. Karl Mildenberger
2. Ernie Terrell
3. Joe Frazier
4. George Chuvalo
5. Floyd Patterson
6. Manuel Ramos
7. Thad Spencer
8. Jerry Quarry
9. Oscar Bonavena
10. Leotis Martin

 

The "only" metric?

Karl Mildenberger was at the top of the ratings primarily because of his great performance against a better version of Ali than Liston ever fought.

Sonny Liston WAS NOT in the ratings at all because he humiliated himself in two fights against a younger, greener Ali.

Liston couldn't even last one round in their rematch. Don't pretend that didn't happen. That fight is reason Liston wasn't in the ratings AT ALL.

So don't pretend Liston did better against Ali. Liston wasn't in the ratings anymore specifically because of HIS horrible performances in his fights with Ali.

Whereas Karl was so high in the ratings SPECIFICALLY because of his performance against a better version of Ali.

The BEST VERSION EVER of Ali was the Ali who fought Cleveland WIlliams in 1966. Karl fought him two months prior and gave Ali his toughest challenge as champ.

You act like Karl got stopped in one and humiliated himself against a greener version of Ali ... and Liston went 12 rounds with Ali at his best and gave Ali a hard night.

When, in fact, the opposite is true.

Liston was Ali's easiest title defense. By far. In either reign.

 

The combined total losses of Zechs opponents leading up to the Liston fight was 575 & 92 draws. An average of 15 losses per opponent..

There were 38 opponents before Sonny Liston.

A few months prior to Liston hed lost TWICE.. once to a CW & once to a fella who didn't even posses a winning record..
Dave Bailey.. he got rid of him in 2 rounds, 5 rounds quicker than Liston..

Are we meant to be impressed? Dunno what the point here was but Zechs resume is trash & ridiculously padded..

BTW it appears at the time of fighting Liston Zech was at his career heaviest, so was out of shape too LOL.. he averaged about 215lbs..

 

That doesn't really prove anything. Mac Foster became the No. 1 contender without beating a single top-10 ranked opponent. Given your continued refusal to answer how many ranked fighters Mildenberger actually beat, it's starting to look like the same thing happened with him.

And as for your claim that Mildenberger was "fighting all the usual suspects that everyone else fought," the July 1967 ratings actually undermine that argument. He never fought most of the names on that list at any point in his career. The only exceptions were Oscar Bonavena and Leotis Martin, and both beat him decisively.

So simply pointing to where Mildenberger was ranked doesn't answer the question I've been asking all along: who did he actually beat who was ranked in the top ten?

 

Yes. That's the only objective (foreign word to you, I know) metric in which Mildenberger outperformed Liston against Ali. Liston was dead even on the scorecards when he retired and won more rounds overall despite fighting five fewer rounds.

That isn't true.

Before the Ali fight, Mildenberger was ranked No. 4 by The Ring. After the fight, he dropped to No. 6. He also fell in the WBA rankings afterward. If his ranking was supposedly driven by that performance, it’s hard to explain why both organizations moved him down immediately after it.

https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-times-standard/200336587/

He didn't humiliate himself in the first fight. As previously stated, Liston was dead even on the cards before a shoulder injury forced him to retire.

That fight is an absolute outlier in both careers, which is why I don’t put much stock in it. More importantly, you yourself don’t consistently treat it as proof of inability—you’ve argued elsewhere that Liston voluntarily quit rather than being physically unable to continue.

So which is it?

As established, it was only the second fight—not the first. For the umpteenth time, Liston gave a very respectable performance in Miami, which is precisely why he remained the No. 1 contender afterward.

And Liston’s removal from the ratings wasn’t simply because of a one-round stoppage. The situation around the rematch mattered. Eddie Machen, the No. 1 contender, had also been blasted out in one round by the virtually unknown Ingemar Johansson. Mildenberger himself was knocked out in one round by Dick Richardson. Neither man disappeared from the rankings because of it.

More to the point, Floyd Patterson was knocked out in one round by Liston, remained the No. 1 contender, got knocked out in one round again in the rematch, and still climbed back to the top of the rankings before fighting Ali.

So it’s inconsistent to claim Liston alone was removed purely because of how he looked against Ali while ignoring how rankings actually behaved in that era.

That also isn’t true.

Following the Ali fight, Mildenberger actually dropped to No. 6 in both the WBA and The Ring rankings. His standing declined after that performance—it didn’t improve because of it.

So the idea that he was elevated because of his performance against Ali doesn’t hold up under the actual rankings.

Using that logic, you're crediting Mildenberger for “lasting longer” against Ali while dismissing context entirely elsewhere. And even Ali himself later said Sonny Liston was his toughest fight.

That only works if you reduce everything to isolated metrics while ignoring rounds won, scoring context, injuries, and opposition conditions.

And if that’s the standard, then by the same logic you're using, Patterson and even a shot Cleveland Williams would've beaten Liston in '65 and '66 respectively.

 

Every issue of the Ring and the ratings within them are posted on the Ring website.

I told you the issue and posted the ratings

Also, the quarterly NBA/WBA ratings are all posted on Boxrec.

Karl Mildenberger was #1 in both when the WBA tournament began.

It's there for all to see.

Listen isn't ranked. He was essentially banished after the Ali rematch when he humiliated himself and hurt the sport.

Liston was Ali's easiest defense in either reign.

I'm not saying anything everyone doesn't already know.

 

I think Gerhard Zech was taller than 6' 5"

His height was given back in the sixties as 6' 9". that might be puffed up a bit, but he did look taller than Ernie Terrell to my eye when the two fought in Madison Square Garden. That fight is on youtube.