if ingo KO'd floyd in the return would the swede be king kong insted of liston?

Bethea, Summerlin, Williams, and DeJohn.

1. It was impressive to knock out Bethea for sure. Otherwise, he was an ordinary second-tier contender.

2. Summerlin--It was impressive for Liston to be fighting a relatively experienced fighter like this. On the down side, the two Summerlin decisions were very controversial and many, including the Ring correspondent, thought Summerlin won

3. DeJohn--sometimes looked good against 2nd stringers like Powell or Miteff but lost badly every time he stepped up and was later crushingly ko'd by both Machen and Folley.

4. Williams--hard to judge because he fought so few good fighters, running up an imposing statistical record against walkovers. He wasn't all that impressive against the few top men he fought. Satterfield starched him. So did Liston twice. In his best efforts he drew with Machen and stopped Terrell. Terrell came back to edge him a year later. Williams was shot not long afterward and was never the same. One could argue Williams was green for Satterfield (he was a week from his 21st birthday and was 31-1) but it is also true that his biggest win was over an arguably equally green Terrell (he was a week from his 23rd birthday and was 24-3). Both the young Williams and Terrell were really stepping up in class.

 

Who dismisses Liston's victories over Williams? Seems to me Liston's supporters play them up for all they are worth and then some.

I would have a question:

How many fighters did Williams defeat who were rated on the day Williams defeated them?

I think Ali's victory over Williams is a signature win less because Williams was "ranked" than because Ali looked so sensational against this slow-moving opponent. Certainly Williams was nothing like what he had been.

 

Williams did not defeat Machen. On the other hand, Harold Johnson did.

The main reason I bring up what ranked contenders Williams fought is that Suzie-Q harps on D'Amato ducking Williams. Well, when? Williams was not rated at all until 1961 and he had not defeated a rated fighter. Why should he get a shot at the title?

 

Why should of Rademacher, Cut and Shoot Harris, McNeeley etc. recieved title shots?

Fact is, Williams was much more deserving of a shot than almost everyone Patterson defended his title against. Along with Machen and Folley of course.

 

Rademacher and McNeeley did not deserve title shots.

Roy Harris is different. He was undefeated in 23 fights. He had victories over former top contender Bob Baker and current top contender Willie Pastrano, as well as trial horses such as Willi Besmanoff and Charley Norkus.

Certainly a case can be made for Harris and the fight drew well. Williams had not beaten anyone nearly as good as Baker or Pastrano.

Of the men Patterson defended his title against, Jackson was the #1 contender, Harris #4, and Johansson the #1 contender. Williams did not have the credentials of these men, or for that matter even London, who had beaten Pastrano.

Why didn't Williams fight some contenders? It doesn't quite wash with me that everyone ducked him. Liston got fights with contender after contender and trial horse after trial horse. I don't really believe that they were afraid of Williams but not of Liston.

 

The risk/reward wasn't there for Williams as much as Sonny, basically Liston's scalp meant a lot more and thus got more fights against contenders.

Williams was dangerous and not rated super highly, why fight him?

Not saying that he was better than even Machen, but like McGrain said he was on that level.

 

I get the impresion wiliams was a big attraction in texas. looking at his record he fought a lot there, were his people happy to fight often in less demanding fights? I remember reading rocky graziano would say " do you want a lot of a little or a little of a lot" by way of explaining that a number of regular smaller easier fights pay as well as one big harder fight where you lose a lot in tax.

as an aside I also remember reading wiliams was dificult during a visit to the uk. he called off a fight at the last moment because he couldnt find his lucky shorts.

 

Ingos right this...ingos right that. What about Ingos chin? Weak Hitting Brian London had him down and nearly out at the bell. Patterson knocked him out twice. If Liston pursues Ingo early, he is going to hammer him into submission with his deadly clubs. This is non debatable. Ingos only, and I mean only chance is to catch him blindsided with an element of suprise. Even then, he still has to put Liston away..and Liston in his prime was difficult to put away. Not that fat 40 year old man of 1969.

 

I think its fair to say this...

When I judge liston's era I classify it like this


Great Heavyweights: Patterson, Liston

First Class Crop: Johnson, Johannson, Folley, Machen, Williams, Moore.

2nd teir: Valdes, Dejohn, Bethea, Summerlin, Cooper, Harris.

 

ingo took a bad concusion from floyd. the late arthur mercante said it was the worst knockout he witnessed. Hand over his microphone cossel shouted over to arthur "is he dead?" ingo could never hope to be the same after that. It was a wonder performance from patterson, almost an over achievement. If ingo was chinny it was because of that knockout. prior to this ingo was an unbeaten terror who had knocked out the best two yet to be exposed heavyweights. liston did not knock out "yet to be exposed heavyweights" as good as he was the best guys he beat had ALL been exposed before.

 

Sorry Choker, but Ingo just ain't that good. Sonny is on a different level