Ingemar Johansson vs Sonny Liston

1. "The European heavyweight scene was fairly weak"--It seemed to come on a bit in the late fifties--Johansson ko'd Patterson and Machen, Cooper outpointed Folley, and Erskine outpointed Willie Pastrano.

This is the yearly ratings for 1957-(J) if for those who would be beaten by Ingo, (C) for those who would be beaten by Cooper, and (E) for those who would be beaten by Erskine.

champion---Floyd Patterson (J)

1---Eddie Machen (J)
2---Zora Folley (C)
3---Willie Pastrano (E)
4---Roy Harris (C)
5---Pat McMurtry
6---Nino Valdes
7---Mike DeJohn
8---Wayne Bethea (C)
9---Alex Miteff (C)
10--Ingemar Johansson

and the 1958 ratings

champion---Floyd Patterson (J)

1---Ingemar Johansson
2---Nino Valdes
3---Zora Folley (C)
4---Henry Cooper
5---Willie Pastrano (E)
6---Archie Moore
7---Eddie Machen (J)
8---Brian London
9---Sonny Liston
10--Mike DeJohn

I think the Euros were holding their own in the late fifties.

2. "Liston defeated six men on that list"--Which is why he is credited with cleaning out the division. Four of those victories were still in the future, though, the big ones over Patterson, Machen, Folley, and Harris. Hunter and DeJohn, the only men in the ratings of 1959 he had beaten, would both be brutally ko'd by Machen, as was Valdes.

 

"You decide to compare Liston's performance against the Ring Magazine top 10 in 1962 (which you failed to mention Liston knocked out Williams TWICE making him 4-0) against Ingo's in 1959."

1. I compared the two men against the ratings for the year they won the title. What exactly is wrong with that? I didn't pick and chose years.

2. Okay, Liston knocked out Williams twice, while Ingo only ko'd Machen once--and Dempsey only ko'd Willard once, Louis only ko'd Max Baer once, and Marciano only ko'd Layne once.

3. By the way, my point was that Johansson looks pretty good based on what he had done up to winning the title rather than what he would do in the future.

4. I am not disputing that Liston has a deeper resume.

5. "I am confused on what you are trying to prove above."

I noticed. You seem to be stuck into a Liston versus Johansson rut, so any evaluation of Johansson which does not completely trash the man is viewed as a slight to Liston. I am just giving my opinion that Ingo has an underrated resume. Doesn't have to mean it is as good as that of Liston. Or Joe Louis. It is just respectable.

 

:good impresive when you consider ingo was only 22-0 compared to Listons 33-1 when they won the title. I think knocking out 4 of the top ten when a guy is only 22-0 is beter than Liston Knocking out 3 of the top ten when he was 33-1. this means liston had way more build up fights and was groomed much more patiently.

when you consider liston actualy lost a fight and that the contenders he knocked out had ALL been softened up before with previous concusions etc its not so good. at 22 fights liston was 21-1 and had won 2 split decisions without facing a single "at that time" rated fighter.

 

How impressed are you then, that Nino Valdes from 1954-1961 went 7-0 with 7 knockouts against most of Europe's most prestigious heavyweights?

Dick Richardson, Karel Sys, Heinz Neuhas, Don Cockell, Joe Erkskine, Brian London, Hans Friedrich all fell victim to valdes inside the distance.

 

This content is protected

 

Just to be clear about one point--in 1959 when he got his shot at Patterson, Johansson was the #1 contender, not Liston.

 

You are correct.


Here are the Annuel Ring Ratings for 1959

Ingemar Johansson, Champion

1. Zora Folley
2. Floyd Patterson
3. Sonny Liston
4. Henry Cooper
5. Eddie Machen
6. Billy Hunter
7. Roy Harris
8. Mike DeJohn
9. Joe Erskine
10. Alex Miteff



Liston gained # 1 contender status after knocking out Zora Folley in 1960

 

You get bonus points for consistent use of multimedia in your presentations.

 

By the way, did you read the third part of the interview with Steward? He was pretty damn impressed by Liston, it seems.

Ps. McGrain, stick to one ****ing avatar will you. At least for a day or two. All this changing of avatars makes me tired all over. Make a choice and stick to it, like certain grown-ups here do.:hat

 

Copied the quotes from the main site:

"Q: If Sonny Liston had gotten his shot earlier against Floyd Patterson and if he didn’t have Ali coming up, how good could Sonny Liston have been?

A: Sonny Liston, I watched Sonny Liston when I was a teenager do something that I’ve never seen any heavyweight do—walk through the whole division almost from being the number ten guy all the way up to the champion because he was that devastating like around ’57, and ’58, and ’59. I mean he had unbelievable brutal punching power. He was mean, punched with both hands, and I think that the time that he finally got to the title, I think his best years had gone and right after he won the title he began to live the life of a middle aged wealthy man. He lost the real focus that he had earlier. ’57, ’58, and ’59 he was one of the most vicious machines probably ever in boxing, but after he won the title, from my reports and from what I gather, he started drinking a lot and he was golfing and he just lost that total edge. He was living the life of a comfortable man and then here comes exactly what the computer prints out—the thing in the world for him..

A fast, young fighter, good movement, a solid amateur background, and who had been fighting on a regular basis, so therefore when the match-up came it was just perfect timing for one, terrible timing for another guy who had slipped past his prime—but if they had fought, in like say ’58 or ’59, a prime Sonny Liston and a prime I would still say Cassius Clay or whatever—I don’t know. I don’t know. Sonny at that stage was just such a really powerful wrecking machine and I remember the fights he had with Cleveland Williams—oh my God. I don’t know, Sonny might have won if they would have fought at that time."

 

Muste be a nice read for Suzie

 

That is impressive, and apparently Nat Fleischer and his staff were impressed also, which is why Valdes was the #1 contender in 1955 and after a slump, got back to #2 in 1958. I personally would not have rated him ahead of Folley and Machen in 1958--I would have had him about #4 behind these two and Ingo.

The most impressive victory was probably the one round ko of Erskine, although of course we know that Erskine was "sandbagged" in that bout*


*Relax. I was just teasing.

 

Cooper beat Folley because, after dropping Cooper, Folley forgot his boxing and went right hand happy,in the return he iced Cooper in 2rds.
Erskine was a weak punching heavyweight, who had good boxing skills,Pastrano was a weak punching light heavy who, had good boxing skills the heavyweight won.