I've just never believed that either Ali-Liston fight was on the level...this just adds to the mysterious aura of Sonny Liston.
The faster and younger man with better stamina. No amount of preparation and motivation would have allowed Sonny to overcome the deficits he had in speed and reflexes. Eddie Machen, following his draw with Cleveland Williams said, "In a way, he's tougher to fight than Liston, because he has the speed the other doesn't have. You can't walk around Cleveland the way you can Liston." Ali had speed even a peak Williams couldn't approach. In 1965, Sonny would have been five years slower than he was when Machen took him the limit. Ali's height and reach were more along the lines of the Big Cat, whose long arms posed some issues for Sonny in the early going of both their bouts. (Most of Sonny's reach was in his collarbone. His arms were not quite as long from end of collarbone to end of fist as is commonly supposed.) I just paused in the midst of composing this post to review Liston-Williams I & II. Big Cat took the opening round of each bout, but with markedly different tactics. In their first match, Cleveland won the opening stanza with aggression, and the speed of his multiple hooks. For the second fight, he carried the first three minutes by keeping it at long range, and out jabbed Sonny with his superior height, speed and longer arms. Williams did not have Ali's durability, jab or mobility, and properly executing his best punch necessitated coming within range of Liston's firepower. He didn't have the sort of long straight right Muhammad complemented his own jab with. Prior to the controversial ending in Lewiston, Ali was flying around the ring clockwise, repeatedly forcing Sonny to reset himself. One area where Foreman was vastly superior to Liston was in cutting off the ring. Sonny never really learned how to do this, something not typically necessary for him with his jab. Best for best, I can't see Liston doing much better against Ali than losing a clear UD.
Nothing was 'right' with both of those fights. Circus atmosphere for the first fight, much like a wrestling venue. Cheap production for the second fight, much like a B-rated Movie production. None of this stuff would have went on in Las Vegas or New York City.
Duo, Much agreed,,,,,,,,Sonny just too slow. But Cassius Clay (at the time) didn't set the world on fire with struggling over 185 lbs. Doug Jones. And watch his fight with (188 lb.) Henry Cooper, who pretty much chased him all over the ring. I do agree though, Sonny's plodding straight ahead style was not a good approach, against a quick-footed fighter.
To me, he just abruptly came of age on February 25, 1964, much as Holmes did near the conclusion of the opening round in Shavers I. Sometimes, that quantum leap of improvement occurs all at once. (I don't know that I've ever seen an upgrade in quality quite as drastic as that of Holmes from Arrington to Shavers I though.)
The sparring partners in both camps were not overly impressed with either fighter. Both fighters were not impressive during sports-writers visits. And when the sparring/training sessions were open to the public, very little sparring was done. Just heavy bag, speed bag, and rope skipping performances.
What if : When Sonny Liston fought Ali in 1964-1965,Liston who was supposedly born in 1932 [probably before]was 32-3 years old.Ali was 22-23 at that time. So Sonny was on the downside, while Ali was in his best years. What if their ages were reversed. Would the 33 year old Ali of the Frazer fight in the Phillipines,then lick the 23-4 year old terror that was then Liston ? We today tend to forget these valid points when we compare fighters...What say you ?
burt, Never thought of that fight scenario. Or how about, if Cassius Clay didn't have any 'white businessmen' backers to write the checks and cover the expenses, while he could train and focus on his career.
He'd probably have at least one early loss, just like Liston had. And he would have been older when he got his title shot (or in jail for refusing induction).
Interesting one. Don't know if I have seen that scenario before, strangely enough. This would be a fight. Ali wouldn't move much, but rather duke it out properly. The 225 lbs Ali of Manilla wasn't nearly as quick as 22 year old Clay, but he was strong as hell and could punch. And he was as tough and hardened as they come. In the end I think his superior ring generalship and indominatable will to win would see him win.
With all the baggage attached to Sonny Liston, law-suits and tax-liens, lawyers and his expenses, the money to be made on the first Liston vs Clay I fight was not large, not after taxes. Did Sonny lay down, or did his connections 'advise' him. The betting-odds were ripe for a move on them. Nick Tosches did get into this in his book. Cash money to be made, with no tax-attachements. The close-knit few of the Chicago 'mob-controlled gamblers' (no names mentioned) making small-to-medium sized bets (with 7-1 odds) in non-mob controlled betting parlors, to put the squeeze on them. Not sure how he came up with $300,000 in placed bets, to get a return of $2,100,000. But, Lucio Tano, a non-mob controlled 'bet-taker' in Chicago, had to pay out $70,000 to 'two' political hacks, who each placed bets on Cassius Clay, three seperate bets placed 4-days and 2-days before the fight, and one the day of the fight. Up to that point, Lucio Tano had said, no one else had layed more than $200 on Cassius Clay.
So B, what you are saying the 33year old Ali of Manilla would have licked the 24 year old Liston who was the scourge of the heavyweights in 1956.! Hmm. I think not. My point is when we compare fighters ,it should take into ACCOUNT what ages tgey were when they met. For example Ali lost to a Leon Spinks,but we disregard this loss on account of age..Why not so with Liston [at least 33-4], and Ali 24 years old..Emotions take hold in boxing lore, rather than cold facts, methinks...