Ken Norton vs Big Cat Williams

Oh, before the Cubs-Mets game comes on, I just wanted to add that in the National Boxing Association ratings in the same issue as the Cleveland Williams interview I posted, the NBA ratings were:

Champion: Floyd Patterson
1. Sonny Liston
2. Eddie Machen
3. Zora Folley
4. Archie Moore
5. Ingemar Johansson
6. Cleveland Williams
7. Cassius Clay

That year, in 1962, #6 rated Cleveland Williams drew with #2 rated Machen, and then Eddie suffered a mental breakdown, tried to kill himself, was sent to a psych ward and was out of boxing for a year.

Also, #3 rated Zora Folley decisioned and then was knocked out by the previously unrated Doug Jones.

The #4 rated Archie Moore was stopped by the #7 rated Clay.

The #5 rated Johansson was floored in the first and nearly stopped by the unknown, unrated Wim Snoek.

So there's a case for Williams being no less than the third best heavyweight that year. Everyone rated above him that year were either knocked out (Patterson, Foley, Moore), were nearly KOed by an unknown (Johansson), or were committed to a mental institution (Machen).

He was right up there in 62.

 

The annual Ring ratings meant nothing. Ring was a magazine. Ring had no control over who fought whom.

The National Boxing Association was the ratings body. The NBA rated Williams #6 at the time he beat Terrell.

I'm sure he was rated even higher by then when nearly everyone above him lost that year. I don't have any more issues from 1962, I'd check. But once LIston won the title, it's not like Williams was going to get a shot at the title no matter how highly he was rated. He'd already been stopped twice by Sonny.

My point is Williams was among the very best heavyweights in 1962. Arguably no worse than three. Maybe as high as two.

Don't sell Williams short based on boxrec Ring annual ratings. Those aren't even their monthly ratings, which fluctuated wildly throughout the year.

 

I'm not saying Patterson SHOULD HAVE fought Williams. Of course he shouldn't have. Liston was the deserving top rated challenger and he was better than Patterson and Williams.

But Patterson avoided Liston for a long time, and Civil Rights groups (which Patterson was a part of) and the White House didn't want him to fight Liston.

If he'd have chosen Williams instead, I'm saying I think Williams wins.

Williams posed nearly all the same threats to Patterson that Liston did. And if Williams attacked Floyd like he did the first round against Liston, I think Floyd would've lost rather quickly.

 

Why would Williams' ranking take a leap up to #3 based on other fighters' wins? - especially since the fighter that Patterson lost to was already rated over Williams to begin with? If anything, I'd say that Williams' ranking would be lowered by the arrival of new fighters crashing the top 5.

And why would simply struggling en route to a win mean that a fighter's ranking should be dropped? - Williams had his fair share of unexpected struggles with "lesser" fighters too, just like every other fighter that ever lived.

 

Patterson was knocked off his feet by Pete Rademacher in Pete's very first pro fight so I have to believe Cleve would have put the finisher on Floyd.

 

Everything you say in this post is, Incorrect. Cleveland Williams was one of the hardest punchers who ever lived. Williams knocked out over 50 fighters, hitting one opponent so hard he broke the fighters back, the guy had to go around on crutches for the rest of his life. Ken Norton got KOd every time he fought a puncher.

 

Norton was chinny but Big Cat did not show elite power when he moved up. Norton stopped Garcia in rematch, stopped a past it Quarry and Ron Stander (who KO Shavers) and KO1 Duane Bobick,Larry Middleton and Boone Kirkman not a great batch but Williams was also stopped by many and I think Ken had the better technique....could Williams be a danger to Norton yes but I think Norton would better the greater danger of the 2

 

People didn't have boxrec in 1962. People didn't know how everyone's boxing careers would end up. Cleveland Williams was a rising contender. Everyone above him in the ratings in 1962 lost (including Patterson) except for Sonny Liston and a bloated, shopworn Johansson.

Williams was a powerful, ferocious talent. Anyone with eyes could see that Floyd Patterson would have a terrible time trying to beat that guy.

It's like, today, if someone said, well, Anthony Joshua hasn't beaten anyone to prove that he'd knock out Ruslan Chagaev. Chagaev has better wins. Well, all you need is a pair of eyes to tell you Chagaev would have a helluva time trying to beat Anthony Joshua.

Anthony Joshua could end up losing some decisions and never become champ. But, RIGHT NOW, if anyone thinks Anthony Joshua wouldn't have a helluva chance and blowing out Ruslan Chagaev, they'd be crazy.

And Chagaev hasn't been bounced off the canvas more than dozen times - like Patterson was. And Joshua only has 14 wins, not 54 WINS (like Williams had).

Patterson and Williams never fought. Trying to pick a winner between them in 1962 is like trying to pick a winner between two fighters today. If you took sixth-rated Cleveland Williams (coming off his stoppage win over Terrell) and the champion Floyd Patterson (coming off his win over McNeeley) and reviewed how they both looked and where they were at that point in their careers ... OF COURSE WILLIAMS could win.

Williams was on the cusp of a title shot in 1962. Everyone ahead of him was falling by the wayside. Many important figures were encouraging Patterson not to fight Liston. Williams was right there.

But, to his credit, Patterson chose Liston. However, the moment Floyd got knocked out, Cleveland's prospects of getting a title shot were essentially over.

As long as Sonny Liston was champion, no matter how high Cleveland climbed in the ratings, he wasn't going to get a title shot. People had seen that fight twice. Williams had been stopped twice. That was that.

Saying "on film Cleveland Williams' win over Billy Daniels (when Liston was champ) is underwhelming" means nothing.

If Cleveland looked bored decisioning Billy Daniels, it's totally understandable. No matter who he fought, he wasn't going anywhere with Liston as champ.

Everything changed after Sonny got the title.

But, anyone who just assumes Floyd Patterson beats the much more powerful, larger and very hungry Cleveland WIlliams in 1961/1962, IMO, is wrong.

Patterson never beat anyone as dangerous as Cleveland Williams was during his reign.

If Cleveland Williams fought Patterson before Liston got to Floyd, he wouldn't enter the ring bored like he was against Daniels.

I don't see Patterson beating Cleveland Williams. Size, style and powerwise, Williams was all wrong for Patterson.

 

What? Since nearly everyone above him lost, his rating should go lower? That makes no sense at all.

Liston was rated #1. He won the title, so he was no longer in the contender ratings. He was the champ.

Machen was rated #2 (Williams #6) when they met, and it ended in a draw. After the fight, Machen went crazy, tried to kill himself and was committed to a mental institution and was out of boxing for more than a year.

Zora Folley was rated #3, and he got knocked out by a light heavyweight (Doug Jones) who wasn't ranked.

Archie Moore was #4 and was 175 years old (or thereabouts) ... and he got stopped by #7 rated Cassius Clay.

So how do you figure Williams should go DOWN from #6 in the ratings after that?

Thankfully, the NBA didn't agree with you.

Actually, Williams kept climbing during Liston's reign. When Liston lost to Clay, and Ali and Liston agreed to a rematch, Cleveland Williams was rated #2 only behind Liston (who was rated #1). Williams was rated ahead of Terrell. Ahead of Patterson. Ahead of Machen.

And Williams was supposed to fight Ernie Terrell (who he'd knocked out and lost a split decision to) for the vacant WBA belt, but Williams got shot by the police.

So Eddie Machen got the fight with Terrell.

https://news.google.com/newspapers?...AIBAJ&sjid=iycEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5058,6536612&hl=en

From 1954 (when he was 20 years old and was a late sub in a fight) to 1968 ... a span of 14 years ... Cleveland Williams only lost to Liston and Ali and that split-decision to Terrell (who he'd already stopped), in a fight that could've gone either way.

It's too bad Williams got shot and never fought Terrell for the vacant WBA belt.

Like Ken Norton in the second half of the 1970s, through the first half of the 1960s, Williams was arguably no worse than the third best heavyweight at any point. And, in some of those years, he was probably no worse than number two.

If Patterson had ever defended against Williams, IMO, Cleveland would've become the champ.

 

Excellent post!:good

 

Well, Ali and Liston did. And, from the time Cleveland was 21 to nearly 35, only Ali and Liston did.

(Terrell edged him, but Williams also stopped Terrell and remained rated above Ernie until Cleveland was shot.)

Lumping in a couple fights when he was a teen, and a couple fights when he was a middle aged man with most of colon removed after getting gunned down ... doesn't tell the story ... and doesn't paint an accurate picture any more than saying Mike Tyson got stopped by Danny Williams and Kevin McBride, so how good could Tyson have really been in the late 80s.

In the early 60s, Williams was among the two or three best heavyweights in the game.

When Ali and Liston were up there, Williams was three. When Liston and Patterson were, IMO, Williams was number two. Cleveland would've beaten Floyd.