Then I'll help you out and you can when you have time check out if I'm right or not. I'm looking at the NBA ratings, since that was the only official one at the time. Fo what it it worth, the Ringa rankings were very similar. Cleveland Williams was in and out of the lower top 10 for Patterson's first reign, at nr. 8 at the highest. During the second one he reached nr. 5. So there was never a time when he was even close to the top contender, so this is one of the strangest myths in boxing- Yes, he was more deserving than at the very least Rademacher, but then goes for a LOT of fighters at the time. So all that goes for the Williams argument is that he had ripped muscles and a cool hairdo. It's that bad. Liston reached nr. 4 during the latter stages of Patterson's first reign, but figured in the first time in august 1958. So he wasn't ranked for even a year during that reign and never higher than 4. He was nr. 1 for all of the second one, but Patterson had a rematch clause with Ingo, which meant that Liston had to wait until late 1961 in any case. So at most you can say he was ducked for 7-8 months, during which time Patterson took a gimme defence against the unranked McNeely. Machen was nr. 1 ranked for about a year after Jackson lost that spot after losing hos title challenge to Patterson. Patterson opted for nr. 3 ranked Roy Harris instead. So here's the main issue really. Folley was just nr. 1 for a few months in mid '58, then Ingo took that place by defeating Machen. Actually even Brian London leapfrogged Folley in the rankings in the late months of '58 after beating Pastrano. but sank to nr. 5 after losing to Cooper in January of '59, so how good a defence that was at the time depends really on when it was signed. So, Patterson defences were: 1957 Jackson, nr. 1 Rademacher, unranked 1958 Harris nr. 3 1959 London nr. 2 or nr. 5, depending on when it was signed. Ingo nr. 1 1961 Ingo, nr. 3 or 4 depending on when it was signed, but in any case there was a rematch clause in place. McNeely, unranked 1962 Liston nr. 1 So at no time was Williams remotely first in line. Machen was after Patterson's defence to Jackson and should have gotten the shot that Harris got instead. Folley was only nr. 1 for a short while and and could have been below London when that fight was signed and was certainly below Ingo, so never clearly first in line. Liston was bypassed first by Ingo and then also by the unranked McNeely. Ingo bypassed him due to the rematch clause, but McNeely was only a gimme defence, so Liston should have had that shot instead. But the main reason he had to wait so long for a title shot were Patterson's and Ingo's rematch clauses. Here's the link to NBA:s ratings: https://boxrec.com/media/index.php/National_Boxing_Association#Quarterly_Ratings:_By_Year
Great, just finished reading it. I surrender this fight to you my friend, you really went to town on it. I was thinking primarily of Folley when I said that, as far as rankings go, but had suspicions that Patterson was afraid of those other guys because of their fighting abilities. You surprised me with Machen though. I don't understand why that one seriously didn't happen either. Jackson, Johansson, and Liston will forever be the only three boxers Floyd was justified in fighting. Rademacher and McNeeley we're downright unforgivable. So kind of what I meant was at the very least, Williams, Folley, and the like were more deserving of title shots than those guys.
A lot of guys were more deserving than Rademacher and McNeely, but Williams wasn't near the top of that list, so I don't understand why his name always pops up. That Harris got the shot instead of Machen was probably because he was white and therefore more money. Harris was unbeaten at that point and came off a win against Pastrano, so at that point he was a respectable contender even though Folley and Machen ranked higher. But it wasn't levels between as when Liston was nr. 1. I don't know where the notion has come from that Machen and Folley was that awe-inspiring. They were the two top contenders, but nothing points to them being seen as anything remarkable. And they weren't in fact more remarkable than that they would lose to Cooper and Ingo that year. Yes, Patterson passed over both the top contenders that year, but neither was in any way outstanding like Wills or Liston. I can't see that the Patterson camp had much reason to fear them and believe that Harris would be much easier - so probably it was just a question of who brought the most money to the table. In the SI article after the fight, they wrote that Harris was probably the best contender out there even though he was only ranked nr. 3, so he he doesn't seem to have been regarded really as an easier touch at the time. But Floyd did pass over the nr. 1 contender, so it can be labelled a duck. But not one of the worst ones, certainly.
And I see the logic in saying that a champion should never defend against anyone but the most deserving contender and that fights against lesser opponents should be non-title fights. Like SRR did when WW champion. But I can't understand why this kind of criticism is more or less exclusively aimed at Patterson, when just about every other HW champion has defended against fighters that weren't the top contender, or even close to it. In fact, Marciano might be the only champion who is almost exempt from this criticism. He bypassed his nr. 1 only once, to defend against the nr 2. But he is more or less unique in this regard.
I actually have the same criticism for Charles, Ali, Foreman, Holmes, Michael Spinks, Tyson, and even Joe Louis.
Fair enough then. I'd say that Ali's first reign is beyond any real reproach, though, even according to these standards. When he faced London, Cooper at al, it was because he couldn't get fights in the US against the top contenders because of the Vietnam controversy. He was slated to face Terrell in early '66, but that fell through because no venue in the US would host the fight, so he faced Chuvalo instead and then went to Europe to face the top guys there.
Norton and Young were the top two contenders in 1977 and for some reason neither got a shot. I've also heard that Ali ducked Foreman in that same time frame. I don't know if that's actually true or not, but considering Ali became more careful about his opponents at this time, I wouldn't be surprised.
I agree about his first reign. It mostly pertains to later in Ali's second reign. And since you brought it up, I just had to add how fun it was seeing Ali fight all over the world in the mid 60s.
