I think being blasted out in 1 round 2 times vs Liston really hurts Patterson in regard to being a ATG. Not that he lost that fight, but the way it happen. I see Liston beating ATGs, but not many would be taken out in 1 round.
Yes in a word. I have given detailed analysis on this previously, which I will not repeat here. He was a small heavyweight, who did not sit naturally in any existing weight class. He was ranked in the top ten for more years than any other heavyweight champion in history, despite not having a style suited to longevity, or a physique suited to the weight class. That is an incredible run of form by any definition. Not a man well suited to the circumstances around him, but a great fighter.
Whether he is or isn't an all time great, one thing is beyond dispute. Floyd Patterson is one of finest, bravest and most honourable men who ever stepped into a Boxing ring.
"All Time Great" is a term that means different things to different people so there's bound to be disagreements. So, I guess it all depends on how you define that term. Top 10 all-time in his weight class? Top 20? Top 30? And so on. I suppose some might even think of it in a pound-for-pound way. Then it gets even more confusing.
Fringe ATG at worst. Just outside the top 10 for me. Underrated for both resume and h2h. Being a 2x champ and a gold medalist is enough to entertain the conversation of a boxer being an ATG and there's more to Patterson than just that.
I never understood the premise of rating a guy an ATG because he was the first to regain the title, he had to lose it to achieve that and many more in a similar circumstance could have done it...If you looked at it as just two wins and a loss over Ingo it's not that impressive. Well in the grand scheme of things. Also, being young and doing something? Well I don't find that as impressive as most, if he was ready he was ready and he did win the title through an ancient Moore. Then there is his title reign...
Your and @swagdelfadeel responses are my general feeling. Unfortunately the prototype peak-a-boo style Patterson used was imperfect and bent at the back which greatly reduced his effectiveness during the latter half of his career. A bad back is a damn serious handicap for a man like Patterson. Like you said he already had so much going against him. But I wanted to mention I feel like otherwise Patterson's style is suited to longevity, his ability to flow between his peak-a-boo and squaring up against opponents made him more versatile and I feel like that greatly helped him as his body aged that he was able to switch from his unique style to orthodox easier than Tyson could. If you could build the perfect heavyweight, Patterson has by far and large the fastest hands of a heavyweight, dear god he was fast. Regardless though I don't think Patterson's career was that of a fighter so poorly suited for a division with such a prolific resume who remained a contender for so very long. It's also no small feat, that like Swag said, Ali stated Patterson was the most skilled fighter he had faced. Holy ****. What a compliment.
Beyond a shadow of a doubt. To lose to Liston in the way Patterson did, and still have the stomach to rematch him? That's as brave as it gets. I cannot think of an equivalence to the losses Patterson faced where a fighter was so intent on a rematch.
Despite how he should have retired, Frazier wanting a rematch with Foreman to avenge the only man he never beat
Johannson, much as I like to bash him was not a "complete nobody". He may have been unknown yes, but he'd just smashed the no. 1 contender in a single round. Something that alluded the likes of Liston and Frazier.
