60 Liston vs 88 Tyson and which is historically above

Head to head is an easy call,,Liston by KO.

 

Does it? 15-6 here favour Tyson in terms of legacy. Actually, 16-6 if you include me.

I think most have the outmost respect for how he demolished a solid long time contender like Berbick and also a lineal HW champion, among others. It might be in contrast to those who have that Tyson as unbeatable and TBE that it can seem like he's put down.

 

Personally yes, i think it does. Sure, he sure has his huggers but he's got a lot of critics/haters that have trouble assessing him fairly too. He's one of the many guys who stirs up lots of emotion vs balance and gets judges as such by many.

16-6 proves my point, if anything. They are not miles apart in a heavyweight list but Tyson clearly has the better resume.

 

Yeah, he clearly does. And the votes are clearly on his side.18-6 now, me included.

 

I take the vote differently. Tyson clearly has the better resume yet 25% have voted he doesn't. One quarter. That's tells a story to me.

 

I don't think that's an unreasinable deviation. It could depend on how one views losses. The onoly one Liston lost to near his prime was Ali, the GOAT for most. The manner of the losses are, as you know, a chapter apart.

Tyson on the other hand lost his title to someone whose next best win might be McCall. That might swing it for some.

In terms of wins, it's Tyson hands down. And maybe those are what the TS refers to. But even then it might be more about overrating Liston's wins than denigrating Tyson's.

I have a hard time understanding why so relatively many pick FOTC Frazier to beat Ali at his best, seeing how close a declined Ali pushed him, but that is probably in most cases due to what they feel for Frazier rather than Ali.

 

Tyson has a better resume, but I would bet on Liston to beat him. Not a good style for Mike.

 

Is it that clear tho? Mike's best win is Michael Spinks, Sonny's is Floyd Patterson. Floyd is a better win in terms of legacy, but not by much. Both KOed their rivals in dominating fashion. Quite similar top wins to be fair. Mike also has post prime Larry Holmes.

On the other hand, Cleveland Williams, Niño Valdés, Zora Folley and Eddie Machen aren't much worse than Berbick, Thomas, Smith or Ruddock.

Yes, Mike has more title fights and defences, but we need to remember, we can't compare these two numbers really. Mike won his belt off of a paper title holder. Sonny wasn't able to do so - there was only 1 champion in the division, who happened to avoid him for a bit. He was cleaning the division like Tyson did, but without a title attached to it. Both defeated similar amount of Top 10 competition. When it comes to the only thing comparable, so the lineal championship, Sonny has 1 title defence and Tyson has 2. Again - not that big of a difference.

Liston lost his title to the GOAT, Mike was dethroned by a Top 10 contender. Mike was 23 at the time, Sonny was around 34. They both never reclaimed the real championship.

I would say it's actually crazy, how similar their resumes are. As I pointed in my previous post, I think Mike's resume is better, but not by that much.

 

Tyson was on top for only 2 years or so. That hurts him if you value longevity

 

You also have Tucker, Bruno, Biggs, Tubbs, Holmes and Williams for Tyson.

 

Legacy...of course 88 Tyson since that negates Douglas loss, post prison career, and massive early 2000s decline

The thing is Liston might just do him like Patterson, both 71 reach, Patterson was faster, Tyson had the potential to do more damage but would have a whole night of things not going his way, we never saw the 88 against a legitimate bad man with power, jab, and overall skill level like Liston

At the same time there is always the chance 88 Tyson could KO him in the first round

Overall slight advantage to Liston