Cleveland Big Cat Williams gets a title shot on Sept 26 1962 instead of Sonny Liston.

That Williams beat Herring himself doesn’t detract from my example of them both representing a similar target for Floyd Patterson.

Frank Bruno beat some of the same guys quicker than Mike Tyson did. And it did not mean bruno would beat Tyson. Mike Jameson Bruno up ended in just two rounds. Years later the same Jameson gave Tyson a longer fight than Frank eventually would, certainly second time around anyway. Proving as a target, as big men, both Jameson and Frank were similar victories for Tyson in the way Williams and Todd could be for Floyd.

 

This is essentially the crux behind why people rate Williams beyond his record.

There's a belief that Williams didn't get the opportunity to display his full potential, but in the fights he did have there's enough to see what he potentially could have been.

I firmly believe he would have beaten Patterson and Ingo. And actually I think over a 12 round distance the only person good enough to beat him before he was shot was Liston.

 

I just got your red/Todd herring reference

 

As had been said to you Williams was another level altogether than those two. One can't just just throw out anyone Floyd beat around Cleveland's height and bracket them with him. What does "stood like Williams" even mean.

Roberto Duran beat people that stood like Marciano, and taller, does that mean we should bracket The Rock in there?

No-ones saying Floyd can't beat tall guys but no one's believing he automatically beats Williams fast because he beat, of all people, the red Herring and what was the other guys name, Charlie. It wouldn't matter what camp one was in.

Also no-one was saying because Williams beat Herring a few seconds quicker he would beat Floyd. Such a shallow claim would be embarrassing.

Trying to compare Tyson's victories over Jameson and Bruno not only to each other, but parallel to Floyd's double whammy over Herring and Charlie in the way you are isn't really palatable. To say it's a stretch would be under-utilizing the word. Going to these lengths trying to sell Floyd over Williams is bizarre. I'd stick to the basics if i were you.

 

Oh dear

 

I would have liked to see those fights. Floyd vs Williams and Williams vs Ingo. They would have been exciting. I don’t share your opinion however. I base my opinion on Williams record against good fighters and films of his prime versus Billy Daniels and Terrell.

 

It was more Todd than Red.

 

We've had this convo already mate. Several times. We've also discussed Liston and Marciano and SHW fighters several times.

So I'm happy agreeing to disagree cos I really don't think either of us can bring anything new to a debate on this topic.

 

Terrell beat him the year before he was shot, so he should be added to that list. And you don't think Ali would have beaten him in 1964?

 

Always a dangerous proposition to fight a taller guy with the punch and fast hands William's had, but my best bet would be that Patterson would be quicker on the draw. Might be a classic over 3-4 rounds where both guys visit the canvas, but Patterson ultimately prevails.

 

How did you score the fight with Terrell.

It is to be assumed that Ali would have ended any reign of any boxer at that time.

 

Most viewers of the film scored the fight for Williams.

 

Lol

 

Haven't scored it, but I've never heard it's considered a robbery in any way. It just seems like it could have gone the other way as well, as most close fights.

If they had met a third time, as planned, my money would probably be on Terrell. Seeing how he was at an age where you would expect more improvement and that he could take heart from impoving from the first fight and other good results during that time.

 

AP scores it for Williams.

But I also haven't watched it.

But in a fight where the AP gave it to the other man, I don't see another evidence to declare Terrell as someone I think would take the title from Williams in this scenario.