Sonny Liston beat a prime Cleveland Williams twice. Deal with it. Bob Satterfield and Sylvester Jones did not beat a prime Williams. They beat a teenage/last minute substitute lighter Williams.
I would make Williams a solid 2-1 favorite, mainly because Harris had no power at all. Harris was quick on his feet, quicker than Williams, and he had a good jab and a fast and accurate right, to win he would have to keep moving and outjab the much taller and longer-armed Williams, and I have a tough time seeing that happen, although Harris beating Baker indicates to me he might have a chance here. My take is that Williams was a better boxer than most credit him, but that his power is overrated. And watching on film, I don't think Williams was all that "catlike" quick. Harris looks faster a foot and with quicker reflexes to me, but he is much smaller and has no power at all, and off the KO's by Cleroux, is not all that rugged.
Edward Bob baker was far past his prime when he fought Harris in 57. Coming off one sided losses to Harold carter and besmanoff. His hand injuries were so bad by 57 that he wasn't even able to train for fights anymore. Even so he still managed to put Harris on the floor. Baker was not a big puncher
In 1957 Williams was not fighting guys as good as a faded Bob Baker. He was fighting guys like 4-5 john mason, 2-6 cliff Gray and 7-2 J.D Marshal. By 1959 Harris has the considerable edge in quality of opposition. Harris opponents of 1957 alone had a combined record of losing just 38 of 192 fights. For the same year fighting one more times than Harris, Williams guys had 92 wins against 48 losses. .... And get this they both fought J.D Marshal with exactly the same result both beating J.D in the second round. Harris in 1956 and WIlliams eight months later. I suspect the 1963 version of Williams has a bigger chance against a 59 Harris but in 59' it's a closer fight.
I wish we could ask J.D Marshal.. He fought both. So did Ponce deleon. Williams and Harris recorded equal results against both guys.
And I'd go right to my bookie and lay a thousand on Big Cat and pocket $500... Outside of my '77 bet with four co-workers, $25 bucks apiece Young-Foreman which I got 4-1 on and, collected a 'cool' $400 , I've only went big-time twice with my late bud 'Mike'. $500 bucks apiece on Holmes against ****ey. $500 bucks apiece on Benitez against Duran. Didn't win $500 on either fight because Larry and Wilfred were favored in both fights but...still sweet.
Harris is one of the few alive from that time, but he really did not beat anyone on Cleveland Williams level. Harris' best win might be a declining Bob Baker. I agree. Harris didn't have enough defense to last or offense to make Cleveland Williams do something he did not want to do. Williams could box. He beat Terrell and dew with Machen. Two guys who were better than Harris I see Williams via TKO or KO inside 6 rounds
Mcgrain save me from this madness. Have you ever heard logic like this before? I wanna bite off my finger nails
https://news.google.com/newspapers?...AIBAJ&sjid=EogDAAAAIBAJ&pg=3507,6648152&hl=en Interesting Quote here by The Victorian Advocate Oct 30 1957 "Roy Harris returned to the wars against Willie Besmanoff in Houston, but a stablemate of the cut n shoot clouter has come on to such an extent that boxing men now rate him far ahead of the backwoods school teacher who beat willie pastrano. His name is Cleveland Williams, he is considered the most dangerous heavyweight in the business. If Harris requires any protection, the dope is that Williams would be the policeman with considerable authority. The mere suggestion that they qualify by first beating Williams will keep any toughies away from Harris. Williams is a 25 year old negro with reflexes as quick as a sneeze, the size and strength of a longshoreman, graceful movements of a panther, and a hatred of every chin in the male pulgilism system except his own." This article also claims Williams knocked out Bob Baker out cold with a left hook in Miami, 1954 days before Baker fought Archie Moore. While wearing 16 OZ headgear.
Why did they not get the best of Williams? He didn't decline until the shooting. But a more experienced Terrell did outbox him in the rematch. Why continue to pretend that result didn't happen. And speaking of "not at their best", the only guy you can make that argument for was Machen, who was still good but never really recovered fully from the horrible Ingo fight.
"past his prime" somewhat "far" He was only losing to top men like Jackson, Carter, and Machen other than Besmanoff, who lost a lot but Willi had his moments. He also defeated Miteff, DeJohn, and McMurtry, went to a split decision with Moore, and lasted longer with Liston than almost any of the other contenders did, and actually had been world rated at light-heavy before he moved up to fight Baker. Baker still had enough left to beat Chuvalo and Richardson in 1958.
What isn't ever explained here is why Williams was so poorly managed. It simply doesn't wash with me that just everyone was afraid of him. The same guys got into the ring with Liston and Valdes. Was DeJohn, for example, afraid of Williams but not of Liston? What about Folley who seemed to fight almost everyone else? Trial horses like Besmanoff fought everyone, but somehow missed Williams. Why? Except for the Liston fights, Williams doesn't even seem to have tried to move prior to 1961. It is really hard for me to understand why. He was not a dull fighter. A big punching heavyweight like Williams should have been catnip for the TV guys, but he was rarely on TV even against the trial horse types until 1961.