Could Floyd Patterson have been the best LHW ever?

As for any possible improvements on Moore's part after the Charles fights, I'd say that maybe he got better conditions for preparing and overall life circumstances since he didn't find that real consistency until the 50's. I agree that it's unlikely that his top level improved from those fights.

And, yes, predictions are always tricky and will often end up wrong. Patterson is a bit easier, I think, since he was so consistent. In his whole career he only lost clearly to one fighter who was a clear notch or two below ATG, and that fighter still packed a legit game changer in his right hand. Like a 50's Wilder, but with actual proven top fighters as KO victims - not a near 40-year old who looked good against mediocre opposition but never really beat anyone.

There was no one around at LHW before Foster who had that X factor, and certainly no fighters of the quality of Liston and Ali that he spotted that much size too.

Foster and Patterson at LHW would have been one hell of a fight.

 

I agree Patterson maintained a high level of performance for an incredibly long period of time and am on record on this site as posting, that whilst I don't rate him higher than average at HW, I consider him underrated by most relative to his size.

I maintain it's more than 50% likely Patterson would not have reigned unbeaten at LHW for 12 years, consistently beating top contenders until and including Foster, had he resolved to stay at LHW for as long as he could make it without being significantly weakened (which I'm not sure is 12 years), for the reasons given in my previous post.

I have said I think he would be an ATG at LHW under those circumstances and that top 5 all time seems reasonable, though. In my view, I'm arguing for Patterson at LHW (indeed my first post in this thread was a response to Saintpat, doing exactly that), not against.

Top 5 of all time is exceptionally good. For reasons of relative quality and circumstance, I just don't think he would have quite amassed the record to surpass that of Charles at LHW (in reality, no other fighter in history did), that's all.

 

Yeah, reasonable. If we say he beats Moore when he did beat him but for the LHW title and Foster won it when he did in real life, it would have be an 11,5 year reign for Patterson. In the top 3 for me, especially seeing how Moore gets bumped, with an argument for top spot. Depends on how bad the loss to Foster was, though. If he gets run over twice as he was by Liston, the reign will end on a bad note. Have a very hard time seeing that, though.

As for the merit for the Moore win, we should not forget that Patterson was still developing so he wasn't at his peak either. And it was an easy win.

The exact value of that win and Foster's over him, in this scenario, would probably be an eternal discussion.

 

If he beat Moore at LHW in 56, reigned as unbeaten champion consistently beating the best contenders up until and including Foster, he'd likely be my GOAT at LHW. Same scenario, except he loses to Foster at the end of the reign, then my best guess is I'd have him at #2, but that would depend on who and when he defended against between Moore and Foster.

If he had resolved to stay at LHW for as long as he could make the weight without being significantly weakened, I think there is less than a 50% chance that eithee of the above scenarios would have been the outcome, for the reasons I've given.

 

I'd have a bit higher probability, but only guesswork of course. Yours is eminently reasonable, I'd say.

 

I think Patterson was utterly brilliant relative to his size.

To think it more than 50% likely he'd be the first boxer in history to reign unbeaten as the true champion of a division below HW for 12-years, whilst consistently defending against the best contenders, you must think him even more wonderful than I do and consider his size at HW an even bigger disadvantage than I do.

Which makes for a refreshing change, as I tend to find most posters views are on the opposite side of mine to yours, in those regards.

 

Hey, someone has to be overrating Floyd here. Patterson that is. The slot of overrating Mayweather is already taken.

But to clarify, I'd only give it over 50% in the event he was determined to hold the LHW title as long as possible and create his legacy there. In actual reality, I have a bit of a hard time seeing any scenario where he wouldn't go up to HW full time after 5-7 years at the most as LHW champion. Well, Moore stayed as LHW champ for 8 years even though he was much older, so maybe some kind of possibility...

But anyhow, the title of the thread is "Could Patterson have become the best LHW ever", so I'm going all in on whether he could or not if that was what he really strived for.

 

Didn't he start at MW? And moved up thru LHW to HW? I would think that answer would be no considering he never became a champion at the weight despite campaigning there

 

I'm not even 50% certain that Patterson could make LHW by the mid 60's and perform to the same level that he did in reality, that level that makes us both rate him so highly relative to his size, let alone defend against the best LHWs for over a decade without a single slip up, if he could.

That said, if the question is could he have, rather than on the balance of probability would, my answer would be yes.

 

Best ever? Maybe not?

But if had the same power at LHW that he did at HW... well, now, he's basically a LHW Mike Tyson. He'll probably take some losses (as would anyone in such a stacked division), but still.

 

It's of course impossible to know for sure how someone would react to something he didn't try in real life, but Moore kept defending at LHW despite being as high as 200 lbs for his non-title fights. And he was in his 40's by then. Pastrano, who wasn't known for his discipline, was in the upper 180's since the mid 50's when he didn't have to make weight and won the LHW title in 1963. His weight seems to have gone down in general in the early 60's, though, so maybe he just took care of himself better,

Patterson was 188 in his very last fight and maybe he could have stayed in the 180's his whole career if he didn't take the decision to bulk up after his first loss. So the step down to 175 lbs wouldn't have been bigger than for the likes of Moore and Pastrano.

 

Some seriously great discussion between Bokaj and Greg. Great stuff.

 

Assuming he could make weight, I see him being an excellent light heavyweight. I think if he and Moore fought at LHW in 1956, Patterson still beats him. That would make Patterson the LHW champion. I could see Patterson campaigning at LHW and HW. But if he also fought at heavyweight, obviously he would have had his eye on the heavyweight title and if he won the HW title, likely would have to relinquish the LHW title. And had he done that, it would have been pointless to continue to fight at light heavyweight as there would be nothing to gain if he couldn't hold the title. If Moore had beaten Marciano, Moore likely gives up the LHW title and fights at heavyweight the rest of his career. Or Charles winning the HW title. He never went back down to LHW.

 

Yeah, fair point on the comparison with Moore, I made the same point in response to Saintpat in my first post in this thread.

On the other hand, there are those who believe having to drain from 192lbs to 175lbs, in the day before fight weigh in era, contributed to RJJ appearing to get old overnight (well, specifically over the space of a single fight, post Ruiz). Either way, there are many examples of HWs in history who would have been fine 10-15lbs lighter than their actual career weights and many cases where they would have been totally different fighters 10-15lbs lighter. As you allude to, neither of us know for certain how strong Floyd would have been at 175lbs throughout his career. My guess is that as his mid 20s gave way to his late 20s, he would no longer have been the same wonderful, explosive fighter at 175lbs that you and I have seen footage of, though I'm far from certain in that guess.

And, so as not to dominate this thread any more with our discussion, I'll conclude my input to our exchange by saying, that's where our views differ on this matter, in degrees of balance of probability.

We're not that far apart and I've enjoyed our discussion. Always good to know of fellow Patterson fan posters on this board.

 

I think he could take Foster