Dempsey, Liston, Holyfield, Frazier.

I will go along with that, maybe you have to credit the fighter who beats them even if they were never as bad. If you turn up feeling doomed you dont win.

 

I think that whole debate boils down to how good you think Floyd Patterson really was. I think he was about the most vulnerable heavyweight champion of all, and had been exposed as such before he met Liston.
I can't fault Liston for how he dealt with Patterson - although the rematch was hardly justifiable and proved little.

 

How much Firpo is on film ?
I've seen a few seconds of his fight with Willard, that's all.

Unskilled, yes. He bludgeoned some better skilled fighters to bits though. He certainly could have done with a bit more polish. Commentators, including Dempsey and including Firpo's trainer, made that point at the time. But his method was effective. He was far from the best challenger ever for the HW title, and far from the worst too.

 

IMO, Liston and Ali were the only two heavyweights around at the time who could be considered at all great, and both demonstrated a clear gulf between their own greatness and the abilities of Patterson.

Patterson was better than Ingo. But not by a huge margin - the trilogy was very competitive. I don't think Ingo rates highly in the ranks of former HW champions either.

^I'm not sure what to say to this.

My opinion differs.

 

I've acknowleged that Liston's performances against Ali were crap too. And, yes, there are some serious doubts about Liston's greatness.

Well, I'm not in favour of immediate rematches generally (unless the fight is very close or otherwise controversial).

Liston seemed to brush away Patterson with such ease in their first fight. Immediate rematches are usually pointless in such cases.

 

I dont think it acceptable for a world class fighter who has trained, went away in camp and sacraficed his whole life acomplishing championship status to ever enter a ring feeling a sence of doom. Any fighter beating a doomed man cant count it a great win.

Nobody puts much stock into ali beating liston in one round but most put a lot of stock into Liston doing it to patterson. they both put up the same effort. un worthy of the title.

 

was ali an intimidating force?

yes it is worse beacuse getting to the title is a lifes work, you are not suposed to chuck it in like that, world champions go down fighting like walcott and braddock. A defending champion should be past getting intimidated to reach that level. A champion can become stale and dissilusioned, just go through the motions, but that is a non effort. Its not "giving best".

he did have to put the punches together and so did ali but they both must have been disapointed with their opponent not trying.

it was not a dive but it was a non effort from a dissillusioned man. Ali was great and sharp but Liston was absent of any desire to fight that night. this tarnishes the performance. Ali beating liston in one round is never listed as his best win anymore than say the brian london win was.

 

Frazier (was dominant between 1967 and 1973, beat Ali, was only beaten by Ali and Foreman)
Holyfield (beat Bowe once, has a solid resume, though he was not so consistant)
Liston (solid resume)
Dempsey (just doesn't have the accomplishments of the rest)