Frazier-Tyson-Liston

Tyson-Liston-Frazier.

 

I'm not going to argue for Tyson over Liston, because frankly I'm not sure Tyson deserves above Liston.
But Frazier is greater than them both, without question.

The excuse that Liston was 36 (the truth of which cannot be verified anyway) and facing Ali at his best is not a good one. Liston quit after six fairly tame rounds, and didn't bother to do a single round in the rematch. And as good as Clay/Ali was you have to admit that fighters with far lesser reputations than Liston coped with far more intense bedazzlings from Clay/Ali than anything put to Sonny that night. He just quit, in his only fights against a truly great bona fide heavyweight.

I think we can all accept that. So, the balance of Liston's career (ie. minus the Clay/Ali debacles) has to be something real special for him to surpass Joe Frazier on any list of great heavyweights, IMO. And it's just not special enough.
Contrary to some of the claims about Liston, he wasn't uncrowned champ for "years and years" before winning the championship. He established dominance over all other contenders in about 1960, just two years before flattening Patterson.

You can offer an opinion that Sonny Liston would have beaten Evander Holyfield but that's just speculation. In his own time Sonny performed absolutely miserably against the only fighter he faced of true ATG quality, and performed well against no one remotely as great as Holyfield.

 

Most sources say he's born in 1932, which would make him 32 years old for the first Clay fight.
I just typed "Sonny Liston encyclopedia" on google and of the first 10 encyclopedic results it gave, 9 had him listed as born in 1932. Only Brittanica had him born otherwise, in 1917, which has to be some mistake.


And yes, Ali is greater than anyone who Tyson faced. And i don't blame Liston for losing to Ali. But i do blame him for how he lost to him, which was disgracefully. Ali was great but he was by no means a very hard puncher and mostly ran for the first six rounds. Fact is that most of Ali's opponents around that time gave him a harder fight than Liston did, and those opponents were by no means great (Cooper, Banks, Terrel, Chuvalo Mildenberg etc). And he did it twice.

You say he "would've" beaten all but 5 or 6 fighters in the history of the sport. But that's just your opinion. I can also say that Douglas would've beaten all but 5 or 6 fighters the night he beat Tyson (which i don't believe, by the way). It's speculation; the facts show that he quit in a fight that was mentally a hard one but physically far from it, compared to others.

 

Frazier is greater than both.

But distinguishing who is greater between Tyson and Liston is tricky. It's a very close call. I'll think some more about it .......

 

Tyson 8-10. Had he fulfilled all his potential he could have been top 5.

Frazier 11-15. Beat comebacking Ali but short prime and dismal defence against Foreman.

Liston 15-20. I just don't what some others see.

 

Here is my case in more detail:

Frazier dominated every non-great fighter he faced, with the exception of Bonavena. But this was his 12th pro fight.
By comparison, Tyson had a close fight with Green early in his career and Liston not only had a close fight, but lost, to Marty Marshall. This result was later reversed, but the fact is that Bonavena was a top10 contender by Ring Magazine rankings when he fought Frazier, whereas Green was a fringe contender and Marshall a journeyman who lost 4 out of 5 fights by KO prior to facing Liston.

Frazier was involved involved in the fight of the century, in my opinion one of the greatest fights ever, and came out as decisive winner. By comparison, Liston quit after 6 and 1 round against Ali.

Frazier pretty much cleaned up the division (something he doesn't very often seem to get credit for) between 1968-1971. Off the top of my head, only Patterson escaped him, but then again, he lost to Quarry and Ellis (maybe somewhat controversial), both of whom were beaten by Frazier.

Sonny Liston was also very dominant although it should be noted that he only beat 5 ranked contenders during this period and in fact during his entire career (Folley, Machen, DeJohn and Patterson twice).
By comparison, Frazier beat 8 and Tyson beat 12.
Liston was being ducked, although it's worth noting that Patterson was having his trilogy with Johansson in 1959-1961.

All three had their embarresing losses. With all three they were unfocused on their boxing careers when they happened. Frazier showed a lot of heart and courage against Foreman. Tyson did the same against Douglas, almost came back from losing nearly every round. Liston quit after taking only a mild beating from Clay. I don't believe Tyson bit Holyfield with the intention to quit. I think that was just the Tyson from the streets who couldn't take being butted and outboxed again. Am i sure of it? No, no one knows whether he wanted a way out or was just blinded by fury. But the fact that he took a HUGE beating from Lewis five years later when he could've gotten out of there much earlier does say something for me. I think heart and will to win are very important factors in boxing and while Tyson does not rank as high as Frazier, i do think he ranks higher than Liston.

 

I dont draw much distinction between "better" and "greater", or "head-to-head" as some might say, and "achievements".

To me, a fighter's worth is demonstrated in his achievements, or more specifically in how he performs in his fights and against who he performs.
I dont see how there can be much seperation. Of course, I make judgments as to how good fighters are, but when it comes to assessing these great ones it's pretty much down to what they achieved and how, because it's pretty much a given that they fought world class fighters of their time.

I think it's a close call between Tyson & Liston.
Tyson's championship reign (1988-90) was about as "miserable" as Sonny's surely.

 

But Liston only managed 1 defense of his title. At least Tyson managed 9.

 

:good

 

No, Tyson managed 2.

He won the title versus Spinks, and defended against Bruno & Williams, then lost it.

His "alphabet" title reign from '86 - '88 while Spinks was biding his time, is no different from Sonny Liston eliminating the contenders while waiting for Floyd Patterson to step up to the challenge. If the WBA/WBC and IBF had been around in 1959 or 1960 with their habitual stripping of titles I'm sure Liston would have gathered at least one or two of those belts before getting Patterson in the ring.

Tyson & Liston's situations are almost identical, and they both made short work of the champs when they finally got them in the ring.

 

Legacy:

1. Frazier (Wins vs Ali, Machen, Chuvalo and Bonavena give him the edge in depth)
2. Tyson (Devestating title reign from '86 up until 'Buster' defeat)
3. Liston (The manner of his two losses to Ali and the 'mafia' hurt him here. A crushing title run, however.)

Head-to-head:

1. Liston (Indimidation factor, excellent skills, great chin and heavy hitting)
2. Frazier (Durable, tough and an awkward as hell fighting style to nullify. Best left hook in the divisions history.)
3. Tyson (Formidible as his very best, fast, accurate, a hard puncher and in possession of a solid chin. However a questionable mentality and self belief once he lost the invincibility arua, or the intimidation factor didn't work. Holyfield and Lewis fought back wereas Bruno and Biggs etc were scared.)

 

I dont see much difference in biting him out of blind fury and frustration, or biting with the actual intention of getting DQ'd. Either way, he lost control and was unable to channel himself into performing better in the face of adversity.
He's crumbled.
He bit Holyfield twice. Once after getting deducted two points. He was a man overcome with emotion, whether it fear, anger, hate, frustration. Who cares ? His behaviour made a mockery of anything resembling a boxing match, and he seemed unable or unwilling to act normal.

Personally I'm inclined to believe he really didn't want to fight. I mean, I've seen Tyson in rough fouls fights before and since, and he never resorted to anything quite as ridiculous as biting a chunk out of the man's ear.
Tyson butted, hit low, elbowed and punched after the bell at times in his entire BEFORE the Holyfield fight, (and plenty afterwards), and he took some back from certain fighters.
I think the fact that Holyfield had beat the crap out of him 6 months earlier was what really bothered him. Tyson was in much better shape for the rematch and suddenly realized he was not ever gonna walk through this guy. That's what I think happened.

Either way, he lost the plot. And that's got to be a mark against his mentality as a fighter when you compare him to the greats.

I think Tyson showed courage and toughness in taking his beating from Lewis. I think he had a different mentality that night than what he had against Holyfield.
I do NOT think he showed a will to win against Lewis, he didn't. I'm not sure he ever thought he could win that one. But I appreciated his resolve to take his beating like a man. He looked like a man on Zoloft paying pennance for his past sins, and he was way past his prime, but there was definitely some redemption made by his taking that beating as he did.

Liston's heart, will to win and courage are hard to assess. His losses to Clay/Ali may well have been fixed, so, IMO, he's perhaps guilty of selling his reputation down the river rather than showing cowardice. And there are examples of him being in tough and/or frustrating fights against others where he did not quit.
Still, I mark him down heavily for his losses to Clay/Ali. For whatever reason, he didn't show us anything much against the best opponent he ever fought. Whether he was out-of-shape, in the tank, injured or totally lacking heart, he quit once and then completely surpassed that debacle with the flop in the rematch.

 

By that reasoning Tyson knocked off 7 contenders before he met Spinks. How many did Liston beat?
Liston's sole title defence was against the man he beat in the first place, which hardly counts.
My problem with Liston is that everyone keeps banging on about how good he was, but when I see film of him he looks ponderous and slow, and I'm talking about the Williams fight (among others) where he was supposedly so devastating.
I just don't see it. The jab is there and so is the power, but Liston appeared slow-witted and unimaginative to me.
I think the best thing that ever happened to his legacy is that he lost to Ali, which because it was Ali, makes it more excusable.