if liston had beat clay.....

because he had nothing but a bag workout in 4 years. Patterson froze both times. four years is a long time to go without getting hit back. Liston was younger but he was out of practice. He could not posibly maintain his 1960 form without taking a punch back in 4 years!

look at the guys sonny fought between 65-70. They were a lower level of competition but helped liston rebuild. by the clark fight sonny was close to world class. It wasnt where hed been in 1960 but he was beter prepared for a compettive fight by then than against ali in 64'.

I am still not talking about a good level of form, just capable. chuck wepner went all the way with Liston the same time green joe bugner stopped him. billy joiner was going the distance against Liston yet hubert hilton could knock Joiner out and he only lasted one round against henry cooper. zech and roger rischer were beaten more impresivly by folley and brian london around the same time.

 

You can keep up a good shape by training hard and sparring. What went through Patterson's mind is only speculation on our part, what isn't is that he flattened him twice like no man did before or after. This is revisionism of the most pathetic kind.

And I love how you first say that anyone who could last 5 rds with him could have taken him, and in the next post you make a big deal out of that he (when much older) went beyond 5 rds with opponents that were stopped earlier by other fighters. So if he flattens them early it means he's shot, and if he doesn't it means he's shot. Gotta love that one.

You're just looking for an excuse as to why big, bad Sonny got his ass handed to him. And you're making a fool out of yourself doing it.

 

During those four years he fought Williams, Machen, Folley, Westphal, Harris and King, beside the the Patterson fights. Make it four years and two days and you can add another eight rounds against King. How is that "nothing but a bag workout". :huh

 

ok, let me be frank.


1961- howard king lasted 3 mins 53 seconds. he was not rated.
1961 - AL westphal lasted 1min 58 seconds. he was not rated.
1962-floyd patterson lasted 2.05
1963-floyd patterson lasted 2.09.

So through out 1961, 1962 and 1963 Liston had 10 minuets of fighting without taking one serious punch in return. It was no preparation for facing a top class contender.

 

You can say that just about every dominant fighter. Roy Jones to name one, Tyson to name another. ****, Foreman must have been a rusty wreck when he used Frazier and Norton to wipe his ass.

And had he had trouble or went the distance with any of these guys, you're MO would be to say: "That Liston struggled with xx, who was more easily beat by xx, just shows how Liston was declining". (Just as you have already done concerning his post-Ali career). Instead you use Liston's dominance as proof of his decline. How can one hedge himself better?:yep

Ps. You haven't answered my post just previous to the one you answered here. It, among other things, made fun of your double standard to make a big deal out of Liston going the distance with lesser opponents, while you previously had stated that anyone taking him past five rounds would have beaten him in 1964.

 

I think an elite level fighter who lasted beyond five rounds against a champion who had just 10mins of action spread over 3 years stands a good chance, whats wrong with that?

If Liston flattens them early he is not maintaining the level he aquired against the firm opposition he faced in 1960 who at least gave him some resistance. a rematch with folley or machen in 1962-63 would have been enough to stop a decline. Too many walk overs are a waste of time. Patterson II was pointless, a waste of a year.

Liston later did face fighters who lasted beyond 5 rounds with him in his comeback but they were not elite fighters so Liston kept winning. whats wrong with that? those kind of fights were beter prep than King, westphal and patterson.

Leotis martin was a step up and look what happened there.

 

liston woulda beaten henry cooper/karl mildenburger/chuvalo in 65/buster mathis/.....maybe frazer woulda beaten him,,,

 

You said that Liston would be takken by the next guy who lasted five rounds with him would take him. You're onlly reason for saying this was his dominance. Not a very strong one. In fact, he KO'd his next opponent after Ali in the 7:th. This after less than one round of action for almost two and half years.

You are really clutching. This was almost six years later, when Liston was closing in on 40. And the only defeat the "just waiting to be taken" Liston had after the Ali fights. In fact, the only time he had been close to be defeated after those.

 

B.J what planet are you on!!!! I said the next chalenger, as in a genuine top rated guy who wanted to win, not an ex champ who lost his mojo or an unrated dude like king and westphal.. gerhard ****in zech wasnt anywhere near world title chalenger status anymore than peter mcneely was when tyson fought him. WTF!

name one post 1965 opponent liston faced who was near leotis martin's level? I dare you! richer? zech??? martin was the first rated non champion Liston faced since 1960!

 

Again, your approach is something else: You claim something without any proof and then try and make out like your claim is validated since there aren't any absolute proof to the contrary. Are you a creationist as well?

Bottom line is that nothing supports your line of reasoning, if anything the facts are against it since fighters in the 30's that are on a serious slide don't go nearly six years unbeaten.

Again: If all you have is a defeat Liston suffered six years after his loss to Clay, you have nothing really.

I'm only going in circles here, so I'll leave it at this.

 

Yeah, the same "evidence" that Duran, Frazier, Tyson etc were all in **** condition when they lost, the same "evidence" that Dempsey really dived (but Johnson of course didn't, because that would devalue Dempsey's win over Willard) - and so on, and so on.

 

:good

 

Its not all I have. I told you Liston had only 10 minuets of action in 3 years without taking a punch in return. You have no answer because its true..

I know why you are “going to leave It”, you cant name one decent fighter Liston beat after Ali who was any better than wesphal or howard king. That’s fine, I know you accept this.

 

The evidence for Listons poor training habits before the Ali fight is prety comprehensive. It is nearly as well documented as Tyson's behaviour before the Douglas fight.

I think that if you push the issue, you will probably eventualy be forced to conceed it.