Ingemar Johansson vs Sonny Liston 1959

A few posters claimed that there was no chance in hell that Ingo could stop Liston because Liston ate Williams best shots without blinking. If you don't believe that those were indeed his best shots, you are apparently deluded.
Jason Thomas made an excellent post about those punches.
It looks like Liston read the shots and minimized the impact either by partly blocking them or by rolling with them. I think you get the point.. Just because it's Cleveland Williams doesn't mean that every punch he lands is an automatic knock out.

 

So you're acknowledging that Sonny Liston was highly skilled with great defensive abilities.Added to Sonny's
all-time great punching power this is another reason why he would beat Johansson.

 

All you've done, literally this entire thread (and under your alt account Bah Lance) is "cherry-pick certain facts from one fight and then ignore them in other fights" just like your buddies Jason Thomas and Choklab.

For instance, comparing Ingo and Williams' respective performances against Machen as a guage of how they would fair H2H. London did much worse than Williams against Machen, "Machen dominated the bout as London was little more than a punching bag for the American. London retired in his corner after 5th round, complaining that his nose felt like it was broken." so Ingo wipes the floor with London right? Instead he got knocked down (and virtually out on his feet to the point where the referee says he would've stopped it, had the bell not rung), and retired.

But no let's just ignore that comparison, and accuse others of cherry-picking facts.

You're a clown.

 

Oh for goodness sake not this old rubbish again.How about ''let's not forget how Sonny '' fought for several
rounds with a broken jaw in only his EIGHTH fight ! ''Let's not forget '' how Liston kept his nerve while having
his nose bloodied by Cleveland Williams and won that fight so conclusively.
Stop trying to impugn Sonny Liston's courage.The man fought every leading contender while waiting
to fight for the title,hardly the behaviour of a coward.
To question the courage of any man who achieved success as a professional boxer is truly asinine.
Liston retired from the bout because he had torn a tendon in his shoulder.So what was he supposed
to do ? Risk permanent disability to impress a hate-filled creep like Robert Lypsyte ? Yeah Robert
Lypsyte,judging a man like Liston from the safe side of the ropes ! Get outta here !!!

 

Whist London is a decent win on paper I don’t think anyone defending Ingo on this thread has denied he was nearly stopped in the dying moments of a fight he had won well. Oftentimes, the very last bout of a career is off limits so far as comparisons usually go but then when one is clutching at straws they reach for this kind of thing.

Some might just as easy say That Machen having a much better time against London than ingo had must show how far away ingo was from the pinpoint knockout artist he was in his prime?

if Ingo lost one micro second of timing it would be understandable. He was not famous for being a serious trainer after all.

if you watch the knockdown sequence, London cleverly blindsided ingo. Just one of those things. A late error.

The amount of people who do not count the Golota fights against Riddick Bowe should support reason enough to excuse Ingo against London. Especially when Riddick won very little of those encounters.

Ingo himself said:

“The London win was no fond memory. I had the fight won all through, for eleven rounds, two minutes and fifty four seconds. Then he nails me with a good one, and it was all he managed all night, and he had me literally hanging in the ropes at the end of the fight. It looked awful. I won that fight a million points to one. - and he came out of it looking good! After that I hung em up.”

 

"Your buddies in this thread , , , are painting the narrative that Eddie was never the same after his loss to Ingo, right. So which one is it?"

First, my opinions are my opinions, period. If someone agrees with me on something, that is cool. If they don't, that is okay also.

As for what you are saying here, there is no contradiction. Machen does look more formidable to me in the 1956 films I have seen, against Summerlin and in the KO of Valdes. His KO of Valdes is his most impressive effort I have seen. He looks like a coming champion. By the 1960's he doesn't. But I don't know if the regression, if there is one, begins with Ingo. Going into the Ingo fight Machen was coming off an unimpressive draw with Folley. The Valdes fight might not have been quite as impressive overall as the highlight film focusing on the KO makes it. One judge had Valdes ahead, and another had Nino within one point. It seems to have been a sudden knockout and by far Machen's most explosive KO. Valdes was big and durable.

As for Machen, the real problem is other than the Quarry victory, at a time everyone agrees he was past it and Quarry was green, when is the last time he had a win over a top tier heavy? Doug Jones was probably his best scalp, but he was still a light-heavy without much experience against good heavies. Jones would come in at 172 in his next fight while losing a one-sided decision to Harold Johnson.

What stands with Machen is that he didn't beat any of the best he fought--Folley, Ingo, Liston, Johnson, Williams, Patterson, Terrell. The film shows Machen being too slow to handle Patterson. There is no evidence this wouldn't always have been true and that the 1962 version of Machen would not have also lost badly to Patterson, and also lost to the 1965 version of Terrell.

I don't understand what you are talking about with deleting quotes. The quote about the injured eye is from the next day newspapers posted on this thread. What is the citation for the other quote about almost being knocked out.

As for who hit me hardest quotes, as I said I am skeptical like with Joe Louis saying it was Alex Borchuk, etc. I am certain Louis was sincere and he was the one hit.

But hitting hardest is less important than hitting best. A good historical example would be Max Baer and Max Schmeling against Louis. Baer possibly hit harder than Schmeling punch for punch and might have had a better chin. He did not have Schmeling's skill defensively nor his skill as a puncher. Did Baer hit Louis? Yes, he did, and Louis took it and came back. Louis also took Schmeling's right several times in the third round without apparent severe damage, and came back. But Schmeling was a very accurate puncher and kept hitting him and hitting him. I would not be shocked if Louis judged Baer the harder puncher, but the skill to keep hitting the target was decisive.

"Ali knocked down Foreman. Frazier didn't.."
"Douglas knocked down Tyson. Bruno and Ruddick didn't."

Ali hit Foreman over and over. Did Frazier?
Douglas hit Tyson over and over. Did Bruno and Ruddick hit Tyson that often and relentlessly?

Many if not most KO's come from hitting the opponent accurately, and keeping on hitting him. Skill and stamina matter as well as an abstract consideration of power. (I haven't seen the Cooper fight recently enough to comment)

 

"You once stated Mike DeJohn exhibited more power than Cleveland Williams when he didn't knock out Daniels either."

Whom you didn't knock out is not the key. It is whom you did knock out.

For example, Marciano went the distance with Red Applegate. Lee Oma stopped Applegate. So Oma is the bigger puncher? Nonsense. Marciano rep as a puncher rests on KO's over Walcott, Charles, Moore, Louis, Layne, Matthews, etc. Not on his off night performances. The trouble with Williams is not whom he didn't knock out, but how generally unimpressive his list of victims is. The only top man he KO'd was a green Terrell, who a year later went the distance with him and won the decision. The rest of his resume is past it types and/or fringe contenders--Holman, Miteff, Alonzo Johnson, Roger Rischer, etc. Who was the highest ranked man at the time Williams KO'd him? I think Miteff at #9.

What about Mike DeJohn. Here are the NBA ratings for his top KO victims:

September 1957 NBA ratings
Champ--Floyd Patterson
1--Eddie Machen
2--Zora Folley
3--Roy Harris
4--Willie Pastrano
5--Hurricane Jackson
6--Nino Valdes
7--Alex Miteff*
8--Pat McMurtry
9--Ingemar Johansson
10-Bob Satterfield
DeJohn KO'd Miteff in October in the first round.

June 1959 NBA ratings
Champ--Ingemar Johansson
1--Floyd Patterson
2--Henry Cooper
3--Zora Folley
4--Sonny Liston
5--Roy Harris
6--Eddie Machen
7--Alonzo Johnson
8--Charley Powell*
9--Brian London
10-Joe Erskine
DeJohn KO'd Powell in the first round before the next ratings

October 1960 NBA ratings
Champ--Floyd Patterson
1--Sonny Liston
2--Eddie Machen
3--Ingemar Johansson
4--Zora Folley
5--Henry Cooper
6--Billy Hunter*
7--Alex Miteff
8--Bob Cleroux
9--Mike DeJohn
10-Archie Moore
DeJohn KO'd Hunter in 9 before the next ratings

Now DeJohn isn't anything to get excited about. He clearly had a punch, but like Williams never stopped a top tier guy. I don't recall saying he was the harder puncher. What I probably said is that if you are going to try to judge these things DeJohn knocked out men who were ranked higher when he fought them. That is simply true. It isn't that DeJohn's resume is all that impressive. It just puts Williams' resume as a puncher in perspective.

Now if the two men had fought, I would pick Williams because I think he was bigger and faster and way more athletic, and ended up the more skilled boxer in the early 1960's. (It was not hard to be more skilled than DeJohn)

 

Actually, Ingo did wipe the floor with London. He won by a huge points margin. His superior lead gave him the leeway to relax in the last 10 seconds and as he was up at about five, his victory was never in doubt.
That Ingo's worst fight in his career was a win over a guy like London speaks loads. You have no other flaws in his record except for two losses against an atg. Williams on the other hand lost to bums.

 

1. Williams never lost to any "bums". He lost to a lower class in fighters when extremely green, and after he was shot.

2. Williams wasn't prime for any losses, except against Liston and Terrell with whom he had damaged hands against in the rematch that many still scored for him. Ingo was dropped, incurred serious brain damage, and retired by Brian London in his prime.

 

One of the most irritating features of this forum is the casual use of the words ''bums'' or '' bum''.No man
brave enough to step into the ring deserves to be called a ''bum''.

 

Londen went the distance with Ingo. No way he's knocked out by Machen, who was stopped by Ingo in one round.

 

No matter how hard you try to elevate Williams, fact is that he always bottled it when it mattered. Ingo became the world champion as he brutally knocked out the two best american boxers in emphatic fashion. Williams couldn’t beat a worse version of Machen. How can you even compare the two?

 

This has absolutely nothing to do with the post you replied to.

Actually I think the version of Machen who fought Liston and Williams would've outpointed Ingo handily.

 

I agree. I hate the use of that word.

 

I think at this point, we can safely add Chok and Hob to that list.