Is Sonny Liston A Top Ten HW ATG?

As for Ali being prime or not for Liston... I can see both sides of this. Yes, Ali in 1963 looked far from the fighting machine he would become and there was very little suggesting that he was a GOAT in the coming. On the other hand, is it that far fetched that he stepped up a level for the by far biggest fight of his life? Was it really only Liston being poor that made him look so much better in those fights than against Cooper and Jones?

If so, when did he arrive in his prime? He looked as good against Patterson as he ever did imo, so that should be a reasonable answer. And short as the second fight was, he did look clearly improved in that even compared to the first I think. So maybe he reached his prime in 1965, with his 1964 fight against Liston still marking a substantial increase in sharpness and focus compared to previous fights? That would seem reasonable to me.

 

The reason why no one here likes you, No Neck or White Bomber isn't because your favourites are Louis, Tyson and Mayweather. Especially Louis is as highly respected and loved here as anyone.

It's because you can't stand any hint of criticism against them and think you must bring other fighters down to bring them up, and also conduct this very basic black and white reasoning in a very haughty manner. That's General Forum level and those that can't rise above it never become liked here.

 

I can only tolerate hostile black/white thinking for so long in discussions. It's infantile. There's plenty of fighters I absolutely despise and I can be honest about their achievements and skills. Fury has done plenty of things that tick me off, but I'm not blind to the fact a focused and in shape Fury is a major h2h threat with his size/speed/chin etc.

What's even more annoying is when people pretend they're being objective and just "calling it like they see it" when they obviously have weird standards for one fighter they don't use for another.

 

I think everyone (perhaps with one exception) who's been here for a longer period have no need to tear certain fighters or eras down, even though they prefer some to others, and they can also have an exchange of ideas and at times modify or even change their stance a bit. That's the difference between this board and General, which is verbal fighting rather than discussing. Black or white and nothing ever conceded.

Annoying when that kind of behaviour is brought here.

 

In my experience, the General forum has maybe 5-6 reasonable guys who you can have an interesting honest discussion with even if you disagree.

8-12 who are "somewhat tolerable". A few who might provide something of merit, but have several annoying habits. Then you have a HUGE number who are just downright toxic, crazy, or are smart enough to know what they're doing but troll anyways.

It tends to be the opposite in classic, but it tends to be the same vocal minority that often derails discussions with nonsense. I'm not perfect and I can get petty playing tit for tat, but I will at least try to stick to the topic at hand and be objective.

 

Lots of nonsense and your own hissy fit mixed in there for good measure. Per your definition of a good record how is he so obviously superior to a Schemling, Walcott or even Baer? What stands out to you over them?

Also for the record a fair few of my favourite fighters are from the 60s. I like good fighters from every era.

 

If you’d paid attention, you’d know that I said he didn’t look great for most of Liston fight. That means I think he had better performances extending into the 70s, which doesn’t require writing a long ass list.

 

I’m not saying that you can stay the same man and he definitely wasn’t but you do get sharp IN training not whilst fighting. Liston was still a fine fighter when he lost with lots of experience and intelligence to fall back on.

Stating the obvious like “Training and sparring is different” doesn’t mean the other person thought so nor does it make it look that way.

I don’t know about trusting YouTube clips when most of the times they’re playing to the camera in sparring - he very well could’ve been going through the motions till they left. I’m not sure.

 

For me, Liston’s “performance” in the second fight with Ali is what significantly marks him down.

There’s a Duran “no mas” type situation where he may have had health issues (stomach cramps) and fought for a great proportion of the fight and was being schooled by SRL which is somewhat forgivable. And then there is Liston who either took a dive or just flat out quit for no good reason.

And it goes to the question of the guy’s integrity or courage. Hence he’s not in the very top bracket for me.

 

I think he got dropped. You can see the punch land. And he got up but might've been stopped later in the round. Walcott butchered the fight, but I don't see how that performance redeems Liston in anyway from the first fight.

 

If that dropped him then I'd question his chin. Ali was not a big puncher and that one was hardly a big punch by Ali's standards.

I've no doubt it landed but I think Liston was looking for a reason to have the fight stopped.

 

I rewatched it. It was strange how he did that part where he threw arms over his head after falling off his knee. It could’ve been his version of “I got up at 9.” I can’t think of anyone else who did that with their arms.

 

He wasn't in his prime in the 70's so it's pretty buffoonish to bring that decade up.

Nobody asked for a "long ass list". Me asking you to name 2-3 fights in the 60's where you think he looked "better than he did against Liston" isn't asking you to type a lot. You're more dramatic than some of the teenagers I've had to teach.

 

The whole thing was just bizarre.