Jack Johnson vs. Sonny Liston

No, I always give my honest opinion. I like to watch Liston more. I personally enjoy ass beaters. His style is so much fun to watch. But my enjoyment of watching a fighter is different from how I would bet my hard earned coin if they were to fight. It is like Corrales and Castillo fighting - they make for a fun war. But when they fight a defensive master in Mayweather, it is not as fun and the ass beater can't land as well or as often. Same thing with Ali against many punchers who make for wars against others.

Well, having read so many thousands of pages on Johnson now, I have grown to respect his style and defensive prowess, and simply think he could have frustrated the hell out of any puncher. Guy knew how to block, duck, pull or lean back, step back, move away, dance about, or step in and smother and clinch, or to suppress his opponent's arms and gloves. He was quick enough to land against anyone, and he also had enough pop that you had to respect his power. I see him badly closing Liston's eyes, eluding him or tying him up, and I think Sonny would find Johnson's clinching skills to be much stronger than he expected. I also think Johnson had superior stamina, and could keep it up round after round. And all the while he would smile and taunt Sonny, too, which a guy with a bully mentality would not be able to handle.

 

My opinion on Liston si slowly degenrating.

His power against top level opponents his own size is questionable and his power down the stretch is questionable also.

Johnson is quicker and might even be stronger in the clinch.

Liston won't knock out Johnson early, does he have what it takes to either outpoint him or wear him out down the stretch?

I'm not convinced, johnson should be comfortable parrying and countering Liston's slow punches. He should be able to land his lead uppercuts without too much difficulty.

i'm not convinced yet, i'll make my mind up later.

 

An interesting thread but we're talking vastly different eras here folks.
I've always been against the "ERA" comparisons.
What would Johnson look like if he'd come along as a 21 yr. old in the late 40's-early 50's?
What would have Sonny have looked like if he had hit prime in the early 20th century?
IMHO you have to factor these things into the equation and its just too hard to come up with a serviceable opinion on a 'result'.
My somewhat weak $0.02.

 

Liston had almost a foot in reach on Johnson...Factor in Sonny's educated powerful jab and Johnson could be in for a long night. Liston could keep Johnson at arms length with that jab all the while setting him up for more powerful punches. This wouldn't be a small man trying to catch Johnson while Jack leans back and throws the uppercut. I think this fight like so many other hypothetical matches boils down to styles...and I think Sonny has the right style in this one. I think any modern HW with a good jab would pose problems for Johnson...No certain outcome of course but I'd favor Liston in this fight.

 

Where is the footage of a decently skilled heavyweight pre-1915? McVea and Jeanette look frightfully amateurish, almost tough man competition level.
Johnson was a master of blocking, dodging, outthinking and clinching because he was fighting neanderthals... and mostly, small neanderthals. He looks gargantuan next to Tommy Burns, when in reality Johnson was anything but a large heavyweight. Of course he had little trouble tieing up and suppressing the output of super middleweights. I used to do the same thing to lights and welters in the gym.

Johnson was a great, great fighter, but in a sense his success was a bit of being the tallest midget in the room.

 

Seamus you really are a funny guy. Accurate too.

 

I think it's a load of crap when people say there were primitive boxing skills pre-1920, yet most would admit by the 1930s we have some of the most skilful boxers ever. (****, we have Benny Leonard pre-1920, but I guess people are convincing themselves that he had primitive skills too ??)
It's illogical.

Anyway, Liston seems a bit strategically limited, a bit robotic in that way, and prone to frustration. Very overrated.
I think Johnson might well take him.

 

This sums it up. If Johnson had a better chin, or better power, you could give him a better puncher's chance, or a chance to make Liston's sometimes questionable intangibles to come into play.

I tend to doubt Johnson could man handle Liston in a clinch. I'm sure Liston's modren day skills would have little trouble finding their mark vs Johnson's low guard, somewhat stationary stance, and short reach.

In fact on film, Johnson is a better in-fight than out fighter. Sonny would eat Johnson alive on the outside. If Johnson pressed an in-fight, it would be an even shorter match.

Liston via Ko inside 7 rounds.

 

Welcome back Suzie. It seems like you took a break after the superbowl. Told ya' New England is done winning titles.

 

1. Stronger than Willard? McVey? Kaufman? Ferguson? Jim Johnson?


2. Better than Griffin, Martin, Gardner?




This of course, is all based on the extensive footage you have seen of Hank Griffin, Joe Jeannette, and Denver Ed Martin?

 

1.Johnson was beaten by Williad, drew with Jim Johnson. Only beat a novice Mcvey with less than 15 fights.

2. Gardner weighed 155 pounds and Hank Griffin beat him and drew with him.

Since there is no footage, you can't say that these people were better technicians than Liston either can you?

 

Maybe Jack Johnson is one of history's strongest heavyweights.
If it's good for Liston, it's good for Johnson.
Willard and Jeffries have to be candidates for the list too.

 

Williad looks terrible on film though.

It's one thing being strong, it's another being strong and a good boxer.