Leotis Martin's KO over Liston. How much does it make you question Liston's chin?

wtf you posted this **** twice? What is this based upon? Please don't tell me you are making this deduction based upon the Martin fight?

 

Do you mean, Liston was short of rounds at the time he fought Martin?

 

Yes, he beat him.

He was at least 39, and some of the people around him say he was an alcoholic. That is, people who know him say he was - that doesn't make it so - but your insistence that he absolutely was not is strange at best.

People who were around him have also indicated that he may have been using heroin at the time - but of course, you don't credit that, either.

 

Whether or not he drank is not in debate. What is in debate is your insistence[/QUOTE] that he "wasn't an alcoholic" despite reasonable evidence to the contrary.

Didn't it? How do you know that? Why do you think that is the case when Floyd Mayweather senior and Ricky Hatton himself have both said that alcohol did interfere with his career?

"It's very simple. He needs to do this to save his career, however much time he has left — it might be two or three years, but the less he gets into [drinking alcohol] the longer his career is going to last.

While Mayweather believes Hatton is prepared to make some adjustments to his lifestyle he said he doubted whether his fighter would quit alcohol altogether: "He's got it in him to do a little [drinking] but if he does a little he's going to do it all. He's a man, I can't read his mind but he seemed like he was kind of considering it when I told he wasn't going to be beating no Oscar or Floyd or anyone like that while he was doing this."

OK, and is this based upon something that is made up in your head because it suits you or actual evidence? Have you dismissed, out of hand, claims that he was drinking during training for Patterson II or do you know something we don't?

Right. And the track marks on his arms discovered during post-mortem?

 

Repeatedly, and for years, in the face of limited evidence to the contrary having presented absolutely none in support.

No. You are not describing an alcoholic or even a functioning alcoholic. An alcoholic is addicted to alcohol. What you call a "functioning alcoholic" (or high-functioning alcoholic) is someone who maintains studies/job/training whatever despite their addiction.

But i've explained this to you before, exactly. Here you are, repeating the same completely wrong thing - exactly.

Johnny Tapia was a drug-addict and alcoholic who abused both in training for fights. I have no idea what you are trying to say. I think you might be trying to say that being a drug and alcohol addict made Tapia no worse as a fighter. As most adults know, that wouldn't be true.

No, but I don't think we are debating whether or not Liston was "successful", because we are not five. Once again i'm reduced to directing you through posts that we have exchanged in order that you aren't allowed to change what it is we are talking about every time you get cornered, but I'm used to it.

1 - You ludicrously claimed that Rcky Hatton's drinking "did not interfere with his career." How the F*CK you think you can know that is beyond me, but knowing it wasn't true i lazily googled until I found

2 - A direct quote by someone close to him professionally that directly contradicted this, Floyd Mayweather Senior who said: ""It's very simple. He needs to do this to save his career, however much time he has left — it might be two or three years, but the less he gets into [drinking alcohol] the longer his career is going to last."

While Mayweather believes Hatton is prepared to make some adjustments to his lifestyle he said he doubted whether his fighter would quit alcohol altogether: "He's got it in him to do a little [drinking] but if he does a little he's going to do it all. He's a man, I can't read his mind but he seemed like he was kind of considering it when I told he wasn't going to be beating no Oscar or Floyd or anyone like that while he was doing this."

This wasn't really necessary, as everyone - everyone, including Ricky - accepted that his boozing, associated weight gain and neglect of training between fights took its toll. But obviously it helps that I posted it. You, immediately change your original point with:

3 - "it did not prevent Ricky from being successful did it?"

It did not. But everyone sensible accepts that heavy drinking between fights, and any drinking during training for fights is an enormous negative for any fighter. I have never seen that disputed by anyone - but you, the supposed ex-professional.

Nobody to my knoweldge even said he was an alcoholic at that time??

Related though, is the quote by Floyd Mayweather Snr., which I presume you read where his world-level trainer explained to him that he wouldn't be beating any world-level fighters before his losses to Floyd and Pacquiao.

Who says that about Liston!?? What are you talking about??

Right. So you accept then that Liston could have been abusing Alcohol and even drugs for the Martin fight and that this could have been among the deciding factors?

"a shambling weakened alcoholic", where do you get these things from?

Why? Did they examine between his anus and his scrotal sack for track marks? Would there be track marks if he was smoking heroin and snorting cocaine? He was connected with both by his death.

It's pretty clear from your posts that you don't understand alcoholism and the above makes it pretty obvious that you don't understand drug addiction.

But it's possible that he was nowhere near drugs before the Martin fight. It's also possible that he wasn't anywhere near alcohol. But that certainly wasn't the case according to the one eye-witness account I have read. George Foreman was in the camp for that fight. Here is what he had to say:

"The last thing Sonny would do was train. He'd want to party all the time. Sometimes he would do it so much that he didn't know his own name."

The sad thing is, i'll have to make this post again in a year, maybe two, when you start regurgitating your "suspicions" again.

 

If you read the rest of that post rather than just pick out the one single line that you can agree with you know exactly what the problem is.