Liston Head-to-head:

I think using "Tyson is mentally weak" logic doesnt pertain to the Tyson that is used in the arguement. He was never mentally weak in his prime. It was when is physical gifts diminished that his frustration grew and was acted out in an unexcusable acts, biting, breaking arm, etc. But in terms of toughness he was physically and mentally tough. Look at Douglas, Holyfield and Lewis. His mental toughness and never say die attitude was the reason why:

-Despite taking a beating from Douglas he managed to drop him in the 8th round. Thats a result of a resiliant fighter who despite the circumstances continued his sustained effort to win the fight.

-Despite being outboxed and outfought by Evander, Tyson managed to control most of the 10th round before being caught clean and subsequently getting stopped.

-Despite being beat by a big puncher in Lewis Tyson kept trudging forward and the 8th round we saw Tyson coming out a little more spirited than he had in the previous 2-3 rounds. (watch the fight for a refresher and you'll see what I mean)

Patterson lost to Liston because he lacked the durability required to beat him not because of his style. Look at the first fight with Liston. Initially Floyd's bob and weave seemed effective but he lacked the chin to sustain the ocassional blow that he was unable to avoid that would undoubtedly prolong the affair and the punch to keep Liston wary. Tyson has the chin and the punch to make Liston hesitate.

Look at Lewis-Tua, Lewis did just enough to win the decision. No taking unnessary risks and jabbed his way to a decision. To became complacent and content to last the distance. Why? Because Lewis got his respect early by landing some heavy right hands.

Tyson beats him because he's able to land early and often. Liston will get his licks in and will make a good account of himself but his discrepancy in handspeed will contribute to a TKO loss as he is unable match Tyson Blow for Blow.


Head to Head:

Favor: Tyson, Lewis, Ali.

50/50: Foreman, Frazier, Holmes and Louis.

 

I would like to make a comment here.


Holmes was past his prime, sure.

But let's be fair: Going into this fight he had lost to Spinks twice, but just about anyone knew he won the rematch. So while he was aging, he was still very good and had beaten every man he faced. He had a month and a half which is enough to get your timing back, get in shape etc. Of course, by "getting your timing back" i mean getting it as good as your age allows it to be.

After the Tyson fight he went on to be quite succesful, handing the top10 contender Mercer his first defeat.

Was Holmes past his best in the Tyson? No doubt about it. Was he still a competent fighter, able to legitly regain a top10 contender status? Yes.


Now...... let's compare this to one other great fighter he lost to, Evander Holyfield.

Holyfield was 34, had a very mediocre performance against Moorer and a knockout loss against Bowe which made him look somewhat fragile because you seemed to be able to break down or lose his stamina for no reason other than age and injuries. Few people gave him a chance in this fight, but he rose to the occasion and knocked Tyson out.

After the fight he went on to be succesful, knocking Moorer out, having one somewhat close fight with Lewis as well as beating other contenders Ruiz and Rahman.


Clearly, the Holyfield that Tyson fought was better than the Holmes he fought. BUT: if Tyson had knocked Holyfield out, you can be damn sure that after the other shaky performances he had, he'd be written off as "washed up going in anyway", which was in fact what was said before the fight!



So probably if Tyson won that fight, he would've still lost to all great fighters because Holyfield was washed up and a natural cruiserweight.


Tyson destroyed an all time great in a fashion that no one ever repeated even up to ten years of Holmes fighting on beyond that. I think this is a legit win over a great. You can be guaranteed that if Holmes had beat Tyson, like Holyfield did, Holmes wouldn't be old etc just like Holyfield all of a sudden wasn't considered washed up anymore.


Oh, and Lewis was 36 and a year and a half away from retirement himself when he fought Tyson. Roughly the same circumstances under which Holmes fought Tyson. I think there's a double standard here.

 

What other great at their peak he'd beat? Not many obviously, if they are at their peaks and he's not.

All i'm saying is that he had beaten every man he faced, had a shitload of experience and proven to be great. While he was past his best, he was still a great fighter. If Frazier beat Ali in Manilla, he'd have beaten a great fighter. Dito with Norton-Ali III, although i think Holmes had more left than Ali at those points.


Anyway, my opinion is that Holmes was a great fighter with all the experience and ring savy he carried with him. And Tyson annihilated him. The other greats that beat him weren't exactly at their peaks either (and neither was Tyson, particularly for the Lewis fight), so i don't see why the Holmes fight should be totally disregarded.

 

Liston had 1 of the best jabs in hw history, his hands were fast , and his power was obvious. Regarding the list , I think;
Liston beats Holyfield, Bowe, Tunney{ too big } , , Norton , Bowe and Walcott. He has a war with Frazier and it goes either way. I think the elite heavys in history are Louis , Ali , Marciano , Johnson , Tyson , Holmes , Lewis and Dempsey. I can't give anyone outside of these fighters a win over them. I'm undecided on what happens with Foreman , maybe Liston beats him. Liston doesn't have a prayer against Holmes or Louis.

 

You know my thoughts on Holmes latter reign but the guy Tyson beat i would put at 70% of his peak. If that. His timing was shot and he had no snap at all. Even vs Spinks in his better performance (rematch) he looked well past it. Of course his aging was magnified by a Tyson's extreme speed and power at his absolute peak.