Dempsey. Too fast, too mobile, too resilient, and when Patterson went low on Sonny, he had fleeting success ducking shots. "Never hook with a hooker" favors Jack here, the guy who literally wrote the book on it. "These big slow guys are easy meat for me!" - Jack Dempsey. Plus, his right may have been harder than his left. I watched the enhanced film of Dempsey - Willard before it was taken down, and at 0.25 speed with maximum resolution. Then, I watched Harold Johnson - Marty Marshall at a time when Marshall was 1-0 over Sonny.
I don’t know who would win Dempsey-Liston, but I know who I’d be betting on, & big. There’s no shortage of people who think it’s a gimme for Liston. Dempsey would be at irresistible odds.
There are black marks against both of them as champion. Liston only averaged one title fight per year during his brief spell as champ, which is actually comparable to Dempsey's activity level over his first 4 years as champ (during which he defended the title 5 times). Unlike Dempsey, Liston surrendered his title on his stool just 6 rounds into his 2nd defense & chose to lay down instead of trying to regain it, whereas Dempsey at least stuck it out for two 10-round beatings both in defense & attempting to regain his title.
I don’t know about all time but I think Dempsey would run Liston out of the ring he was a great fighter.
Ignorant can be defined as "Patterson's performances against Sonny Liston were excellent displays of the Sweet Science".
How could Patterson have had fleeting success if both fights were 1 round? That's kinda crazy. Then "never hook with a hooker" isn't all that relevant when the hooker is trying to out hook one of the top 5-10ish jabs ever at HW. Original questions: Sonny as far as greater, he was the division's boogeyman and uncrowned champion way before he actually beat Floyd. H2H, definitely Sonny