Liston -vs- Holyfield:

Hold on here for a second.
You said Liston was 6 years past his prime in 1964, but now you are saying his peak was in 1959. Agreed with the latter, but saying that he was past his prime right after he peaked is stretching it a bit in my opinion.
Tyson against Douglas was in his prime but not as his peak. Same with Foreman against Young. Same with Liston against Ali.

Well that's a different topic/debate on its own, but my point was that someone who quits when he holds the championship of the world doesn't do justice to being "mean and nasty".

Again, this is more a matter of styles than of strength. Lewis can work from the outside with the jab and has by far the longer reach, so it is stylistic to his advantage to stay away from Mercer. Not because he is less strong.

Couldn't agree more, although i do think Tyson should've done more in the inside during some fights. When he's fighting someone with a long reach who ties him up on the inside/from mid range, he can't do much if he does nothing on the inside.

I think it's the other way around: when a fighter discovers he can't take a punch well, he's likely to fight cautious and protect that weakness. In this case mentality is formed by physical events.

This is what i'm trying to say; if Holyfield has the right gameplan and actually sticks to it (which is no given) then he can pull it off.

Well, ok. That's purely subjective. We can only disagree here.

 

I said 5 years past his prime, meaning his best. Liston was probably older than widely assumed. His "best" seemed to me to be right around 1959. That is the Liston I submit in head-to-heads.

This may be a matter of semantics.

It's tough to be mean and nasty when you are not at your best. Duran wasn't mean and nasty against Lang, but he was against Moore.

Sure, but if we are making deductions based on evidence, when I see Mercer coming forward, Lewis backing off, and Mercer bulling Lewis into the ropes, I deduce that Mercer is probably stronger. You assume that Lewis is stronger based on assumptions. I deduce it based on first-hand observations of the flow of the fight.

Now you can say it is purely strategy and I may even agree... but then we are both making an assumption.

Agreed... but Tyson was looking for angles if he wasn't looking for breathers. I don't think he was stronger than most of his foes.

Perhaps we are both right here, depending on the boxer.

Possibly... Holyfield is hard to pick against. But I find it easier to pick against him when he is facing superior strength and a long jab.

 

I think Holyfield has a real shot at this one but his warriors mentality would come back to bite him in the arse,when Sonny hurts him he will fire back and get into a brawl not a smart move against the Bear,Liston by ko 9 th rnd.

 

This is a tough call
The different cenerios are pretty much explained.
My gut feeling is Liston by tight decision.

 

it would depend on how Holyfield would fight Liston, if he brawled with him then I don't think that would be very smart at all.
but if he counter punched and used his footwork like he did against foreman and in the second bowe fight, I think he may be able to make a UD
but I would just have to take Liston in this one.

 

In my opinion, Liston would have some early moments, but, in the end, Holyfield would win over 15 rounds.

 

Liston by mid round stoppage. Liston would trick Holyfield into brawling with him and holy can not match liston in punching power and physical strength. Another key point is Liston's left jab. Holyfield did not like long jabs in his face(Bowe, Foreman, Lewis)..Liston's long 84" hammer would really throw evander off his game plan.

 

If the fight goes over 6-7 rounds (I think it will) Holyfield takes it. Holyfield has the heart and courage to continue fighting even if he is decked by Liston early. Holyfield that outboxed ol' Foreman would dance around Liston and rally to get the decision.

 

I'm somewhat surprised that 20 out of 39 picked Liston by KO. I'm not saying Liston wasn't great but how many fighters with the chin and ability of Holyfield's did he ever KO?

Patterson was a great fighter but he was down more than any other HW champ ever (20 times). Vs. Johansson (9 times), Liston (4 times), and Quarry (2 times) he was down 15 times! Holyfield was much more durable than Patterson.

Machen and Folley were very good boxers. Machen had the better chin and he did last the distance vs. Liston (W12 Liston). Folley was stopped in 3. Holyfield was much more durable than Folley.

 

Holyfield would win. The myth of Liston would get crushed again.

Holyfield would be disciplined knowing Liston's aura and will use the right tactics.

I don't buy that Holyfield couldn't suppress his love for brawling. Watch his fights with Bowe II, Foreman, Tyson, etc.

Holyfield is going to finish stronger.

What's interesting is I'm not sure which Holyfield has a better chance. Holyfield of 91-92 or Holyfield of 94-97? A bigger, stocker Holyfield might be more immovable and durable. I also think that this Holyfield is stronger than Liston, physically.

 

Holyfield pre-Moorer (1994) was the best version of Holyfield IMO. He took Bowe lightly in late '92 but stuck to a good fight plan in '93 and avenged the loss.

Don't be fooled by the wins over Tyson (1996-97) or even the win over Moorer (1997).

The younger Holyfield was quicker, had better legs, a higher workrate, stuck to his fight plan better, and was more elusive.

IMO, Holyfield would have beat Tyson at any point. They were both past prime when they did fight.

With that said, I'll take Holyfield over Liston.

 

Perhaps none. But how did Holyfield compete against men of similiar skill, power, tools of liston?

He fought Bowe and Lennox, who both sport 84" reaches like liston, and have similiar power and strength like liston. Holyfield only went 1-4 against these men.

Holyfield was nearly stopped by substitute journeyman Bert Cooper, taken 10 life or death rounds by Michael Dokes, and struggled tremdously with 44 year old Foremans and Holmes.

Holyfield was not the dominant fighter liston was in his prime. Holy struggled with all different kids of fighters. liston wiped out the top 10 very effectively.



In this matchup, I feel holyfield would be inclined to brawl to be able to get away from liston's jab. This would bring doom for evander. Evander was badly hurt, stopped by much less punchers than liston...even during his prime years.

 

How? Why?


You say pre 1993. Well during that time period Holyfield was very inconsistent. He was nearly kayoed by a late sub journeyman Bert Cooper. He struggled to beat 45 year old versions of Holmes and Foreman. He also was outslugged at times by Michael Dokes. Holyfield simply was never that dominant a fighter at heavyweight. Liston was. Holyfield throuought his heavyweight career had trouble with long jabs, and had the bad tendency to brawl against stronger powerful fighters, allowing himself to be outslugged at times. Both these weaknesses will be capitalized on by liston.

 

I did

Bowe went 2-1 against him. Bowe was not as good as liston. Liston, like bowe, had a very long left jab, and was a terrific inside fighter. Liston was more powerful than bowe.

Foreman who was 42, slow, fat, and easy to outbox, gave evander a very difficult time. This was a fighter who was shutout by glass jaw tommy morrison. Foreman in the 1990s was not that good. He still landed his jab on evander at will. A prime liston is a different animal than a 45 year old foreman.

Tyson fights are nice, but tyson fought nothing like liston. so I don't see the resemblance. This was also not a prime 1980s mike tyson in there.