Liston Vs. Small Greats - Would You Favor...

I just rewatched Liston's fight with Machen and frankly, I think he would have trouble with these lighter men on the whole. Machen was able to parry his jab almost to uselessness. The argument is that Machen ran--well, he moved, but he was in front of Liston quite a bit. Liston simply could not hit him very often with his jab. Machen ducked it or slipped it or blocked it. Liston missed again and again and again with lefts and rights. As a matter of fact, how often did Liston hit Machen to the head? Not very often and not very effectively. Machen's defense stymied Liston and in most rounds Machen launched a brief flurry or two and generally scored much better than Liston was able to. If Liston is viewed the winner of this fight, it is on aggressiveness and body slapping in the clinches.

With Liston deducted three points, I had Machen winning the fight by one point. It was certainly a tough fight to score. Liston was aggressive but largely inept. Machen outboxed Liston badly but only punched in spurts. Machen ended up unmarked. Liston badly swollen.

Now Machen is somewhat heavier and solider built than some of these smaller men, but he did not have a good right and used his right only a few times against Liston--I counted less than five serious rights from Machen. Tunney, Conn, Charles, Johnson, and certainly Walcott will be moving as well as Machen, and all of them, except perhaps Conn, had a much more dangerous right than Eddie. When Machen occasionally spurted into an attack, Liston did not seem to know how to respond but backed and tried to cover. I think Liston would be at risk against all these quick-stepping little guys, off the Machen fight.

As for Liston catching them late--whom did he ever catch late? He did show excellent stamina against Machen, though.

 

liston won 10 out of the 12 rounds against machen, and no one ever beat a peak condition Eddie that badly on the scorecards.

 

bert whitehurst II for one, that last 4 punch combination was lethal. I think the ref mis interpreted the bell, it should have been ruled a Kayo. Also Howard king, Mike Dejohn, henry clark?

 

That is the way the judges scored it. I had Liston winning 7 to 5, so with the three point deduction, Machen edges it.

I repeat that it was a very difficult fight to score. Liston was aggressive, plodding forward and throwing punches for three minutes per round, but he missed and missed and missed. Machen boxed smartly and certainly outboxed Liston, actually making him look inept at times, but he was aggressive only in spurts, although when he did open up he landed. Should Liston be credited for his aggression? Well, he was. Should Liston be credited for flailing away at the body in the clinches? Well, he was. Should Machen be given credit for his excellent defensive work and making Liston miss? Well, he was not.
If either man was stunned in the fight, it was Liston by a left in the 8th round and by a combination in the 12th, but he was no more than stunned. Other than by the flagrantly low blow in the 11th, Machen was in no real trouble at all. Eddie ended up unmarked.

 

I've said this before and i'll say it again - i think Liston's slowness badly hurts the effectiveness of his jab. 84 inch but his height is on the low side and his lack of speed doesn't make his jab that much of a killer against a skilled boxer. He barely landed a jab on clay. Dito against Machen.

To make a comparison to an other boxer-puncher, Klitschko didn't drop a single round to a similar fighter in Byrd, because he has great handspeed, making his jab much more effective other than just being bigger hand heavier handed.

 

Right. My most vivid image of Liston/Machen was an exchange where Sonny jabbed, and Eddie chased back Liston's slowly recoiling left with a quick and well executed counter hook.

Not having watched it from ringside, I'd be more inclined to accept the scoring of the nearest eyewitnesses, rather than the footage, but Machen was no choir boy in dealing with Liston, hitting on the break (infuriating Sonny), and spinning him around, roughing him up in the clinches.

While he did have unusually long arms, much of that 84 inch reach was in his collarbone. Cleveland Williams and Ali had noticably longer arms than Liston. Sonny could do a masterful job of keeping his punches straight though, helping to maximize the reach he did have. But I could certainly see a Conn, Pastrano, Loughran or Tunney landing three jabs in the same time it takes Liston to unload one. A mobile speedster could readily beat him to the punch continually.

 

Liston did not lack speed, I think thats a popular myth. I think his handspeed was quite decent when he was younger, and he had pretty fast upperbody head movement. Lets face the facts, There are not many heavyweights with the skills speed of Eddie. liston still completley outboxed him. This fight demonstrates listons very sound boxing skills and ability to fight for 12 hard paced rounds.

 

Wow! when I scored it I gave Eddie 2-3 rounds at most!

 

1. 12 hard paced rounds---good point

2. Not many heavyweights with the skills and speed of Machen--Machen could not outpoint contemporaries Folley and Johnson in three tries. His skill set is undercut by his weak right hand. He had an excellent left but was basically a one-handed fighter.

3. Liston still completely outboxed him--I have to disagree. If Liston is given credit for winning, it would be on aggression. My take was that Machen clearly outboxed him. Liston really missed a lot and his vaunted jab was largely ineffective.

 

True

1. Harold Johnson was an ATG fighter who had one of the best jabs ever

2. Folley had one of the best jabs of that era and was quite slick in his own right, Machen had trouble with first class boxers with A level jabs(johnson, folley, liston).....Machen also beat alot of good fighters.

Also lets not forget machen had a little back luck on the cards..... the Folley and Williams draw could have easily been wins for machen, and if one of the judges changed there scorecard by one round machen would have won a split over harold johnson. Machen was always right there...

 

Well to be honest this has gone deeper than i was looking and veered a long way from home. My whole point is that thrusting forth the Martin and Marshall fights as a means to discredit Liston as a fighter is biased and totally unfair. I use Louis as a comparison as Bummy ranks him highly and i put forth a similar shallow view to highlight Liston shouldn't be overly judged by these two fights just as it would be ridiculous to use Charles and Schmeling as heavily to summate Joe as a boxer. Surely we agree?

Well we sit the same. As stated, my entire point at the end of the day has nothing to do with rating Liston vs Louis or denouncing Louis. For the record i think Liston would be even money with him head to head, tho he's light years behind on resume.