Most shameless title defences of all time

The guy was a seasoned veteran who held wins over ex LHW champs, a HW top fiver and several guys who were ranked, or held a ranking before or after. Could do a lot worse than that.
If that was the one guy Louis defended against that year, yeah he'd be worth a mention, but a defense in the same year he fought Billy Conn, Lou Nova, Buddy Baer and defended the title 8 times overall? No.

 

Maskaev-Okello Peter

 

That’s why I named the source. I couldn’t find anything really, but also the AP report on the Rademacher fight didn’t note that it was the first time Floyd went down … which isn’t evidence of anything but if so you’d think it might have been noted.

Whether Pete was the first or second to knock Floyd down, pretty amazing he got that far into his career with so few knockdowns and ended up being decked 20 times in all.

 

As Floyd proudly pointed out though, "Nobody got up more times than I did either!"

He was asked who was the harder puncher, Sonny Liston, or Ingo? He said it was Ingo. The questioner asked, "Really?" And Floyd humorously replied, "Ah, but you see, I BEAT Ingo!" Great guy, and perhaps the best character to ever hold the heavyweight championship after Schmeling.

 

Haha.

He did keep getting up. No lack of heart with Floyd. I think he’d have accepted a third match with Sonny anywhere, anytime — even shortly after the second meeting, knowing how it would likely go. And he’d have given it his all.

(And has been discussed here and there, we can find a tipping point in Sonny’s decline where Patterson probably overcomes his fear and the previous two meetings to beat Liston.)

 

Pedro, I'm a purist on this subject. I feel the world title is a bauble to be praised and only the best get to approach. So no gimme's where I stand and I hold my heroes accountable too. When you're champ you fight the best. Saddened to say, but Henry Armstrong's welterweight title reign was one of the worst cases of shameless defenses of all time.

 

Ali vs Liston.

 

Scar, Conn and Nova were both number 1. To criticize a champ for a "gimme" during the year he knocked out two number 1s, a knockout machine and several borderline contenders is criticism that is misplaced. The alternative would be Louis defending against Nova, Conn and nobody else until next year. You can't expect him to defend against the top three back to back, which champion has ever done that?
Having title defenses that frequently means that some guys you defend against aren't top of the line. In that context, facing a guy who while unranked has beaten two ex lhw champs, a top fiver and several other hw contenders, is not that bad despite the spotty record.

 

I've posted about Patterson-Liston III. Harold Valan should've awarded the WBA Championship to Floyd over Jimmy Ellis on September 15, 1968 in Stockholm.

As both Patterson and Liston were now established competitors in Stockholm, that's where Patterson-Liston takes place in 1969. This time, Floyd flips the script sometime during the Championship Rounds as Sonny runs out of gas. Patterson had become too smart with Chuvalo, was always in top shape, significantly younger, and had far more experience by 1969. If Leotis Martin had the later round power to lay out Liston, then Floyd very definitely did.

Zero question Valan blew the call in round 14, after Patterson decked the solid chinned Ellis with a hard hook, a few seconds after blasting Jimmy with a right. As this was scored on a rounds basis, Floyd simply won round 14 anyway. That's not what's important. That Patterson had the kind of power that late in a bout at age 33 means Sonny would be dead in a third match, as Floyd would now have absolute confidence in his ability to perform at a high level through a complete 15 rounds.

 

I could see Floyd winning, but I don’t think it’s that simple.

Patterson has to get to the late rounds first, which means in large part making it out of the first. He was 0-for-2 in doing just that in his previous meetings with Sonny, and no guarantee that he has the psychological wherewithal to do it in this scenario even vs. a diminished Liston.

Sonny would fade, but only if the fight went long enough. He’d be dangerous early.

 

I’m not convinced is all I can say. Those fights stink to the moon.

 

True enough. Although historic, you're right. They stunk as self contained bouts.

 

Pedro, I guess it all depends on where we set our bar. Like I said before, I'm a purist on the subject and I feel a blown up light heavy who lost three out of his last four was an unacceptable opponent for the heavyweight title. I do see what you're saying about his frequency in putting the title on the line, but that was Joe's choice. Gimme's should never be part of the choice. It cheapens the sport. Again, I'm a stickler on the subject of deserving challengers.

 

Floyd stated that he went straight down into a Liston uppercut instead of weaving when he lost the title. For Chuvalo though, he was weaving through the corners as he ducked sideways, using lateral movement, not awkwardly moving backwards as he did in the Liston rematch.

 

You guys are doing a great deep dive into the recesses of boxing history. Not to derail the thread into a more modern example, but Matthew Hilton taking on "Iron Man" Jack Callahan was a shameful gimme.

Hate to shag on Callahan too much, because he was a tough club fighter and fought with courage, but I was from Indiana and followed even the undercard guys religiously and barely knew of him.