This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected This content is protected Not to get into great detail: I am a big advocate of styles and when it comes to the top of the rankings h2h plays a big part and I really Like listons puncher-boxer style and ability h2h, and in a match between Ali-Liston at there best I think its a toss up. Liston did the best he possibly could with his era, Ali did the best he possibly could with his era.....now it comes down to styles and h2h I slightly favor sonny.
That list doensnt make sense to me but hey.. elmer violent ray above ken norton?sonny was a beast an often underated but not number 2..
What's the reasoning for having Liston above Ali? If we assess this by your criteria, Ali has the edge in head to head, all around accomplishments, and historical significance. This leaves intangibles, which I would give to Ali as well.
Yeah lets rank liston higher than someone who already beat him twice and has 5x the better resume. If you wanna say ali lost to norton, shavers and young. Many People believe summerlin beat him both times and hes had other close calls. There is a difference between admiring liston and completely overrating the hell out of him.
I love the way despite there being many controversial picks on my list, everyone is attacking this one. head to head- I like liston at his very best to do better vs the rest of the field in a h2h sense and both at there best i think a ali vs liston fight is 50/50 im still undecided. I like Listons boxer-punch style. Edge Liston accomplishments- Different Eras, both cleaned up there eras, liston dominated his top competition more ,ali beat much more rated fighters didnt duck anyone, liston beat better competition early in career, ali beat better comp when past his prime..... Ali beat better fighters and reigned longer, but Liston could only do so much in his era......he didnt have the oppertunity to fight in an era like the 70s..If Ali doesnt come along and knock off an aging liston he probably reigns until 1969 at least... Historical Signifigance- This would have to go to Ali. But you could also look at listons signifigance as right smack in the middle of the peak of the mob and the mob has a huge signifance on the history of boxing and in listons era......and perhaps the 2nd ali fight? Intangibles- Both possessed them. Liston and Ali could fight 10 long rounds and survive the distance with broken jaws,both possesed top stamina ali up on his toes for 15 rounds liston and machen clashing for a very fast paced 12rounder...... both could take some heavy heavy blows and not mentally quit with ali having the edge here, Liston possessed more of a killer instinct, both were very patient calm cool under pressure(except liston and ali in there first fight....liston quit and ali wanted to quit and dundee had to force him into the middle of the ring), both in there primes possessed a lot of heart ali defintley much more, Outside of the two Ali fights listons record when it comes to intangibles looks perfect.....Ali fights leave a bitter taste in everyones mouth but if you believe 1 or maybe both ali-liston fights were dives, then perhaps one must not hold this against Listons lack of abilities. But it certainly cost him in intangibles for doing what he did. Ali the big edge here.. if you look at the whole picture Ali might take the cake, but I am a big advocate of styles and when it comes to the top of the rankings h2h plays a big part ....I decided to rate liston over Ali. call me crazy, its my opinion deal with it.
do you think ali would have beaten a seasoned talented prospect like Johnny Summerlin in his 5th-6th pro fight? No one here has saw the liston-summerlin fights. Only one person has provided "one" report on the first fight, no one has a report on the 2nd fight. Without strong evidence, we can only go with what the officals had. I saw a fight report once on the 2nd fight that said the fight was very close and could have gone either way but that listons jab was the difference. Holland Evening Sentinel, Wednesday, June 30, 1954 reported "Summerlin of Detroit, Michigan's ranking heavyweight, was no match for Charles Liston" Its my opinion deal with it But I dont think Ali lost to shavers, norton , young I think he beat them all.
Another thing that I'm interested in hearing is your reasons for putting Pinklon Thomas and Ernie Terrell above Wladimir Klitschko.
Pinklon Thomas was robbed of a title shot vs holmes. He should have had one in 1984 or 1985... he was robbed out of his chance to make a legacy. Outside of the Trevor Berbick Debable(which this close decision loss is certainly not more embarrasing than being knocked out in 2 by 38 year old fat golfer, or ross Purrity).......Pinklon was very dominant in the 1980s beating a very good figher tim witherspoon to win the title as well as other contenders of the 1980s. Pinklon had good size, fluid boxing skills, powerful right hand, but what made him a top fighter was he had one of the best jabs of that era he would jab with anyone. I rate him over wlad because he never suffered embarrasing losses near his prime like wlad did, beat better competition and I like Pinklon's style head to head over alot of fighters. Wlad can defintley move up over pink in the future. Ernie Terell? Terell is an underated fighter. At 6'6 He possessed a top level fast accurate jab( I am a big fan of jabs) and he beat excellent competition and was WBA champion in a tough heavyweight era. He has so far beaten better competition than Wlad, and only suffered one knockout loss in his prime to the very good big cat williams which was avenged(wlad never avenged his KO loss to 38 year old sanders), I really like Terells style its an ackward one, tough to figure out.....He uses his height reach jab clutching skills, sound boxing skills to frustrate his opponent. Ali really ruined terell, he was never the same after that. I think wlad still has alot of time to move up over terell and could do so very soon.
While your views have a lot in common with mine, here are some points on which I disagree with your list- Sonny Liston is MUCH too high. Just to briefly illustrate the point, let's compare him with Ali based on the four criteria you list at the top: 1. Head-to-head- It's pretty hard to argue Liston ranks ahead of Ali here, given what happened between them in the ring (Liston was past peak, but this was his very next fight after Patterson- he wasn't a corpse). Even if you do take Liston as the better one here, it has to be only narrowly, and the other three categories completely put him out of the running. 2. All-around accomplishments- Ali absolutely blows Liston out of the water here, and I don't think you would try to contest this point. If you did, I would compare their resumes, title reigns, longevity and the like, and you would have no reasonable counterargument. 3. Historical significance- Same as number two, this is an absolute slaughter in Ali's favor. One would more or less have to cover his ears, squeeze his eyes shut tight and shout loudly nonstop in order to not recognize that Ali is the more historically significant of these two. 4. Intangibles- Who do you like; the man who pulled two of the greatest upsets in history, fought tooth and nail in countless wars over two of the toughest decades the heavyweight division has seen, came off the canvas to win three times and, at age 37, had to finally be shut down by his corner after 10 rounds of ugly pasting from a prime Larry Holmes, or the man who did fight with a broken jaw once and came off the floor in one instance to win, but ultimately quit on his stool for the world heavyweight championship when he hadn't taken any terrible pounding- this being after quite possibly attempting to cheat- and then put on an extremely suspect showing in a one-round flop in the rematch? Ali's intangibles are on another planet from Liston's. Aside from that, in terms of significant dischord with my own opinions, I think Johnson, Tyson, and Wills are too high, Jeffries, Holyfield and Charles too low, Cleveland Williams much too high, George Godfrey too high, Gene Tunney much too low, I don't think Tony Tucker belongs ahead of Sam McVey, and where the heck is Jimmy Bivins?
