Please rate Cleveland Williams?

1. All of the aforementioned men were future champions besides Folley who might've been part of that group had he not been ducked, and gotten the title shot he deserved but I digress.

2. Johnson never beat another heavyweight again because he never FOUGHT another heavyweight again, as he was the light heavyweight champion. Nice try though.

3. Machen was on a 5 fight win streak consisting of KOs over Dejohn, London, Whitehurst, Rischer, with a UD over Doug Jones in the mix as well. He was young (in his 20s) and in his prime when he fought Williams. Deal with it.

Williams drew with the highest ranking heavyweight not named Sonny Liston in a fight most thought he won. If it was a swede fighter (whom you have an odd obsession with as BlackCloud alluded to earlier) who drew with the #2 contender, you'd be shouting it from the rooftops.

Nice straw-man but I never compared their results against Machen in the post you quoted. As a matter of fact, I did not even mention Johannson once in the aforementioned post.

Also funny, you're calling my "comparisons" nonsensical when you stated the following in another one of your notorious comparisons involving Williams

Putting aside the fact that you disingenuously neglected to mention that while Williams was considerably (and literally) shot against Ali, while London was in his prime when he faced Ali (which was sadly the most honest part of your post) and you left out a common opponent who lost to Williams, and KO'd London. This is probably the most disingenuous, dishonest, and hypocritical post I've ever seen. And that's saying A LOT considering your earlier posts.

Here's how both did against Machen. "Machen dominated the bout as London was little more than a punching bag for the American. London retired in his corner after 5th round, complaining that his nose felt like it was broken." Source: https://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Eddie_Machen_vs._Brian_London

Williams on the other hand did notably better. Williams and Machen fought to a draw. A majority draw actually. The other judge had Williams a clear winner as did the AP (98-96), and the majority of those ringside.

"Williams the no. 5 contender felt he had turned in an upset. Most of the crowd of 10,000 partial perhaps to the hometown favorite and one judge agreed."

Source: https://www.newspapers.com/clip/48465177/the-news-review/

"Williams, a powerful left hooker, shook Machen in the 3rd and 8th rounds"

"In a way he's tougher to fight than Liston because he has the speed the other doesn't have. You can't walk around Cleveland like you can Liston." -Eddie Machen

Source: https://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Cleveland_Williams_vs._Eddie_Machen

If I was a dishonest agenda-driven POS such as yourself I could say "Williams and Ingo did the same against Machen because both went unbeaten against him.

God knows you'd throw a fit subsequently go on yet another 5 page rant on why Williams was the worst boxer to ever lace up the gloves as you do, whenever you see him getting the slightest amount of praise. I'm sure you'll find a way to work in your repetitive "Baby Booze, and Candy "ass" McDaniels" schtick

1. Not even remotely true. Williams could've lost to Machen via KO or lost to him at all but he didn't. If Williams

2. Even it your statement was accurate (which it's not) it would also ring true for London and Williams results against Machen, yet that didn't stop you from stating both did about the same. Just another example of your never-ending dishonesty and hypocrisy.

Interesting logic. Of course, under this premise, Williams has a better record against Machen than Quarry, Valdes, Jackson, Dejohn, London, Whitehurst, Rischer, Maxim, Summerlin, Holman, Mederos, Miteff, and (Both Young Jack, and Alonzo) Johnson. Excellent point Chok! Seems I've been underrating Williams. Did not realize how all of the above men paled in comparison to him.

 

Losing to future champions is no disgrace at all. And neither is losing to Foley actually. I have respect for Williams in drawing with a man losing only to these kinds of fighters. But the point I was making was that before these defeats, Machen must have appeared more of championship potential himself. Williams did not gather wins against Valdes, Baker, Tommy Jackson and Summerlin in so so few fights did he?

This is correct. Johnson never did fight another heavyweight. The point being that a win over Machen by then did not launch Johnson into the role of serious threat to the HW championship. Earlier, it might have been seen as automatic threat..but after his opponents losses to eventual champions, this fine win did not alter things for Johnson. So he concentrated on the lower division in spite of it. Also in spite of beating the man a powerhouse like Williams later got the draw against.

This is true. Machen was a good fighter. He was a real fighting contender. Usually beating someone like that is the thing worth showing off about. I remember Scott Frank drew with Renaldo Snipes and got a title shot from that so I guess Williams was unlucky not to get a title shot from his draw too. I wonder if anyone thought Williams had a chance with the then champion though?

Williams did well to get the draw. It’s his highlight. Let’s celebrate that. It got no better for him.

if Williams crushed Machen in one round I would happily shout that from the rooftops too.

London was in his prime around 1959 but he was a pretty standard contender type for a bit longer. Not that he could do much better, I’m not sure anyone would say Ali fought the best version. Which is probably true of a lot of Ali 1960s opponents. He might not beat the best version of them but he would have beat them anyway.

Ingo KO rnd 1. Williams Draw.

what does this POS mean? I am guessing it’s not “Person of Substance”. If it is, let me thank you for that.

Williams did a lot better against Machen than London did. This is factually accurate yes. Neither beat Machen. This is also accurate. London did beat Rischer quicker than almost anyone. This includes Williams. What’s not to understand here?

 

Who's being a "size queen"? The only person talking about size is you, claiming that Machen can't have been much good because he dropped a hair's breadth decision to the world light heavyweight champion.

 

Many of the guys who hold a candle for Williams are the same ones who sneer at any era where former light heavyweights might beat the best heavyweights.

 

Tiddler.

 

Tried to avoid responding but I unfortunately could not resist

No but he drew with the man who did, as did Folley which was enough for you to place Folley at the same level of Machen. So why shouldn't the same apply to Williams?

This is nothing but made-up malarkey (the usual from your good-self). In the AP report from the fight, it was stated that the reason Johnson was likely not going to recieve a title shot because he "displayed little prowess" in his bout against Machen.

"Johnson had hoped that Saturday night's performance against the No. 2 heavyweight contender would earn him the status of heavyweight challenger. However, it was a comparatively dull bout"

OK, I still don't see your point.

Many thought at the time, Patterson was avoiding Williams, and in fact would've lost had they met in the ring as much as you don't want to hear it.

Lol you'd make every excuse in the book for Machen (Machen didn't have his wheaties, Machen wasn't ready, Williams should've given him a round or 2 to warm up, etc) as you did when you attempted to make a case for Daniels being robbed because YOU thought he was slightly ahead in the footage that you did see which was ONLY FIVE ROUNDS. It's as laughable as it is pathetic.

Lol London was two bouts and only months away, from his one-punch KO over Rischer that you continuously jack off to.

I was referring to Williams and London. This is the SECOND time, you've interjected Ingo into a discussion that had nothing to do with him. Your obsession with swede fighters (and more specifically Ingo) is becoming increasingly concerning.

Look in the mirror.

In a comparison between common opponents, you KNEW that Williams drew with Machen while London was stopped early in a one-sided manner. You KNEW this was relevant in a comparison with performances against common opponents but you chose to leave that out and word it like you did because you have an agenda and don't want to give Williams any credit relative to anybody else. It's the same reason you left out Dick Richardson when you compared their common opponents. You never had any intentions of being objective because as I stated earlier, you're an agenda-driven tool.

 

So because Williams drew with machen who beat Bob Baker, Tommy Jackson and Nino Valdes this means you would expect Machen to also lose to Sly Jones in a similar number of fights as Williams did? Works both ways doesn’t it?

Henry Brimm drew with a prime Sugar Ray Robinson. Let’s start a thread about him?

I never said it was anything more than a dull bout. I was demonstrating the luster of even beating Machen before Williams fought him was no longer catapulting anyone into title fights as it once did when Ingo sensationally beat the unbeaten version 4 years earlier. A draw at this point just was not doing it by then.

I would like to see evidence of this. The way I understand it Jackson was his number one contender. Johansson was his number one contender. Harris was his number 3. London was number 4 at one point before meeting Floyd. I can’t think where a higher ranking for Williams fit into these timelines.

. mcneeley was a mere warm up for Liston. Radmacher and Mcneeley were never really meant to be real challengers. Floyd didn’t break camp for those fights.

I think Radmacher was an extra bout that was made while Floyd was still in camp after the Jackson fight.

Lots of people of a later generation certainly like to think Williams would beat Floyd but it’s not quite as simple as deciding one man got knocked down a lot and the other one hit really hard. The guy hitting hard has to have some kind of filmed evidence that he decked quality fighters for one thing. It all kind of falls apart after that. Or it used to. Today a YouTuber is given a chance against boxers if he has big muscles and enough of a following. So I understand the confusion.

That’s rather unpleasant and totally uncalled for.

I credit Williams with the draw against a very good Machen. That’s plenty credit enough. It was as good as it got for him.

It’s a pity you seem to think a fact based opinion is some evil agenda. Fact driven opinions are totally cool.

happy you did.