Sonny Liston vs Joe Frazier

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by Ali Frazier, Mar 22, 2014.


  1. Tonto62

    Tonto62 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,618
    2,306
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Mar 26, 2011
    Liston was in his 40's when he lost to Martin .Frazier was just 29 when Ali busted him up, and he looked as good as ever in his second fight with Quarry.Frazier had limitations and to ignore/excuse them fans play up his physical condition after FOTC with gross exaggerations.
     
  2. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Boxing Addict Full Member

    7,314
    919
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Jul 30, 2014
    Louis was on a 8 fight win streak when he lost to Marciano. He couldn't have been to bad right?

    Similarly Ali was on a 14 fight when streak not having lost in half a decade when Spinks beat him. Using your logic wouldn't that mean they weren't far from their best? Of course not because it doesn't suit your agenda to undermine Liston.
     
  3. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    23,651
    3,011
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Dec 31, 2009

    Ali was on a 14 fight streak but everyone knew he was he was running on empty, barely getting away with it after defending against Norton. He was a dead man walking and couldn’t really convincingly beat anybody anymore. Put it this way, He was no longer a convincing champion when he fought Spinks.

    That’s totally different to Louis and Sonny. Clearly they were not their best! When did I say that? Clearly both were Still convincing as contenders. Nobody was saying they were barely getting away with it by the time of their last fight.

    Louis was outpointing Jimmy Bivins, who was always a good fighter, and Joe was genuinely a #1 rated contender in his last fight.

    Sonny did as good a job of Henry Clark and scrap iron Johnson than any of the current contenders would expect to do. Don’t forget, on paper, he should have had as much mileage going for him as Floyd Patterson who was still knocking about the top tier.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2019
  4. Tonto62

    Tonto62 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,618
    2,306
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Mar 26, 2011
    Bivins was in decline and hadn't been ranked for 2 years, he had 3 recent wins over 2 journeymen but was losing to the better guys.
     
  5. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    23,651
    3,011
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Dec 31, 2009
    Utter claptrap. You know full well the following year Bivins would get rated again after sensationaly knocking out the highly touted Coley Wallace who beat Marciano in the amateurs. Bivins even beat mike Dejohn years later. After losing to Louis, Bivins only lost to good fighters on points and would still hold his own against the best. He was never disgraced after losing to Louis.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2019
  6. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    23,651
    3,011
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Dec 31, 2009
    And on this win streak, Sonny, even then, was still a better fighter than George Foreman was in his comeback.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2019
  7. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Boxing Addict Full Member

    7,314
    919
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Jul 30, 2014
    You said he wasn't "much past it" which is bull**** as he was 40 perhaps older. At the same time, Frazier was a paraplegic at the ripe old age of 29. :lol:
     
  8. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    23,651
    3,011
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Dec 31, 2009
    So in the answer to my question “can you dispute Sonny was deservedly highly ranked?” I am assuming Your answer Is “I cannot dispute this”.

    I rest my case.
     
  9. Tonto62

    Tonto62 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,618
    2,306
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Mar 26, 2011
    That's an opinion
     
  10. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Boxing Addict Full Member

    7,314
    919
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Jul 30, 2014
    Louis was no 1 contender when he faced Marciano. Ali was CHAMPION when he faced Spinks. Rankings are not in an indicator of how close a fighter is to his peak. You know this but it doesn't jive with your intellectual dishonesty.
     
  11. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    23,651
    3,011
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Dec 31, 2009
    When did I EVER say Rankings are an indicator of how close a fighter is to his peak?

    I know Liston and Louis were both past their peak. There. Said it again. Third or fourth time now.

    If anything it is dishonest of you to continue to say that I think they were peak after I have told you this many times I know that they were not.

    Rankings are still an indication of a fighters worth - at that time. how close they are to their prime does not takeaway from their value as a contender. Not championship level. But justifiably top contender level. Because they earned that.

    Sonny and Louis were still registering top contender level results.

    At the time of the Spinks fight Ali was masquerading as a champion on unconvincing wins against contenders. where as Louis and Sonny were still clearly beating contenders.
     
    Last edited: Aug 5, 2019
  12. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    23,651
    3,011
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Dec 31, 2009
    It stands up.
     
  13. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Boxing Addict Full Member

    7,314
    919
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Jul 30, 2014
    You bought it up to support your stance that Liston wasn't "much past it".
    In your own words you said he wasn't "much past it" despite being 40+ lol
    Beating contenders or not. All one needs to do is look at film of the fighters (which I honestly doubt you have) to see they were shells of themselves.
     
  14. choklab

    choklab cocoon of horror Full Member

    23,651
    3,011
    Sportsbook:
    1,000
    Dec 31, 2009
    Sonny was certainly getting on. He was not fighting the best men in the division after losing to Ali so it’s difficult to gage exactly. I don’t think Sonny was getting hit much in return in any of the fights between Ali and Leotis since he was still knocking guys out in pretty impressive fashion. He was still having things his own way. So yeah, he has to have been past it somewhat, but only so far as any contender who is also knocking out Henry Clark level guys.

    despite being how old? There is no acceptable evidence that Charles Sonny Liston was over 40 years old in 1969. The latest census points to him being born no earlier than 1930. Making him 38 or 39 at the oldest in 1969.

    At a similar age, after winning lesser fights, George Foreman relaunched himself as a contender in his comeback before scoring wins as good as Sonny had in 1969.


    What do you mean “beating contenders or not”? Beating a current world rated contender is still The most obvious way anyone can prove that they are still a legitimate threat at World Level.

    still being able to knockout and convincingly beat rated fighters whilst being the shell of their former selves still means they are legit fighters with “something” to offer.

    Again, you are the one being intellectually dishonest here not me. You are suggesting they had nothing to offer just because of their age... when history shows that ex champions who are still beating real contenders have always been taken seriously. Old ones like Foreman, Larry Holmes, Lennox Lewis, Vitali Klitschko etc etc.
     
    Last edited: Aug 6, 2019
  15. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Boxing Addict Full Member

    7,314
    919
    Sportsbook:
    500
    Jul 30, 2014
    I've made a thread on this very topic. We can continue our discussion there.
     


Sign up for ESPN+ and Stream Live Sports! Advertisement