Sonny Liston vs Rocky Marciano

QUOTE="choklab, post: 22336824, member: 50845"]This is precisely what happened. Powell and Alonzo whupped Valdes from the ratings then both lost their next fights. I even posted the ratings showing that Alex miteff and Roy Harris had replaced Powell and Alonzo in the ratings by the time Liston fought Valdes. Nino was, as we know, unrated for Liston.[/QUOTE]Valdes got his number 1 ranking by beating the number 1 challenger Charles,he did not get a title shot.

Valdes lost his no1 spot to Moore who did get a title shot.

 

Your track record is there for all to see, you have even been called on it by moderator in the past .You are ,imo a dishonest poster .

 

You are more familiar with the moderator than I am. There is nothing distinctly dishonest here. Just another way of looking at things.

 

Anybody calling me a liar here?

 

People absolutely have the right to their own opinions and their individual way of looking at things, but going around and around and around and around in an effort to convince people that those opinions and individual ways of looking at things are right and everyone else's are wrong when there's absolutely zero chance of anyone's opinions and ways of looking at things changing is, basically, trolling. Sometimes you need to do what swag said he was going to do and simply walk away. Which I am going to do as well from this thread, or at least try to. I believe that if Sonny Liston and Rocky Marciano, at their absolute peaks as boxers, fought 100 times, Sonny Liston would win 95 of those bouts, if not more, within four rounds. I think I have clearly articulated why. Nothing you or anyone else can say will change my mind. So be it. Neither of us will ever know for sure.

 

This is absolutely true. Nino then sustained a ranking by staying undefeated. I Cannot argue with that. But Charles got that shot by going ahead of Nino. It’s well documented that Charles was the logical contender. A status that superseded number one contender during the set up at that time. Check it out. It’s true. The rematch was supposed to be Marciano vs Valdes…but there was more call for a Charles rematch based on the initial super fight.

well Valdes was behind other more logical contenders until October 54 when he was finally named “logical” and he stayed logical until jully 1955 when Archie became logical. So he was in line for maybe 9 months until Moore beat him the second time.

 

You are entitled to think this. Absolutely. And I shan’t call you a liar either.

 

In 1960
Floyd Patterson
Ingemar Johansson
Sonny Liston
Eddie Machen
Zora Folley
Archie Moore
Harold Johnson
Mike DeJohn
Roy Harris
Bob Cleroux
Cleveland Williams
Henry Cooper
Were all better than Richardson by my reckoning probably Chuvalo too

I just came up with a top 10 list without Richardson easily

 

Sonny Listons resume seems totally at odds with where people rate him H2H. He's probably better than his resume indicates but the top guys he beat were the size of today's light heavyweights.

It would be like people claiming Dmitry Bivol as some H2H heavyweight beast who would beat Tyson and Holyfield

 

Did you know that Liston could throw uppercuts and push his opponents back?

 

Yes I did know that. This would be more of an inside manoeuvre wouldn’t it rather than a long punch wouldn’t it?

At the short distance, where Sonny can try this, he’s also within Rockys range isnt he?

 

True MDWC,and ChokLab are not going to be dissuaded from there opinions.

MDWC makes some very good posts on different subjects.

 

Liston is over 25lbs of muscle heavier than Marciano,why would he be worried about Marciano at close range?

 

It's a physiological thing. A 200 pound man, assuming he's packed muscle and isn't just a string bean or fat, has the frame and fast twitch fibers to hang with many other men over 200. You have to consider several factors such as styles, skill, experience, etc, but generally speaking an elite guy whose 205 won't automatically crumble against a guy 230+ unless the opponent is just flat out better in multiple categories and has a solid game plan to win.

When you wrestle and box, you notice a big difference between men over 200 and men below that weight. Maybe that's some sort of sweet spot in terms of competition and more research needs to be done, but it's something I've seen consistently. As you pointed out, sometimes they heavyweight division has an inflation where even the low 200's range isn't ideal and you might want to come in at 210+ (such as the 70's and 80's) but it ebbs and flows. This is partly due to the rules. In a 15 round era where the ref actually penalizes excessive clinching and leaning, it wouldn't be wise to come in flabby and over 230. In a more lenient 12 round era with slower pace and action, have extra weight helps even if it's fat (but, again, there's many factors such as the clash of styles). Fury is likely the pinnacle of what a tall fat guy can pull off in a lenient era. He'd still be elite in other time periods, but his style and diet would probably need some adjustments if he went further back in time.

 

It's a religion.

For some, it's part Napoleon complex (short guys identifying with Rocky), part hero worship (fanboy adoration to the extreme).