Sonny Liston W 10 Bert Whitehurst II 1958

One flaw in this logic is that I think Johnny Holman was a better fighter over his career than Alex Miteff.

 

Whitehurst 1 was Liston's 18th fight.
How do you account for Joe Rowan actually koing Whitehurst inside a round, does that make him a monster puncher,bigger than Liston and Moore? Was Rowan's technique better than Moore's since he sparked Whitehurst whereas Moore only tko'd him? Or is it possible ,even likely that none of the comparisons are valid?

 

Except for the fact that Miteff beat the pants off Holman one fight before Holman lost to Williams!! At that point Williams literally feasted on Miteffs left overs.

Why value Holman in his last actual fight? His career over all should not be a consideration since he was damaged goods at the time he lost to both Miteff and WIlliams in back to back fights.

Miteff was actually a pretty good fighter over all. Alex was a better win for Williams. Alex became a fringe guy taking paydays at the end but he traded mostly within the top ten. Initially Alex was groomed as a star but he was rushed. He beat Holman in his 12th fight then Williams (who was having his 38th fight) beats the same guy next time out.


Interestingly, the report of the Williams vs Holman fight says Holman even had Williams in trouble early in the fight so Cleveland had a lot more improving to do since by then Holman won just one of his last 7 fights.

Miteff was Williams first win worth taking seriously.

 

I dont really know the details of the Rowan fight or the circumstanses, but Whitehurst showed himself to be pretty durable against Liston who was a puncher. My comment was that you got to give credit to Moore because he was able to finish Whitehurst 2X in the same period that he survived Liston 2X I did not say it to undermine Liston as a puncher but credit to Archie as crafty, versityle and intellegent and adaptable battle master