Sonny Liston, why is he ranked so highly?

A good one. But Patterson is a small HW, while Liston was bigger and probably big by that times standards. Stylistically it was a nightmare of a matchup (Partly due to Patterson's chin. It's like Wlad vs Dempsey. Most pick Dempsey to win).

I don't consider him an aggressive swarmer. I had this discussion before. I've always considered him more of a boxer-puncher type, especially at Heavyweight. He didn't demand to push you backwards nor was in your face. He could box in a zone, and do so movement and shifting within that zone.

Oh, I thought your case was he didn't have a weak chin. My bad...

He was, and I also think you can't list 5 HW champions that you thought were noticeably inferior in terms of their chin. Patterson durability wasn't awful, but he did have trouble taking one punch power. And when hit, he usually froze up (Why Ali coined him the Rabbit). He's been hit, downed, and staggered badly often. His great stamina helped him not got KOed too badly or cold. He was also an elusive target, a fighter with good defense. Good defensive, but still downed more than any HW champ. Even in his late 60's early 70's run where he changed his style he was still being floored on an almost regular basis.

Patterson chin was just not very good. Let's not meander anymore.

 

Peralta was a good fighter. Some non-winning record fighters took Liston the distance. A lot more fighters did too, even though Foreman fought well into his 40's and fought over 80 fights.

Interesting to me. I guess Liston could possibly be the hardest hitter in HW history. But I doubt it. He could've hit like a superheavyweight or modern 90's HW. Could've hit harder than Tyson and Lewis. Boosting Patterson's chin doesn't help this credence, though. You must think Liston would kill Frazier then, huh?

Holyfield probably would, though. But on ESB Classic, even the best posters make the mistake of commenting on Holyfield would've been too small for Liston. For Christ Sake... he was just as big if not bigger. But the top posters have helped boost Liston's legend somewhat successfully I believe.

I agree. So how do you rank Liston ahead of him? I know you factor H2H (You really must to do so) but how much do you factor again? I think I remember 40-50% was H2H factored.

He might have been, but he probably wasn't. Foreman might've beaten him... who knows.

I never used the KO % is my only point so I don't really see the point of jumping on that single statement. I was making a collection of points to prove my point... you choice to respond to selectively respond to the KO percentage point. Regardless, the overwhelming of evidence precedes with Foreman, and I think I did a decent job making my case when I did awhile back.

Even the biggest Liston poster on here ranked Foreman as a better puncher. Not a more powerful puncher, but a better one. That says something about how great Foreman's power was. But you're trying to merely rival power for power. I have seen Liston hit the Heavybag, and I have since Foreman hit the Heavybag (The biggest standard one). And it's not even comparable. Foreman would put a hole in the bag. Historians and boxing reporters have commented on this. It can be noted on the When We Were Kings documentary.

 

Lunny, I made a huge long post regarding Liston. I analyzed his ability and worth as an H2H Heavyweight. I talked about his good resume (Although definitely lacking a great big HW. At least a great HW that's not the stylistic nightmare Liston was for Floyd. I've talked about his losses, too).

The reasoning always comes down to H2H. People feel he's a monster. I agree that he put it all together on paper very well. But the reality is what translates on paper doesn't always materials in the heat of things in a tough grind it out fight. Liston never really proved this, and he certainly isn't bullying down ATG Heavyweights. I'm still astonished at how some rank, not rate but rank him so highly. Liston will always be one of ESB's favorite fighters. The what if element and his domination are to terrific to ignore. Though, fairly ranking him, I don't see him as being a viable top 5 Heavyweight. Anything from 6-14 seems much more appropriate of a ranking to me.

 

That's a misleading and inaccurate claim often used to prop Liston up.

Only half the names you listed were actually considered top HWs at the time. Valdez was completely washed up by the time Liston got to him, and Williams was still on the way up; neither was ranked at the time Liston beat them. Harris was never that highly thought of, even when he was given a shot at Patterson a couple years earlier.

Machen and Folley were the only two leading contenders Liston beat in his career, and neither one was considered the best contender outside of Liston himself; that was Johansson. Liston chose not to accept a big money offer to fight Johansson in Sweden (understandable as he was himself already the #1 contender and didn't need any big win to guarantee a title shot). You can't claim a fighter "cleaned out his division of all the top HWs of his era" when he chose not to fight the next best contender out there for him.

There are numerous HOF HW champs who did as good or even better a job of "cleaning up" their divisions than Liston did on their way to title shots - ie: Marciano, Dempsey, Walcott, Fitzsimmons, just to name a few. Tyson and Frazier cleaned out their respective divisions far more thoroughly than Liston when unifying the titles. What Liston did in his division isn't really unique compared to what other HOF HW champs have done.

More like he ran away and hid in Sweden for years afterward.

 

Only if you think merely counting the number of times a fighter was stopped in his career will determine if he's chinny or not. Fighters like Terry Norris and Tommy Morrison were stopped even less times than Patterson or Tyson; do you think they weren't chinny?

Patterson has been down more times in a single fight that Tyson has in his whole career put together. Patterson clearly had a suspect chin and showed it consistently throughout his career.

 

He fought a lot of guys that were rated in the top 10 at some point in their careers, but even these lists show that he didn't fight a relatively lot of fighters that were rated at the time he fought them. Prior to 1960, I believe the only ranked HWs he fought were DeJohn and Bethea; and both were considered only bottom 10 or fringe contenders. When he beat Harris in 1960, that was considered a step up for him, and yet Harris wasn't even considered one of the truly elite contenders at that time.

 

Thank you!

Killing it My2Sense.

 

Liston won a lot of fights at the weigh-in.

Clay avoided it in Fight one by going "crazy".

Liston is the type of fighter you wouldn't want to fight out on the parking lot, kinda like the cop that ended upside down in the trash can after Liston deposited him there.

 

I find it odd that we are having a revist in history over Patterson's chin.

Or rewriteing history in this regard

 

Patterson was a difficult man to put away. He may have gone down 7 times against Johansson, but I find it incredible that he got up 7 times. In Tyson's case he usually found a soft spot on the canvas whenever he was knocked down. Patterson was suspectible to knockdowns early but interestingly he was never knocked down after the first couple of rounds.

With all due respect to Terry Norris and Tommy Morrison, they were knocked out by the likes of Michael Bentt and Keith Mullings. Patterson was stopped by three men, Ingemar Johansson, Sonny Liston and Muhammad Ali. Liston's KO wins were by far the most impressive and decisive.

The argument that Liston did not clean out the division because not all of the men he fought were ranked at the time is a bit silly. The men Liston fought and beat were the men who made up the late 1950's and early 1960's heavyweight era. The few that Liston didn't fight simply did not want to fight him. He established superiority over every fighter in the division until Cassius Clay came along.

 

Only because his management wanted to rather have the fight in Canada for a better sum of money. However Liston had legal troubles at the time and his he was suspended by the NBA.

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/courant/access/912950752.html?dids=912950752:912950752&FMT=ABS&FMTS=ABS:AI&type=historic&date=Aug+23%2C+1961&author=&pub=Hartford+Courant&desc=Johansson-Liston+Fight+Set+in+Canada+This+Year&pqatl=google

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/courant...Series+of+Developments+Bar+Match&pqatl=google

When he was acquitted of charges, Patterson suddenly started showing interest in a fight against Liston and the fight was made.

After winning the title, Liston wanted to give Johansson a title shot but Ingemar ended up retiring due to his poor performance against Brian London. Harold Johnson, whom a young Liston came close to fighting in the mid 1950's, was another alternative but he ended up losing to Willie Pastrano.

 

http://news.google.com/newspapers?i...AJ&dq=liston johansson canada&pg=1001,3867282

 

Ingo was out of his league if he fought the prime Liston.

Liston could take Ingo's punch, Ingo wouldn't be able to take Liston's punch.

Liston was just too big...super long reach...could box...and had a full arsenal of punches.

Ingo maybe lasts 4 rounds before heading to the canvas.

 

I wouldn't say it's "silly" as its a point made in reports even from his own day.

For example, this was printed in Time Magazine following the Valdes win:

"Whatever his connections, many boxing buffs see Liston as the U.S.'s most promising challenger for Sweden's Johansson, even though Liston has so far fought only second-raters."

Keep in mind that this was a contemporary view of Liston after he had already fought Valdes, DeJohn, Williams, and Bethea.

It wasn't until 1960 when he scored his string of wins over Harris, Folley, and Machen that Liston was viewed as fighting top fighters of the era. Those wins were enough to establish him as the clear cut #1 contender, but to say he "cleaned out" an entire era is placing a lot of stock in only a relatively few wins in a short span of time.

 

I don't think Johansson should be written off as "he would've been another easy Liston victim". Clay was also an easy Liston victim, remember?

What are the facts?

• From a legacy point of view, Johansson would be the 3rd-best heavyweight Liston fought. Outside of Patterson, Johansson never lost to any Liston victims. In fact, even Johansson's foes didn't lose to Liston victims;

• From a stylistic point of view, Johansson matches up much better with Liston than the 2nd-best heavyweight he fought, Patterson. In fact, my grandmother would match up better with him than Floyd. So, in a head-to-head sense, Johansson would be the 2nd-best heavyweight that Liston fights;

• Liston could be hurt by right hands. King sent him reeling across the ring with a right but didn't follow up. Whitehurst stuns Liston - this is on film. DeJohn staggered Liston with a right according to Sports Illustrated. Ali stunned Liston with a right hand (first fight) and knocked him down with a right hand in their second fight.

• Ingomar is the better right hand puncher than any of the former mentioned who stunned or hurt Liston. In fact, Johanson is the best right hand puncher he'd ever faced, period.

Do i favor Johansson against Liston? No. But given the facts listed above, there is absolutely no reason to count him out before the bell rung.


It's not really Liston's fault that they never shared a ring, but at the same time, not having beaten the 2nd best heavyweight of your time means you have not cleaned out the division, as many claim he did.

p.s. Here is Liston vs Besmanoff:

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSFtNeAVloM[/ame]

You think his straight punches are faster than given credit for. I don't. Although he did produce some nice short hooks, he mostly threw bruising, sometimes clubbing punches. Watch the final volley against Williams. It's not a combination he throws. It's: clubbing punch. Another clubbing punch. Another clubbing punch. No coherence. Compare that to for instance the combination that Lewis put away Golota or Botha with. The handspeed and technique are a league above, despite being a lot bigger than Liston.

Guys like Machen, Whitehurst and Besmanoff made him look stupid at times for the same reason, and they did relatively well, while Johansson easily blew Machen away and Moore stopped Whitehurst twice.

You're saying Liston got outclassed in the jab department against Ali because of styles. I'm saying it's because Ali had better speed, timing and height, which shows how insignificant the wingspan ("reach") measurement is, where Ali is a midget compared to Liston.