That´s why I think Sonny Liston is overrated

I think Tyson gave a great account of himself, heart-wise, against Douglas. He was pounded from pillar to post from the opening bell but kept looking for openings and found one twice in the 8th, resulting in that knockdown. He also came out agressively in the 9th and the 10th. He was just broken down badly.

Beautiful display of boxing by Douglas, this is one of my favorite fights. I always wondered if he was a converted southpaw, he had a terrific left hand to throw after the 1-2.

 

I think there were a lot of Big fights that changed hands of the title that were not easy fights. Duran/Buchanan was a rough struggle but Duran went on to be #1 in lightweight ATG's. Marciano vs Walcott was a tough title exchange and went on to be an ATG. and there were many. I too believe the 1st Ali/Liston fight was one of Ali's best and Foreman was the 2nd best win. Trilla in Manilla was good but it was not the same Frazier as in the 1st bout, it may have not been the same Ali as in 1st fight but Frazier went downhill faster and worse than Ali. The 2nd Liston fight was a DIVE if there ever was one and anyone that doubts that is proberly a wrestling fan. Liston quit on his stool in the 1st fight with a shoulder injury but I think he was getting outboxed and it was Ali's greatest fight. Tyson did not give up in the Douglas fight something left him when Douglas got up from the KD, strangely it repeated again in the Holyfield fight,Lewis,Williams, and quit again with McBride. Duran quit in the 2nd Leonard fight but it was strange because the man stayed in with Puncher Barkley and Hagler after that event with SRL. There was something suspect about Liston and Ali brought it out of him. Sometimes fighters grow from that kind of humbling loss sometimes they dont

 

Your analysis is verry sound.

My only observation would be that the line between a hero and a coward is a verry fine one and Tyson was always close to the line.

 

A. I think Liston's resume is more than a bit behind Louis'. Here is a comparision of Liston's whole career with Louis' resume prior to his fight with BRADDOCK! with the highest Ring Magazine rating any opponent ever achieved down to the position of #5 contender:
Liston:
Champion--Patterson
1. Valdes, Folley, Machen
2.
3.
4. Williams, Harris
5.
Louis:
Champion--Carnera, Baer, Sharkey
1.
2. Pastor
3. Uzcudun, Levinsky, Poreda
4. Retzlaff, Toles
5.
So, before he wins the championship at 23, Louis has ko'd three champions to Liston's one for his career, and beaten 9 top 5 men, eight by ko, to Liston's 6, five by ko, for his career. Louis still has 26 victories in championship fights ahead of him, and a few more wins as an ex-champ. There really is no comparision. The best you could say is that you might consider Patterson about on par with the best of Louis' opponents, which I have my doubts about, but the width and depth of resume is not in the same league.

Yes, Louis lost to Schmeling, but Liston lost to Marshall.

B. Liston matched up well with smaller boxer types. Who knows? Only Machen, and perhaps Harris, could even be viewed this way. Harris was fairly ordinary and was stopped twice by the slow moving Bob Cleroux. Machen, and also, John Summerlin twice, went the distance with Liston.
As for Marciano and Louis having trouble with quick boxers, Louis knocked out Conn, Pastor, and Walcott--Marciano ko'd Walcott, Charles, and LaStarza. Liston did not knock out Machen, nor Summerlin.

Of that list of contenders you posted, Frankie Daniels, Albert Westphal, and Julio Mederos were never in the Ring's yearly ratings. Hunter was a fringe contender-old Valdes, Williams, Bethea, Harris, and Folley, are a fairly impressive run, but why not mention that Whitehurst, every bit as good as Mederos, Westphal, and Daniels, twice went 10 with Liston at his peak, and Machen went 12, or that guys like Cab, DeJohn, Besmanoff, and Howard King lasted more rounds than the men you mentioned?

 

If Joe Louis fell under the weels of a model T ford the day before he was due to fight Jimmy Bradock you could still make a case for him as an all time great heavyweight.

 

Totally agree. I am the first to proclaim it wasn't an in form sound Tyson, but the sheer facts are that he was in his prime. Absolutely. Tyson burnt unbelievably bright, but for a medium length of time.

 

Excellent post. Liston has a small collection of impressive wins, but his overall body of work is nowhere near Marciano's or especially Louis', and he was ultimately lackluster when he had the chance to really put himself on their level, or at least not to disgrace himself the way he did both times out.

 

Good Post!

 

Nice Analysis BUT BUT BUT I would argue top 4-5 fighters should be used (AS LONG AS THEY ARE ELITE) to make it more fairer and look at who really won. (Maybe we shouldnt include when the fighter was shot either)

1. Ali (Liston, Patterson, Foreman, Frazier, Holmes) 5-2

2. Louis (Schmelling, Sharkey, Walcott, Charles, Marciano) should be 3-3 (Walcott really won the first)

3. Liston (Ali/Patterson) - 2-2

4. Lewis (Holyfield/Klitchko/Tyson) - 4-0

5. Johnson (Jeffries/Langford/McVey/Jeanette) - can't remember all these series but think he lost to Jeanette

6. Jeffries - 2-1

7. Frazier - (Ali/Foreman) 1-3

8. Holyfield (Tyson/Bowe/Lewis) - 2-4

9. Tyson (Holmes/Lewis/Holyfield) - 1-2

10. Holmes (Tyson/Holyfield) - 0-2 (you can't count a Parkisons Syndrome Ali as an elite win as Ali was the most shot champ/challenger ever)

11. Dempsey (Tunney/Sharkey) - 1-2

So do we take from this analysis Lennox Lewis is the GOAT and Dempsey, Tyson and Holmes are sub-great HWs? :hey

 

Yes Louis would have KO'd the Ford and still beaten Bradock the next day with ease BUT if he'd died hmm lets think

Would he have been that much more than an Ike Ibeauchi figure

Sharkey, Baer and Carnera are great wins no doubt but would he crack the top 20 HWs? With the unavenged Schmelling loss, probably not quite.

 

I agree with your fight anlysis of Tyson best chance of winning. Actually I think Tysons chances go up if Tyson if dropped in the first it may increase his chances of winning because it may go straight into a toe-toe war and I'd expect Tyson to win.

To win Louis would need to give a calculated beating, pounching on eras, countering with right hands when Tysons in mid range following by pushing Tyson on the back foot with the jab and right and concentrating on the right hand and 1-2s. I think throwing left hooks against Tyson and letting the fight get into mid range is something Louis should avoid at all costs.

A bigger weakness Tyson had was he didn't have much of a plan B if his initial plan failed. He had to be coming forward, throwing more shots, pressuring. It is harder for a shorter smaller reach fighter to have a good plan B

Tysons weaknesses became larger as he aged. He just wasn't as good as he aged.

And the amount of determination he had went down after 1988. Once you've acheived everything in the sport, you may never have the huge amount of determination you had prior to achieving the pinnacle. The drop in motivation had to be at an all time low against McBride, yes Tyson was shot BUT he could have won that fight if he really pushed himself, he just had no desire to push himself that extra mile against Mcbride that he did have against say Rudduck/Bruno. I suppose you could compare it to sleeping with Halle Berry and then having a chance to pull a fat girl at the club, you just don't have the same desire or desperation you once had.