Foreman was very scary but, that was early on in the 70s......... I didn't think Foreman looked scary during his comeback...... Of course Foreman would scare the Dickens right outta his typical "Bum of the Month" tomato can he was kayoing on ESPN or the USA network during the late 80s, but he didn't seem to scare his solid contenders that he faced in the 90s.... MR.BILLhat
Amen! Many people today seem to think that size, weight lifting, and big muscles equals a superior fighter. Not true, in my opinion! In the old days, boxing trainers knew that being muscle bound didn't work against quality competition in the ring. Vitali would be out of his league against Sonny Liston...again...in my opinion.
I think a prime Liston is too fast and precise for any version of Vitali Klitschko. He'd carve him up. It would be a tough fight but I can remember Vitali against what I thought was an overweight, over-the-hill and sluggish Lennox Lewis, and Vitali lost that one. Of course Liston is shorter, around the same height as Sam Peter, and Vitali will attempt his same strategy. But Liston was quicker and more athletic, Liston's speed is underrated. I'm talking about prime Liston. If Liston had been matched with slow fat guys more in his career he'd not be called "slow". And if Vitali had been matched with some of the fast men we see Liston against, he'd look horribly slow. I suspect liston would do well with such a large target in front of him. It would be a long gruelling night though.
On the flipside, he'd also look horribly big to mismatched proportions. Almost everyone considers Liston a giant because he mostly fought small men, but he was as big as Vitali's smallest opponent - Byrd. Who did beat him of course, albeit under special circumstances.
Yes, Vitali would look ridiculously big against a Floyd Patterson. I wouldn't say Byrd was the same size as Liston. Liston was a big-boned natural heavyweight. Byrd was a blown-up light-heavy at best. More similar to Patterson if anything.
Not all of Liston's wins were over small men. he fought Williams x2 6'3'' 215lbs Elmer Rush 214lbs Howard King 6'2'' 204lbs Nino Valdes 6'3'' 211lbs Mike Dejohn 6' 21/2'' 202lbs Amos Lincoln 6' 2'' 215lbs Henry Clark 6 3'' 215lbs Gerhard Zech 65'' 226lbs bigger or comparable to himself in size,and height. Many of them, when he was creaking and old. My money goes on Sonny :good Vitali,I like, but his opposition has been abysmal.
Lisotn doesn't have the style or movement to avoid Vitali's punches from weird angles. Liston reinged when he was a big man who could bully his opponents. Vitali has underrated reflexes, he is one of the best HW's ever at making opponents miss. He also has the better chin, Liston would not have taken that uppercut from Lewis. I see a hard, physical fight where both fighters land their jabs, but Vitali's size, strength and toughness let him take over in the middle to late rounds.
All those fighters on your list are small compared to Vitali, they are in the size range of Gomez who has more boxing skills than most of them and could do very little to Vitali.
You missed the point Chris Pontius said Liston's wins were mostly over smaller men . I gave a few examples of men as big ,or bigger than Liston whom Sonny fought. All of Vitali's wins have been over men considerably smaller than himself,and the vast majority of them were club fighters,imo. Gomez is 36 years old, and his best win is a dec over a 42 year old McCall.
And he's not a legitimate 230 pounder either. He was just plain fat against Vitali. Gomez is a pretty big guy, but I doubt he'd scale over 200 pound if he was in shape.
True, but let's be honest. Williams aside, those opponents were either very mediocre or over the hill. And even at that, none of them scales over 220lbs. VK is 250lbs. Of Liston's key wins, i.e. Patterson, Machen, Williams & Folley, only Williams scaled over 200lbs and/or was over 6'1. Byrd doesn't (nearly) have Liston's strength or punching power, but he is similar in size. He carries 213lbs very well: (click to view) http://i.a.cnn.net/si/2006/writers/richard_obrien/04/21/byrd.klitschko/p1_byrd_klitschko_0421.jpg Whether it's "natural" or not is a bit of a slippery slope to me. He applied the right training methods and gained quite a lot of muscle as you can see. If he did it the Toney way, sure, then i'd understand. But like Holyfield, he became a legit 213lbs, ripped, heavyweight. Now if he entered the ring at 190lbs, then it would be a different story..
I think Liston is bigger than Byrd. Just a bigger-framed man. Byrd fought at 175 and 195 in his last two fights, and claimed that he walked around at 185 between heavyweight fights ! To me, that's a sign that his "213 pounds" was not a weight that he was genuinely settled at. I mean, Liston would never be able to make 175. This may or may not be relevant. The point is, every individual is different. I think natural bone-structure size is important, as is strength and power. I understand your argument about "natural" or not, but I would say that applies to a Holyfield more than a Byrd. I mean, even Holyfield had a smallish frame, he's not really much bigger than Byrd at all, that's true - but he really was ripped and genuinely built up to a genuine 210 pounds. Byrd's "ripped" at 213 pounds like Michael Spinks was, and Spinks was 6'3. Yes, Byrd and Spinks packed on muscle and carry the weight well but they looked a little less solid than Holyfield. Michael Spinks the same size as a young George Foreman (who was 213 against Peralta) ? Byrd's reach was listed as 74 or something like that. Liston's was 84. Not necessarily accurate on either count, but surely indicates something. Of Vitali's opponents, I think Liston is closer in dimensions to Sam Peter, a little less thick, a lot less fat and with longer arms, but pretty close.