When has it ever been an indication that he was steered cleared of Williams? Williams barely broke the top 10 during his first reign and was behind both Ingo and Liston and others in the pecking order during the second, and I've never heard that either Floyd or Cus talked about him but I've might have missed something. Seems strange to me that Floyd was steered clear of someone he in no way was obliged to defend against, though. Steered clear of both Folley and Machen also sounds a bit dodgy to me. They were the top two for '58 and were more deserving of a title shot than Harris, yes, but Floyd only defended once in '58 and later that year both dropped in the rankings. Floyd then signed with the guys that beat them (even though Cooper had to be replaced by London due to injury). So, Machen was nr 1 when Floyd signed with nr. 3 Harris, so "steered clear" can be applied to him even though it very well could be as simple as just Harris being better money as a white challenger, but Machen was side stepped. And, sure, Folley was also ranked higher than Harris, so perhaps. But by that definition a champion is steered clear of everyone ranked above the one he's defending against. Has been a lot of steering clear in that case. Frazier was steered clear of some 50 odd fighters two times in '72 alone by that reckoning. When it comes to Liston it is well documented that Cus tried do steer Floyd clear of him, but obviously failed.
You may have a point about Williams not being within in close enough challenging distance to pose as a threat. But I think it’s been widely discussed that there were some challengers D’Amato kept him away from.
Yes in terms of career and accomplishments and it's asking for ATG not top tier ATG. Also boxing games seem to agree. https://www.arkhamalley.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/IMG_4440-scaled.jpg
Yes, Williams name is thrown in that hat, but I've never seen anyone bring up anything Cus ever said about it. Neither with Folley or Machen. Doesn't mean there can't be something somewhere, but during the many times I've seen it brought up here I've never seen it substantiated with anything said by Cus or Floyd. That Cus pretty much did a Mickey in Rocky 3 ("he'll punch you into tomorrow Rock") concerning Liston is clearly established, though. As for Harris getting the shot in '58 I think it can be as simple as money. White hopes would go on being a lift for revenues until the 80's, 90's and the Harris fight did make good money, so I think it doesn't has to be more complicated than that. Doesn't make it right, but just don't know that it was a case of staying away from Machen rather than just wanting Harris.
I have made the argument many times that he is. If you look at the Ring Magazine end of year rankings, he was in the top ten in more years than any other heavyweight champion in history. Unfortunately he was not a good fit for any weight class, but that is still an incredible run of form.
No, but I could see why people say he is. He was a very good fighter, but breaking the youngest heavyweight champion record and being the first man to regain the title aren’t things you get an actual award for in boxing, yes it’s a bonus, but if someone won the same belts he won and made the same number of defences he did, and became 2 time champion, but they won the belt at 28 instead, people wouldn’t be saying they were an ATG. The age thing bumps his legacy up a bit, but the main things are, how many defences you make and who you beat. If he’d’ve won a title at Light Heavyweight, that’d push him into ATG territory 100%. Michael Moorer is just about an ATG IMO for example, he’s not an ATG at light heavyweight or at heavyweight separately, but as a fighter he is because he held belts in both divisions. I’d describe Patterson as an ATG gatekeeper. Edit: His skill level is ATG level, his style may be bad for him against certain guys, as in he may lose to guys a lot worse than himself due to styles, but all in all his skill level was ATG level, he could beat other very good fighters providing the style wasn’t too bad for him, and if he’d’ve campaigned at light heavyweight, I’m basically certain he’d be an ATG.
18 if you factor in his short light heavyweight career. That is an incredible run of form, however you look at it. Then consider that or most of that period, he was a small heavyweight with a come forward style, fighting in an era of giants. Yes he was great.
I'd say Patterson is very much in the mix of All-Time Greatness. He was a highly skilled, natural talent with 20+ contests against ranked men - the majority of them residing in the top 5 - and he lost to no one outside of the top 10 at LHW or HW. Very watchable fighter, too. Despite being undersized for a HW, even by the standards of his day, Patterson still won, lost and regained the Heavyweight World Championship, winning 11 contests against rated opposition in the division (and it should be 13 or 14 winning contests on fair scorecards, IMO). Half of his eight career losses came at the hands of Liston and Ali - both of whom are in my Top-10 list of ATG Heavyweights. His one other significant loss was against Johansson, whom Patterson bested on two subsequent occasions by way of severe KO victories to win the series. I consider the Draw with Quarry highly questionable, his Loss to Quarry in the rematch debatable, and the Referee's scoring of the Ellis fight beggared belief, in my opinion. Either way, Patterson's career ledger still looks the part, and there might even be a few established "ATGs" who did similar or, dare I say, even less to earn their stripes.
Some of the fastest hands ever for a heavyweight. And did fight with a highly entertaining style. A highly skilled great. Hard to overcome the perception of a weak chin in ATG though I would think.