Who was the Greatest? Who cares?

[Razor2305]

There seems to be a trend on Boxing Wesites to argue about who was the Greatest Heavyweight, who would have beat who in their prime what would have happenened if they werent banned etc etc etc............

I'm all for friendly banter on the subject but people shouldn't be slurring these great Fighters names to score marks of each other.

Some of the points being made are:

1. Joe Louis fought only bums and was a coke head
2. Muhammad Ali got a lot of undeserved decisions and was overated
3. Rocky Marciano only fought old men and his early Career was fixed
4. Mike Tyson was just a Coke head Rapist and wasn't really any good after all
5. Floyd Patterson was a coward.

My guy could beat your guy, the list could go on and on.......

All people have different problems in their lives and I'd just like to rememer the above purely for their Boxing skills and great fights.

Who can forget Louis coming from behind to knock out Billy Conn and destoying Max Baer and Max Schmeling.

Ali destroying Clevland Williams and all the great fights from the 70's!

Marciano knocking out Jersey Joe Walcott and Ezzard Charles!

Tsyon's reign in the mid 80's when he destoyed everyone!

Patterson winning back the Heavyweight Title against Johansson!

It takes great courage to even step into the Ring and these were classic fights from the some of the Greatest Boxers ever and some had to show great courage to come back and win so enough of the trash talk please!!!!!!!!!!

[ben geoghegan]

I care ! ! !

[banjo]

patterson was no coward he fought much larger men than himself and won most of them

[BoxBuzz]

patterson was no coward he fought much larger men than himself and won most of them

I can't imagine anyone making this claim if they have any knowledge of the man whatsoever. What a completely ignorant thing to pass around.

[banjo]

patterson was no coward he fought much larger men than himself and won most of them

I can't imagine anyone making this claim if they have any knowledge of the man whatsoever. What a completely ignorant thing to pass around.

why whats wrong with my comment?

no man or woman who steps into a boxing ring is a coward

[BoxBuzz]

patterson was no coward he fought much larger men than himself and won most of them

I can't imagine anyone making this claim if they have any knowledge of the man whatsoever. What a completely ignorant thing to pass around.

why whats wrong with my comment?

no man or woman who steps into a boxing ring is a coward

I see how that might have been taken wrongly. We are in agreement here. Patterson and coward do not belong in the same universe of language. It's a loathesome and foolish statement.

[banjo]

I can't imagine anyone making this claim if they have any knowledge of the man whatsoever. What a completely ignorant thing to pass around.

why whats wrong with my comment?

no man or woman who steps into a boxing ring is a coward

I see how that might have been taken wrongly. We are in agreement here. Patterson and coward do not belong in the same universe of language. It's a loathesome and foolish statement.

just thought you were having a dig at me, sorry

[Robinson]

Patterson was never a coward. His management was over protetcive.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Not everyone is aware of it but the bald truth of the matter is Patterson could have received a free pass from the public in ignoring Liston's title credentials. Blacks, whites & all in-between did not care for Liston, & did not care to view him objectively.

Patterson could have reigned for longer, without public backlash. He chose to defend against Liston, knowing the man deserved his shot. He was afraid of him, but he faced him anyway. Twice.

Who's the idiot classing him as a coward? They're probably not worth being educated on the subject.

[Marlin]

If Liston didn't take two dives he would have reigned for much longer, he was a fearsome fighter. Mind you if he didn't take two dives he may also have "passed away" sooner as well...

[Collins2000]

If Liston didn't take two dives he would have reigned for much longer, he was a fearsome fighter. Mind you if he didn't take two dives he may also have "passed away" sooner as well...

Let me get this straight.

You believe the first Ali-Liston fight was a fake and that Liston clearly had the beating of Ali that night but purposely under-performed?

[theone]

Of course I'm in agreement that Patterson was no coward, but wearing a disguise after one of the Liston fights probably implied that to a lot of people.
I believe Ali jumped all over that one.

[Robinson]

Being ashamed of losing and being afraid to face a better man before millions and history are two different things.

Patterson never shyed away from anyone. I wish he had of faced Foreman and Frazier which I am sure he would have had he got the decisions he deserved. BUT I am not saying he would ahve won them fights...he would of been in the fight however.

Liston Vs Ali 1...real.

Liston Vs Ali 2....some times conspiracy theorists are right.

Kym

[Razor2305]

Not everyone is aware of it but the bald truth of the matter is Patterson could have received a free pass from the public in ignoring Liston's title credentials. Blacks, whites & all in-between did not care for Liston, & did not care to view him objectively.

Patterson could have reigned for longer, without public backlash. He chose to defend against Liston, knowing the man deserved his shot. He was afraid of him, but he faced him anyway. Twice.

Who's the idiot classing him as a coward? They're probably not worth being educated on the subject.

Some confusion here. The points I made were what some ignorant people were making over the years on various Forums.As I said any Boxer who steps into the ring derserves my utmost respect. Even in replies to this subject people here still claiming Liston took a dive against Ali!!!!!!!

Who has the right to say this about any fighter?

The point I made about Patterson was this is how some people percieve him.I read on previous Boxing Forums some very foolish and degrading comments regarding this great Champion.

I read a lot about Patterson's Life and was very moved by his story. He was under great pressure from everyone including the President to beat Liston, and as you say, in his book he claimed he was scared of Liston but still fought him anyway because he was afraid of letting people down.

My point was about people thrash talking about previous Great Champions because I love and respect Boxing and all its many wonderful characters. I loved Ali and Joe Louis in all the different stages of their Careers and their fights will stand the test of time.

[cultus]

There seems to be a trend on Boxing Wesites to argue about who was the Greatest Heavyweight, who would have beat who in their prime what would have happenened if they werent banned etc etc etc............

I'm all for friendly banter on the subject but people shouldn't be slurring these great Fighters names to score marks of each other.

Some of the points being made are:

1. Joe Louis fought only bums and was a coke head
2. Muhammad Ali got a lot of undeserved decisions and was overated
3. Rocky Marciano only fought old men and his early Career was fixed
4. Mike Tyson was just a Coke head Rapist and wasn't really any good after all
5. Floyd Patterson was a coward.

My guy could beat your guy, the list could go on and on.......

All people have different problems in their lives and I'd just like to rememer the above purely for their Boxing skills and great fights.

Who can forget Louis coming from behind to knock out Billy Conn and destoying Max Baer and Max Schmeling.

Ali destroying Clevland Williams and all the great fights from the 70's!

Marciano knocking out Jersey Joe Walcott and Ezzard Charles!

Tsyon's reign in the mid 80's when he destoyed everyone!

Patterson winning back the Heavyweight Title against Johansson!

It takes great courage to even step into the Ring and these were classic fights from the some of the Greatest Boxers ever and some had to show great courage to come back and win so enough of the trash talk please!!!!!!!!!!

I agree with this completely. There is no black and white scenario. Ali The Greatest of All time is a marketing trick he (Ali) created himself.

[Ambling Alp]

Legitimate criticism against anyone is fine as long as it's accurrate and isn't excessive. Sometimes we go overboard and rip great fighters for every little thing.

It's funny. In other sports, the best get very little criticism in relation to how much credit they get.
You seldom hear people say that Larry Bird was a horrible defensive player, or that Brett Favre or Barry Bonds have consistently choked in the playoffs.
However, in boxing people will point out one fight, even one small period from one round of one fight and use it to slam someone's entire career, and seem almost oblivious to the rest of their career.

It makes you wonder if in other sports that people don't scrutinize the top guys enough, or if in boxing we go too far. Probably a little of both.

[Goodnight, Irene]

It's an individual sport, though. I think to an extent this would explain why fighters come under closer scrutiny than team sport participants. Great players were typically in winning teams, praise & blame get shared.

I don't think this entirely accounts for what you are getting at, but it goes some way to defining it. I thought Ali-Lyle was a suspect stoppage, especially given the score. But it was just my opinion, wasn't trying to present it as fact.

[BoxBuzz]

Being ashamed of losing and being afraid to face a better man before millions and history are two different things.

Patterson never shyed away from anyone. I wish he had of faced Foreman and Frazier which I am sure he would have had he got the decisions he deserved. BUT I am not saying he would ahve won them fights...he would of been in the fight however.

Liston Vs Ali 1...real.

Liston Vs Ali 2....some times conspiracy theorists are right.

Kym

Conspiracy requires two parties....it is entirely beleivable that the only "conspiracy" in this case was with Liston and his own psyche. Many people think he just quit because he didn't believe in himself on that night. The other theory is that he feared something or someone in the crowd other than Ali. Which may or may not have been warranted. But to be a conspiracy someone else would need to have known about this. There is no credible evidence of this. Just a lot of hot air from a lot of people who see "grassy knolls" and "second gunmen" and "aliens" everywhere they look and let's not forget the "east coast fixes" etc etc.

[I Feel Fine]

While on the subject of stupid claims about great fighters careers (and the claim that Liston threw the first Clay fight or that Patterson, who in his mid and late 30's took on some of the best young Heavyweight contenders and was very successful, was cowardly are very stupid) the thing I am tired of hearing from time to time is that Leonard ducked Pryor. I think there is a clear difference between not wanting to fight someone and ducking them. If I called out De La Hoya, and De La Hoya said no, that wouldn't somehow mean that Oscar is "ducking" me. Leonard had bigger money fights out there for him, so he went with those. No one who fights Benitez, Duran, Hearns and Hagler is afraid of Aaron Pryor.

[Robinson]

I think in regards to the Leonard - Pryor thing, it was a case of Pryor having no financial draw as far as risk vs returns were concerned for the Leonard camp.

Also when Pryor was coming in to his own, Leonard was going in and out of retirement.

The conspiracy remark is in regards to the fact that whatever theory you believed aside from the point that Ali KO'd Liston, is most likely more likely than Ali's 'Anchor Punch'.

Kym

[Elton John]

Terry Norris was the greatest. Ray Robinson a close second

[fourreal]

There seems to be a trend on Boxing Wesites to argue about who was the Greatest Heavyweight, who would have beat who in their prime what would have happenened if they werent banned etc etc etc............

I'm all for friendly banter on the subject but people shouldn't be slurring these great Fighters names to score marks of each other.

Some of the points being made are:

1. Joe Louis fought only bums and was a coke head
2. Muhammad Ali got a lot of undeserved decisions and was overated
3. Rocky Marciano only fought old men and his early Career was fixed
4. Mike Tyson was just a Coke head Rapist and wasn't really any good after all
5. Floyd Patterson was a coward.

My guy could beat your guy, the list could go on and on.......

All people have different problems in their lives and I'd just like to rememer the above purely for their Boxing skills and great fights.

Who can forget Louis coming from behind to knock out Billy Conn and destoying Max Baer and Max Schmeling.

Ali destroying Clevland Williams and all the great fights from the 70's!

Marciano knocking out Jersey Joe Walcott and Ezzard Charles!

Tsyon's reign in the mid 80's when he destoyed everyone!

Patterson winning back the Heavyweight Title against Johansson!

It takes great courage to even step into the Ring and these were classic fights from the some of the Greatest Boxers ever and some had to show great courage to come back and win so enough of the trash talk please!!!!!!!!!!

"Who was better", "Who would have beaten who", and "who was the greatest" conversations are generally started and carried on by simpletons.

Trying to accuratly compare fighters across decades, eras, and thousands of variables is not possible, and anyone who claims it is not only knows nothing about the sport of boxing, but is not very smart either.

Even more silly, is the laughable discussions that go something like this :

"You have fighter A as the # 32 best of all time, and fighter B as the 24 best of all time. Clearly, fighter A should be # 29, and fighter B should be 31, because fighter A beat fighter C in 1898, and fighter C had a draw with #A in 1902
Then, in 1906, fighter D beat fighter A, but fighter A was robbed and should have won the fight, so you see fighter A should be # 29, fighter B should be 31, fighter C sould be Either # 30 or 33, and fighter D should be in a tie for 34 with fighter E.

In other words, the only thing more dumb then trying to compare fighters from across 40 to 100 years, is to try to compare fighters using individual fight results, and trying to rank them in order.

EXCEPT, maybe claiming that fighters from 70 years ago "Would beat" fighters of today. That is a joke, and it a claim made by those with naive romanticized, polyanna, rose colored selective recall.

The 1933 Chicago Bears were a great team for their time, but the 2007 NE Patroits would beat them 112-0. Boxing is no different

[Syntax Error]

patterson was no coward he fought much larger men than himself and won most of them

I can't imagine anyone making this claim if they have any knowledge of the man whatsoever. What a completely ignorant thing to pass around.

why whats wrong with my comment?

no man or woman who steps into a boxing ring is a coward

With the possible exception of Audley Harrison!!!! :)

[Syntax Error]

While on the subject of stupid claims about great fighters careers (and the claim that Liston threw the first Clay fight or that Patterson, who in his mid and late 30's took on some of the best young Heavyweight contenders and was very successful, was cowardly are very stupid) the thing I am tired of hearing from time to time is that Leonard ducked Pryor. I think there is a clear difference between not wanting to fight someone and ducking them. If I called out De La Hoya, and De La Hoya said no, that wouldn't somehow mean that Oscar is "ducking" me. Leonard had bigger money fights out there for him, so he went with those. No one who fights Benitez, Duran, Hearns and Hagler is afraid of Aaron Pryor.

Dead right about the Leonard - Pryor situation: besides, the onus was on Pryor to move up, to make the fight happen, so why didn't he?

I've asked this question 1001 times (maybe even more :) ), but nobody has ever given me a satisfactory answer.

[Razor2305]

There seems to be a trend on Boxing Wesites to argue about who was the Greatest Heavyweight, who would have beat who in their prime what would have happenened if they werent banned etc etc etc............

I'm all for friendly banter on the subject but people shouldn't be slurring these great Fighters names to score marks of each other.

Some of the points being made are:

1. Joe Louis fought only bums and was a coke head
2. Muhammad Ali got a lot of undeserved decisions and was overated
3. Rocky Marciano only fought old men and his early Career was fixed
4. Mike Tyson was just a Coke head Rapist and wasn't really any good after all
5. Floyd Patterson was a coward.

My guy could beat your guy, the list could go on and on.......

All people have different problems in their lives and I'd just like to rememer the above purely for their Boxing skills and great fights.

Who can forget Louis coming from behind to knock out Billy Conn and destoying Max Baer and Max Schmeling.

Ali destroying Clevland Williams and all the great fights from the 70's!

Marciano knocking out Jersey Joe Walcott and Ezzard Charles!

Tsyon's reign in the mid 80's when he destoyed everyone!

Patterson winning back the Heavyweight Title against Johansson!

It takes great courage to even step into the Ring and these were classic fights from the some of the Greatest Boxers ever and some had to show great courage to come back and win so enough of the trash talk please!!!!!!!!!!

"Who was better", "Who would have beaten who", and "who was the greatest" conversations are generally started and carried on by simpletons.

Trying to accuratly compare fighters across decades, eras, and thousands of variables is not possible, and anyone who claims it is not only knows nothing about the sport of boxing, but is not very smart either.

Even more silly, is the laughable discussions that go something like this :

"You have fighter A as the # 32 best of all time, and fighter B as the 24 best of all time. Clearly, fighter A should be # 29, and fighter B should be 31, because fighter A beat fighter C in 1898, and fighter C had a draw with #A in 1902
Then, in 1906, fighter D beat fighter A, but fighter A was robbed and should have won the fight, so you see fighter A should be # 29, fighter B should be 31, fighter C sould be Either # 30 or 33, and fighter D should be in a tie for 34 with fighter E.

In other words, the only thing more dumb then trying to compare fighters from across 40 to 100 years, is to try to compare fighters using individual fight results, and trying to rank them in order.

EXCEPT, maybe claiming that fighters from 70 years ago "Would beat" fighters of today. That is a joke, and it a claim made by those with naive romanticized, polyanna, rose colored selective recall.

The 1933 Chicago Bears were a great team for their time, but the 2007 NE Patroits would beat them 112-0. Boxing is no different

Agree with you 100%.

There's nothing wrong with a bit of friendly banter regarding who's the best in any sport, but when it comes to people who know nothing about the sport making stupid remarks regarding a persons Career and Achievements then they are indeed idiots.