Sonny Liston (1963) vs. current HWs ?

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

We are on boxrec. We can all see who he has beat and weights. Why dont you get to the point EO and then answer toneys question on joe Louis?

[margaret thatcher]

As far back as I can remember, I've been reading posts on here from guys who had Liston stopping Tyson, Foreman, Holyfield, Lewis, Frazier, the Klitschko's, one guy even claimed that prime Liston would stop Clay ! This is a guy who's biggest wins came against Patterson and Zora Folley. Off hand I can't think of too many fighters in the history of boxing who accomplished less but are praised more than Sonny Liston.

Agree, the history section here really overrates him. Funny to see Alp having a fit just because some people don't have him #1...anyone who doesn't have him there doesn't watch the fights and only cares about weight. And alp complains about other people being too biased based on eras LOL


Though he'd still do really well today, but he's no default top dawg at all

[margaret thatcher]

Too busy this morning so I'll repost what I wrote in Feb

Ever since I came on here, I've been hearing how a fit 200 lb boxer could clean out the lard asses and uncoordinated giants of the heavyweight division. But now it's 2020 and we're still waiting for Godot.

Ya and the cruisers have been strong in recent years too

[margaret thatcher]

Conn did do very well vs the great Joe Louis though

I wonder if he could do well vs Fury, AJ, Wilder, Klit etc

[Tony1244]

We are on boxrec. We can all see who he has beat and weights. Why dont you get to the point EO and then answer toneys question on joe Louis?

Andy Ruiz and Cleveland Williams were both 6'2". Ruiz had a 74" reach, Williams an 80" reach.

But because Williams was svelte @215, and not a fat poo @ 280 like Ruiz, Sonny doesn't get much credit from EO.

Hmm, wonder if EO is overweight. He's giving me 6th grade assignments. I'm asking him who Louis' best opponents were.

I'll do it for him. Walcott, Charles, Marciano, Max Baer, and Billy Conn were superior to Buddy Baer, Nova, and Carnera, even though they weighed Less. Can you imagine that?

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

Yeah he knocked out cleveland williams prior to 1963. So i guess his point it he fought smaller guys. Which we all knew. He lost twice to the best hw ever which we all knew.

[Enlightened-One]

Is he for real, or just a troll? Have not read many of his other posts.
Sonny Liston was not the biggest puncher? Well he could certainly punch. To answer one of his questions, yes I think he would be fury. Yes, quite easily.
Anyway, it's my theory that that there are ideal sizes. For a heavyweight, depending on his height and frame, 200-225 is ideal. When you get much bigger than that, you usually lose stamina and speed that outweigh the advantages you might get.

There is a reason that 300 pound plus guys don't play qb or wide receiver in the NFL. Neither do 150 pound guys. There is an ideal.
If you much below that , you usually are going to have disadvantages that are difficult to overcome.
So obviously Roberto Duran whom he brought up would not have been able to compete with a decent heavyweight.

There will be rare exceptions. There conceivably could be a really big guy in the 240s or an undersized guy in the 180s or 190s who can do it. However, we should judge fighters by what they can do, not by the frikkin scale.

At a certain, point people have to actually watch the fights.

Answer my points directly by quoting my actual words.

And then let’s see how if you are actually capable of refuting any of my claims by dealing with my comments directly and in their true context.

I did that with your comments, so let’s see if you’re able to do this too.

If you can’t do this, then all I can do is assume that you ultimately agree with a stance you can’t directly refute.

[oogiebe]

Is he for real, or just a troll? Have not read many of his other posts.
Sonny Liston was not the biggest puncher? Well he could certainly punch. To answer one of his questions, yes I think he would be fury. Yes, quite easily.
Anyway, it's my theory that that there are ideal sizes. For a heavyweight, depending on his height and frame, 200-225 is ideal. When you get much bigger than that, you usually lose stamina and speed that outweigh the advantages you might get.

There is a reason that 300 pound plus guys don't play qb or wide receiver in the NFL. Neither do 150 pound guys. There is an ideal.
If you much below that , you usually are going to have disadvantages that are difficult to overcome.
So obviously Roberto Duran whom he brought up would not have been able to compete with a decent heavyweight.

There will be rare exceptions. There conceivably could be a really big guy in the 240s or an undersized guy in the 180s or 190s who can do it. However, we should judge fighters by what they can do, not by the frikkin scale.

At a certain, point people have to actually watch the fights.

Answer my points directly by quoting my actual words.

And then let’s see how if you are actually capable of refuting any of my claims by dealing with my comments directly and in their true context.

I did that with your comments, so let’s see if you’re able to do this too.

Are you for real? Surely you must be taking the piss. No one could be this cvnty.

[Enlightened-One]

Answer my points directly by quoting my actual words.

And then let’s see how if you are actually capable of refuting any of my claims by dealing with my comments directly and in their true context.

I did that with your comments, so let’s see if you’re able to do this too.

Are you for real? Surely you must be taking the piss. No one could be this cvnty.

You’re unable to provide a counter-argument that directly addresses my opinion.

And you’ve resorted to insults, because you’re unable to challenge my thoughts in their true context.

[oogiebe]

Are you for real? Surely you must be taking the piss. No one could be this cvnty.

You’re unable to provide a counter-argument that directly addresses my opinion.

And you’ve resorted to insults, because you’re unable to challenge my thoughts in their true context.

You certainly have yourself convinced.

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

Are you for real? Surely you must be taking the piss. No one could be this cvnty.

You’re unable to provide a counter-argument that directly addresses my opinion.

And you’ve resorted to insults, because you’re unable to challenge my thoughts in their true context.

This whole thread is filled with opinions from numerous posters providing counter arguments and showing the fallacy of you thought process. You just wont address them

[margaret thatcher]

This thread gives me the impression of a bunch of people forcing EO into a gang bukkake, and EO still trying to act in control even as a mess with a face full of smut

[oogiebe]

This thread gives me the impression of a bunch of people forcing EO into a gang bukkake, and EO still trying to act in control even as a mess with a face full of smut

[Tony1244]

You’re unable to provide a counter-argument that directly addresses my opinion.

And you’ve resorted to insults, because you’re unable to challenge my thoughts in their true context.

This whole thread is filled with opinions from numerous posters providing counter arguments and showing the fallacy of you thought process. You just wont address them

I've never seen a clearer case of do what I say, not do what I do. He insults, then accuses others of insulting him. He refuses to answer, and then accuses others of not answering.

He either has a bizarre almost Andy Kauffman sense of humor, and/ or he's mentally ill. Sometimes hard to tell online.

[oogiebe]

This whole thread is filled with opinions from numerous posters providing counter arguments and showing the fallacy of you thought process. You just wont address them

I've never seen a clearer case of do what I say, not do what I do. He insults, then accuses others of insulting him. He refuses to answer, and then accuses others of not answering.

He either has a bizarre almost Andy Kauffman sense of humor, and/ or he's mentally ill. Sometimes hard to tell online.

He certainly gets hyperfocused.

[Enlightened-One]

All I hear is people telling me I’m “wrong”, but they refuse to acknowledge any of the evidence I’ve cited to justify my opinion.

And nor is anyone willing to challenge my actual thoughts verbatim, by quoting my words in their true context, or answer any of my rather simple questions?

Instead, people either resort to insults, because they’re powerless to do otherwise, or even worse… they pretend they’ve successfully refuted a fabricated stance that they’d prefer I hold (one which bears almost no relation to what I’ve actually written).

Come on guys, please do better! Is anyone up for the challenge?

Is anyone brave enough to discuss any of my claims about Sonny Liston verbatim, in the context in which my words were written, or has this forum become a place where it’s perfectly acceptable to insult someone who holds an opinion that cannot be refuted?

[Duran1970]

Can't speak for Tony, but you should know that a certain point, weight stops being an advantage. At a certain point it starts being a disadvantage. It has been shown over and over throughout boxing history.

Freakishly large fighters for their time (i.e. Nikolay Valuev and Primo Carnera) are usually at a disadvantage against smaller foes, but my comments are reserved for today's typically-sized behemoths (i.e. Dillian Whyte, Joseph Parker etc.) and also larger boxers that somehow manage to retain their athleticism (Tyson Fury, AJ etc.).

He mentioned Joe Louis as an example, because Louis' best opponents were not his biggest opponents. Take a look at how well his much larger opponents did against him.

Would you not consider the likes of Buddy Baer, Tony Galento, Max Baer and Primo Carnera amongst Joe Louis' best opponents?

Anyway, Joe Louis and Sonny Liston are different fighters, with different strengths and weaknesses. It’s not an apples to apples comparison.

Liston's hand and foot speed was unimpressive. And Sonny wasn't the biggest of punchers either (well, his in-ring feats certainly don't justify his fearsome reputation).

Liston actually weighed more in 1963 that Wilder did when he had a draw against Fury. That is a fact. Liston was a much better fighter than Wilder. Therefore, it stands to reason that Liston would beat Fury.

Do you seriously believe that size is irrelevant?

So you honestly believe that the 1963 version of Liston would defeat Tyson Fury, with the Brit being a few years younger than Sonny was back then, coupled with being eight inches taller and roughly sixty pounds heavier?

Would the 1983 iteration of Roberto Duran or the 1954 version of Archie Moore beat 1963’s Sonny Liston? And if you feel they couldn’t, what is the main reason for your opinion?

Let's break down your comments, shall we?

Deontay Wilder had a proven track-record for knocking out larger foes, whereas Sonny Liston didn’t.

The 1963 iteration of Sonny Liston was forced to go the distance eleven times within thirty-six bouts, losing one of them.

The average weight of the opponents that went the distance in all eleven bouts was merely 194lbs, which is only 3lbs or 4lbs heavier than what modern day light heavyweights rehydrate to (i.e. Isaac Chilemba, Eleider Alvarez, Sergey Kovalev, Adonis Stevenson, Tony Bellew, Chad Dawson, Glen Johnson etc.).

So you’re comparing a prolific puncher, such as Deontay Wilder, that has proven himself capable of knocking out 245lb-ers, to a man accustomed to facing much smaller foes (i.e. average weight of Liston’s first 36 opponents [up to 1963] was only 196lbs).

Baer Galento and carnera were not Louis' best opponents..

[Enlightened-One]

Baer Galento and carnera were not Louis' best opponents..

They were amongst his most notable victories.

[Enlightened-One]

Within the next fortnight, I’m going to conduct a little experiment.

I shall submit a post claiming a completely nonsense fact within a hot-topic thread, discussing a subject matter that attracts a lot of views and posts.

The purpose of me posting such nonsense will be to determine whether any of the “regulars” take the bait by adopting a completely different debating ploy (such as quoting my “wrong” words), whilst also thoroughly revelling in their so-called victory, due to them having finally proved me wrong.

Those that consider themselves intelligent, will surely appreciate the method in my madness.

[Counter-puncher]

Cool story bro

[oogiebe]

Within the next fortnight, I’m going to conduct a little experiment.

I shall submit a post claiming a completely nonsense fact within a hot-topic thread, discussing a subject matter that attracts a lot of views and posts.

The purpose of me posting such nonsense will be to determine whether any of the “regulars” take the bait by adopting a completely different debating ploy (such as quoting my “wrong” words), whilst also thoroughly revelling in their so-called victory, due to them having finally proved me wrong.

Those that consider themselves intelligent, will surely appreciate the method in my madness.

How is that any different from your other posts!?

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

Fantasizing about what Ruiz would do to Liston is hardly a fact. You take facts and then extrapolate them to guess work and fantasy.

You're lying again. Stop employing dishonest debating tactics. Either quote my words in their true context or refrain from lying!

The sentence of mine you quoted was in relation to the following facts I'd listed in my immediately preceding post:

The six feet tall Floyd Patterson officially weighed 189lbs for the first Sonny Liston bout.

And here's what light heavyweights typically rehydrate to:

• Isaac Chilemba’s rehydration weight against Dmitry Bivol was 189lbs.

• Eleider Alvarez weighed 187lbs for the first Sergey Kovalev bout.

• Sergey Kovalev weighed 189lbs against Jean Pascal.

• Sergey Kovalev weighed 188lbs against Bernard Hopkins.

• Adonis Stevenson and Tony Bellew weighed 189lbs and 190lbs respectively for their bout.

• Chad Dawson and Glen Johnson weighed 191lbs and 189lbs respectively for their second bout.

The 1963 version of Sonny Liston was allegedly 33½ years of age, had competed in 36 bouts, losing one of them and had gone the distance eleven times. He wasn't as heavy-handed as many believe him to be.

- an opinion not a fact. Writers at the time disagree


The 1963 version of Sonny Liston would have been a few years older, eight inches shorter and roughly sixty pounds lighter than Tyson Fury.

- true

The 1963 version of Sonny Liston had never KO’d any world-rated heavyweight opponent that weighed 216lbs or more.

- he hadnt fought many if any. So while true it is a half truth. Also james toney had never knocked out anyone over 175 pounds until he knocked out holyfield so there is a real life demonstration of a refutation of your argument

The 1963 version of Sonny Liston had never defeated any world-rated heavyweight opponent that outweighed him by 5lbs or more.

- see above

The average weight of Sonny’s opponents for the first 36 bouts of his career was 196lbs, which is much smaller than today’s cruiserweights (who all have to dehydrate in order to make weight).

- true

Liston’s average weight during the same period was only 207lbs and he wasn’t particularly well-muscled or defined either.

_ first part true. Second part opinion

The average height & weight of modern-day heavyweights is in the region of 6′ 4½″ 247lbs.

Didn't Liston KO Ali? He must have, he was 8 LBS heavier.

That sentence doesn't resemble any of my claims. So why write it?

Can't you be honest for once and attack my actual words instead of employing strawman debating tactics?

[Ambling Alp II]

Can't speak for Tony, but you should know that a certain point, weight stops being an advantage. At a certain point it starts being a disadvantage. It has been shown over and over throughout boxing history.

Freakishly large fighters for their time (i.e. Nikolay Valuev and Primo Carnera) are usually at a disadvantage against smaller foes, but my comments are reserved for today's typically-sized behemoths (i.e. Dillian Whyte, Joseph Parker etc.) and also larger boxers that somehow manage to retain their athleticism (Tyson Fury, AJ etc.).

He mentioned Joe Louis as an example, because Louis' best opponents were not his biggest opponents. Take a look at how well his much larger opponents did against him.

Would you not consider the likes of Buddy Baer, Tony Galento, Max Baer and Primo Carnera amongst Joe Louis' best opponents?

Anyway, Joe Louis and Sonny Liston are different fighters, with different strengths and weaknesses. It’s not an apples to apples comparison.

Liston's hand and foot speed was unimpressive. And Sonny wasn't the biggest of punchers either (well, his in-ring feats certainly don't justify his fearsome reputation).

Liston actually weighed more in 1963 that Wilder did when he had a draw against Fury. That is a fact. Liston was a much better fighter than Wilder. Therefore, it stands to reason that Liston would beat Fury.

Do you seriously believe that size is irrelevant?

So you honestly believe that the 1963 version of Liston would defeat Tyson Fury, with the Brit being a few years younger than Sonny was back then, coupled with being eight inches taller and roughly sixty pounds heavier?

Would the 1983 iteration of Roberto Duran or the 1954 version of Archie Moore beat 1963’s Sonny Liston? And if you feel they couldn’t, what is the main reason for your opinion?

Let's break down your comments, shall we?

Deontay Wilder had a proven track-record for knocking out larger foes, whereas Sonny Liston didn’t.

The 1963 iteration of Sonny Liston was forced to go the distance eleven times within thirty-six bouts, losing one of them.

The average weight of the opponents that went the distance in all eleven bouts was merely 194lbs, which is only 3lbs or 4lbs heavier than what modern day light heavyweights rehydrate to (i.e. Isaac Chilemba, Eleider Alvarez, Sergey Kovalev, Adonis Stevenson, Tony Bellew, Chad Dawson, Glen Johnson etc.).

So you’re comparing a prolific puncher, such as Deontay Wilder, that has proven himself capable of knocking out 245lb-ers, to a man accustomed to facing much smaller foes (i.e. average weight of Liston’s first 36 opponents [up to 1963] was only 196lbs).

You wanted me to specifically answer your questions, so here you go:

1. Would you not consider the likes of Buddy Baer, Tony Galento, Max Baer and Primo Carnera amongst Joe Louis' best opponents? No. Marciano, Charles, Waclott were all much better. Schemling was roughly even with Max Baer and much better than Buddy, Galento, and Carnera. Many of his other oppponents were better than Galento.

2. Do you seriously believe that size is irrelevant? At a certain point yes. For example, a fighter who weighs an in shape 215 has a huge advantage over a fighter who weighs just 160. A fighter who weighs 270 does not have an "advantage" over a guy who weighs an in shape 215.

3. Would the 1983 iteration of Roberto Duran or the 1954 version of Archie Moore beat 1963’s Sonny Liston? And if you feel they couldn’t, what is the main reason for your opinion? No.

4. So you’re comparing a prolific puncher, such as Deontay Wilder, that has proven himself capable of knocking out 245lb-ers, to a man accustomed to facing much smaller foes (i.e. average weight of Liston’s first 36 opponents [up to 1963] was only 196lbs). Yes.

AS for your comments:
Deontay Wilder had a proven track-record for knocking out larger foes, whereas Sonny Liston didn’t. Don't care.

The average weight of the opponents that went the distance in all eleven bouts was merely 194lbs, which is only 3lbs or 4lbs heavier than what modern day light heavyweights rehydrate to (i.e. Isaac Chilemba, Eleider Alvarez, Sergey Kovalev, Adonis Stevenson, Tony Bellew, Chad Dawson, Glen Johnson etc.).
8 of the 11 opponents were either early in Liston's career or very late.
None of the opponents that Wilder kncokded out were worth a damn and it doesn't matter if they weighed 245 pounds. At ta certain point the extra weight doesn't make you harder to knockout.
Liston knocked out several opponents that were better than anyone Wilder.

In summary: At a certain point, weight stops being an advantage. At a later point, it's a disadvantage.

[Jaywheel]

EO: You didn't go into lenghty details on why Roberto Duran wouldn't beat Liston. Everything you said is irrelevant. You're afraid to adress the real questions I ask. You lose.

[Tony1244]

Wow. For a 2nd I thought EO was actually answering questions, but it was Alp.