Sonny Liston (1963) vs. current HWs ?

[oogiebe]

Dude had some big fists too, or Moo just had tiny little ones

Liston had big hands, AND Ali had somewhat smallish hands.

[Enlightened-One]

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.).

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).

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.

Whilst I admire your attempt to respond to my questions, you definitely decided to side-step some of them.

Your effort to address my words head-on are appreciated, since you’ve definitely done much better than everyone else from this forum, but I’d like to give you an extra 12 hours to address any errors.

A big part of me appreciates the detailed nature of your response, but you should be able to do much better, because if you can’t, then you’re in for a rough ride, since my response will inevitably decimate you.

Do me a favour, please, forget about winning or losing and only focus on reality.

I’d love nothing more than to agree with you. And for us to share the same opinion, but in order for that to happen, you clearly need to perform more research.

The truth should take priority over whether an argument has been won or lost.

[oogiebe]

Careful Alp. You don't want to be decimated! LMFAO!

[jas80s]

A big part of me appreciates the detailed nature of your response, but you should be able to do much better, because if you can’t, then you’re in for a rough ride, since my response will inevitably decimate you.

You would think that the man who writes this response would NOT be widely regarded as a buffoon on a boxing website.

It's hard to imagine that the "decimation" of which he speaks would exist anywhere else besides his own mind.

Let's quickly sum up the argument shall we? Of course size CAN be a factor, even a huge factor, BUT, if a smaller fighter carries other advantages, particularly in the case of, but not limited to, boxing skills, then the size advantage can easily be overcome, as has happened many, many times in the history of the sport.

Many here believe Liston is too talented for many larger fighters today whom they believe do NOT possess the skills to compete with a fighter as good as Liston. EO believes (obviously) that a solid percentage of the larger men that fight today have the requisite skills to keep up with Liston and therefore, would carry the day more often than not as their size advantage would give them inherent advantages in a fight, in other words, a good big man beats a good smaller man.

It would seem that since the fight can NEVER take place, it would be hard for either side to prove they are right. If you can't prove what amounts to an opinion, how do you win an argument? Or excuse me, how do you "decimate" ones argument? It doesn't matter how many hours you spend looking at weights on boxrec, it will never disprove the primary point, which is Liston is a better fighter and thus could give away some weight, but still prevail. No matter how much one talks about weight, one can never prove that Liston isn't a better fighter than HW's today. On the other hand, no matter how impressed one is with Liston's apparent skills, one can never prove that he is any better than: Fury, Joshua, or even Povetkin or Whyte, etc...

This is why I think EO is trolling, you don't have to be that smart to see all this. If he is as smart as he says, he is just trolling old school boxing fans for his own amusement. If he isn't trolling, he's just not that smart.

Or, he suffers from Asperger's and just can't help how he comes across.

For the record, I think Liston is top 5, but not a clear number one. He's a great fighter with more than enough skill to compete, the chin to survive, and enough power to get the respect of pretty much any HW you're going to find....just an opinion, that concludes my thoughts on the matter, no need for follow questions, I'm not trying to "decimate" anyone in an unwinnable argument.

[margaret thatcher]

Aspergers always comes to mind with our boi

[lazboy]

Please people! Aspergers is no longer a current term. All forms of autism were combined under one umbrella diagnosis, that being Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). Yes, it's highly likely EO is on the spectrum; although, I don't think this excuses his provocative behavior or lack of intelligence. Jas80s post is spot on in my 'unenlightened' opinion but I believe the reasons (for EO's behavior) could be all of the above, rather than singular.

[ValMar]

I opened this topic in order to disccuss about Sonny Liston, not about fu.king Mr. Bean, or Forrest Gump or EO.

Liston had been cosidered as a beast, very mean man, and almost all experts and fans had been sure that Ali had been in danger to be seriously hurt, and Ali had not been the no-name, he got Olympic gold medal four years before the Liston fight.

[margaret thatcher]

Ya, and Ali beat his ass twice, became his daddy

[lazboy]

I opened this topic in order to disccuss about Sonny Liston, not about fu.king Mr. Bean, or Forrest Gump or EO.

Well I’m sorry, I won’t talk about him again; although, there is something they all have in common with Liston - all those persons you mentioned abuse heroin, especially Mr Bean.

[ValMar]

I opened this topic in order to disccuss about Sonny Liston, not about fu.king Mr. Bean, or Forrest Gump or EO.

Well I’m sorry, I won’t talk about him again; although, there is something they all have in common with Liston - all those persons you mentioned abuse heroin, especially Mr Bean.

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

Fighters like povetkin, stiverne, brewster, ortiz, rahman, ray merce have all had success in recent years. Sonny would most be as good as those guys if not better

[jas80s]

Fighters like povetkin, stiverne, brewster, ortiz, rahman, ray merce have all had success in recent years. Sonny would most be as good as those guys if not better

Off hand, Ray Mercer seems like a pretty apt comparison. I'm not saying a spot on substitute for one another as I can't say if there was a sizable skill differential, but as it happens, this thought ran through my mind the other day that they do seem to have a fair amount in common.

Mercer makes for an interesting case in this discussion as well, since on the one hand, he was blown away by Wladimir illustrating just how dominant a bigger taller opponent can be in a match up with a smaller man, but on the other hand, he gave Lennox Lewis hell in their fight suggesting just the opposite, that a smaller man can be quite effective in a number of ways against a bigger opponent. I am aware that career stages color results, so one can spin results quite easily to fit their predetermined narrative. So, take of it what you will. Also, Mercer wasn't a dwarf compared to those two even at 6'1" which brings me to my other point.

One other wrinkle in this conversation to me that goes with the "modern training and nutrition" is PED's. Let's face it, enough guys have tested positive these days that it's not simply rampant speculation to say that they are part of the game today. So, would Sonny be a little bigger today? Would some of the guys today be a bit smaller in 1963? I'm just asking the question. It's another factor that I think makes a Mercer-Liston comparison all the more plausible as I see them being of similar size and build.

I know we have focused on size a lot in this discussion, but to be fair, it is a potentially meaningful variable in this hypothetical, though not the be all end all of the conversation.

[Enlightened-One]

You wanted me to specifically answer your questions...

You side-stepped some of my comments and numerous questions, so you didn't "specifically answer" them did you?

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).

Is there a reason for you to refrain from agreeing with me about Joe Louis and Sonny Liston being different fighters with different fighting styles? I guess you've avoided this question, because it undermines your argument, doesn't it?

So let's address your feedback:

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.

Fair enough we disagree and that's fine. I believe Buddy Baer, Tony Galento, Max Baer and Primo Carnera amongst Joe Louis' notable victories. And I'm not alone in believing this to be the case.

It's no biggie, I'm not really bothered if we disagree on this point, since I'd rather focus our discussion on the topic of this thread, which is about how the 1963 version of Sonny Liston would fare against today's fighters, so let's move on...

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.

You conveniently side-stepped one of my comments relating to this point, which allowed you to present my question out-of-context (making my question easier for you to answer):

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?

Are you scared of answering this question? This has been posted to this thread multiple times to this thread and no one is brave enough to answer it. And it seems you're fearful of providing an honest response, since it'll undermine your claims, won't it?

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.

You clearly didn't answer this question properly, did you? You even quoted it in your response!

What is the main reason for your opinion for your belief that the 1983 iteration of Roberto Duran or the 1954 version of Archie Moore couldn't beat 1963’s Sonny Liston? The rather obvious answer to this question undermines your beliefs, doesn't it?

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.

And that surprises me.

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

That's not a legitimate comment and you know it. You need to elaborate.

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.

That's not true. The 1963 version of Sonny Liston had gone the distance eleven times during his first 36 bouts, losing one of them.

I am shocked at the sheer stupidity or dishonesty in your response!

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.

Is it wrong to assume that any fighter that struggles to knockout eleven 194lb-ers, would be less effective against today’s 245lb-ers?

Do you honestly believe that Deontay Wilder would be incapable of stopping any of the 194lb-ers that the prime version of Sonny Liston failed to knockout?

[Jaywheel]

[Tony1244]

Shouldn't we be getting paid to be EO's psychiatrist?

And yes, you are alone in believing Buddy Baer and Galento to be among Louis' best opponents. No one else believes that. EO has size issues.

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

Galento is part of the bum of the month club. Nobody rates that win

[Tony1244]

Galento is part of the bum of the month club. Nobody rates that win

EO does

But if Galento was a svelte 202, he wouldn't. Perhaps a fat person's club.

[margaret thatcher]

How about Galento vs Ruiz, two fat bois who dropped the champs

[oogiebe]

How about Galento vs Ruiz, two fat bois who dropped the champs

Imagine the smell coming off those two by round 10?

[margaret thatcher]

And imagine the smell if big baby is the ref

[oogiebe]

And imagine the smell if big baby is the ref

[insert puke emoji]

[Tony1244]

How about Galento vs Ruiz, two fat bois who dropped the champs

Imagine the smell coming off those two by round 10?

Imagine the lack of respect EO would give those 2 if they had the exact same record but they both looked in shape and fought at 210?

[oogiebe]

Imagine the smell coming off those two by round 10?

Imagine the lack of respect EO would give those 2 if they had the exact same record but they both looked in shape and fought at 210?

I'm done with EO. You can't fix stupid.

[Tony1244]

Imagine the lack of respect EO would give those 2 if they had the exact same record but they both looked in shape and fought at 210?

I'm done with EO. You can't fix stupid.

At least Evander doesn't pretend he wants to debate like EO and chuck puke.

[Onetimeonly]

So much easier to read a line, point out where he's wrong and ignore him.