Sonny Liston (1963) vs. current HWs ?

[jas80s]

Do me a favor? Please explain to me again where you would rank Liston if he were fighting today? I am not interested in your opinion on the views of others. I am ONLY interested in where YOU would rank Liston if he were fighting today. Thanks.

Liston is widely regarded as being a “great” for his own era. And I have no problem about that.

However, regardless his notoriety outside the ring, he didn’t fulfil his fearsome reputation inside of it.

I think he’s too small for at least six of today’s heavyweights (i.e. Fury, Joshua, Wilder, Ruiz Jr., Whyte & Parker). And he might struggle with many other too (i.e. Usyk, Ortiz, Povetkin, Hunter etc.).

I also feel that the 1963 iteration of Liston definitely wasn’t the prolific puncher the media portray him to be, since his resume fails to justify the hype.

Liston’s lack of punching power wouldn’t be such an issue if he was exquisitely-skilled like but he wasn’t.

Don’t get me wrong, Sonny probably was one of the best fighters of his own era, but his reputation far exceeded his actual in-ring accomplishments.

He wouldn’t be able to bulldoze and bully today’s top-tier world rated 245lbs heavyweights, since he struggled to do this against many 194lb-ers from his own era.

Before you respond, check Liston’s resume up to and including 1963. And also watch a few of his bouts.

Excellent post, thank you.

I am reading a lot of "I think" and "I feel" and other similar statements that amount to your personal views on Liston. Totally legit.

But, it proves that Liston couldn't beat today's HWs.............how? IF I were to claim that Sonny Liston is the more talented fighter and would thus present problems that the fighters today haven't dealt with, how do we KNOW that's not true? Where is the proof that Sonny is in over his head in these match ups? Mind you, I'm not asserting that, as I honestly don't know what would happen.

You also speculate as to how a fight would go saying he wouldn't be able to bulldoze his opponents. Where is your proof that that is how the fight would go? You've seen a fight between Liston and these fighters? I think you are often presenting your views as facts just because YOU have reason to believe it's true. Is your belief of how something would go now proof?

I'll wait for you to provide conclusive proof that Sonny Liston COULD NOT beat any of the top 6 heavyweights today. Your first effort failed, go ahead and try again if you would like. I'm still interested.

[Enlightened-One]

Liston is widely regarded as being a “great” for his own era. And I have no problem about that.

However, regardless his notoriety outside the ring, he didn’t fulfil his fearsome reputation inside of it.

I think he’s too small for at least six of today’s heavyweights (i.e. Fury, Joshua, Wilder, Ruiz Jr., Whyte & Parker). And he might struggle with many other too (i.e. Usyk, Ortiz, Povetkin, Hunter etc.).

I also feel that the 1963 iteration of Liston definitely wasn’t the prolific puncher the media portray him to be, since his resume fails to justify the hype.

Liston’s lack of punching power wouldn’t be such an issue if he was exquisitely-skilled like but he wasn’t.

Don’t get me wrong, Sonny probably was one of the best fighters of his own era, but his reputation far exceeded his actual in-ring accomplishments.

He wouldn’t be able to bulldoze and bully today’s top-tier world rated 245lbs heavyweights, since he struggled to do this against many 194lb-ers from his own era.

Before you respond, check Liston’s resume up to and including 1963. And also watch a few of his bouts.

Excellent post, thank you.

I am reading a lot of "I think" and "I feel" and other similar statements that amount to your personal views on Liston. Totally legit.

But, it proves that Liston couldn't beat today's HWs.............how? IF I were to claim that Sonny Liston is the more talented fighter and would thus present problems that the fighters today haven't dealt with, how do we KNOW that's not true? Where is the proof that Sonny is in over his head in these match ups? Mind you, I'm not asserting that, as I honestly don't know what would happen.

You also speculate as to how a fight would go saying he wouldn't be able to bulldoze his opponents. Where is your proof that that is how the fight would go? You've seen a fight between Liston and these fighters? I think you are often presenting your views as facts just because YOU have reason to believe it's true. Is your belief of how something would go now proof?

I'll wait for you to provide conclusive proof that Sonny Liston COULD NOT beat any of the top 6 heavyweights today. Your first effort failed, go ahead and try again if you would like. I'm still interested.

I feel that Liston’s struggling to stop 194lb-ers, coupled with being beaten several opponents that could have made today’s light heavyweight or cruiserweight limits, is sufficient proof that he couldn’t bulldoze or bully today’s 245lbs behemoths, especially someone as big as Tyson Fury.

Pernell Whitaker wasn’t a big puncher at 147lbs, so I consider this as being sufficient proof that he’d be less effective at 175lbs.

Perhaps I’m being unreasonable in making such assumptions.

Look, even though size isn’t the be all and end all, it’s incredibly important.

And let’s not forget that Liston was bigger than most of his opponents and there were only a few men he faced that were roughly the same size as himself.

To be fair, there’s far more proof to support my assertions than those that prefer to base their opinion using nostalgia or evangelical faith.

This might sound a bit harsh, but for me, Sonny Liston is a more accomplished version of Luis Ortiz, with both guys being impressive fighters, but nowhere near good enough to justify their reputations/media hype.

For the record, I've provided plenty of evidence to support my stance, but you've provided none.

In fact, you've done your upmost to avoid directly addressing any of the facts I've cited. The reason for you doing this is rather obvious, since you'd be unable to provide an honest, sincere and objective opinion about my evidence without it undermining your own argument,

No one has tried to disprove my evidence, because they know they can't.

[Ambling Alp II]

OK. How many current guys heavyweights rank higher than 13th or 14th?

I have not considered the current HWs, their careers are not finished.

Rate them as if they just announced their retirement. Their careers are now over. Obviously guys very early in their career you can't really do. However, you should have a ball park idea on some guys who have fought for a long time. Who would be higher than say 14th?

[jas80s]

Excellent post, thank you.

I am reading a lot of "I think" and "I feel" and other similar statements that amount to your personal views on Liston. Totally legit.

But, it proves that Liston couldn't beat today's HWs.............how? IF I were to claim that Sonny Liston is the more talented fighter and would thus present problems that the fighters today haven't dealt with, how do we KNOW that's not true? Where is the proof that Sonny is in over his head in these match ups? Mind you, I'm not asserting that, as I honestly don't know what would happen.

You also speculate as to how a fight would go saying he wouldn't be able to bulldoze his opponents. Where is your proof that that is how the fight would go? You've seen a fight between Liston and these fighters? I think you are often presenting your views as facts just because YOU have reason to believe it's true. Is your belief of how something would go now proof?

I'll wait for you to provide conclusive proof that Sonny Liston COULD NOT beat any of the top 6 heavyweights today. Your first effort failed, go ahead and try again if you would like. I'm still interested.

I feel that Liston’s struggling to stop 194lb-ers, coupled with being beaten several opponents that could have made today’s light heavyweight or cruiserweight limits, is sufficient proof that he couldn’t bulldoze or bully today’s 245lbs behemoths, especially someone as big as Tyson Fury.

Pernell Whitaker wasn’t a big puncher at 147lbs, so I consider this as being sufficient proof that he’d be less effective at 175lbs.

Perhaps I’m being unreasonable in making such assumptions.

Look, even though size isn’t the be all and end all, it’s incredibly important.

And let’s not forget that Liston was bigger than most of his opponents and there were only a few men he faced that were roughly the same size as himself.

To be fair, there’s far more proof to support my assertions than those that prefer to base their opinion using nostalgia or evangelical faith.

This might sound a bit harsh, but for me, Sonny Liston is a more accomplished version of Luis Ortiz, with both guys being impressive fighters, but nowhere near good enough to justify their reputations/media hype.

And once again I am reading a whole lot of this is how I see it and why with nothing whatsoever that would be conclusive proof that this is how the hypothetical would play out with ZERO chance that it could be any different.

What can you say that would conclusively DISPROVE the view that Liston could win? Where is even the conclusive PROOF of what would happen in the fights? Once again, you have substituted your assertion about fight styles and likely fight scenarios as a fact, when in point of fact, they are merely your suppositions based on your views, just like the suppositions of everyone else on this board.

It seems to me, we don't KNOW how a fight would transpire between Sonny Liston and any heavyweight today. In fact, as factual statements go, "we don't know for certain how a fight between Sonny Liston and any heavyweight today would unfold" seems like one that would be hard to disprove, but if you would like to give it a go, I'll certainly read it.

Where is the conclusive evidence that my claim that we cannot know for certain what would happen if Sonny Liston fought in 2020 is not valid?

I will say, it's nice to see you sharing your views on a topic rather than chastising others for not adequately undermining or disproving your take on a given topic to your satisfaction. I hope others are enjoying reading it as much as I am.

[jas80s]

Excellent post, thank you.

I am reading a lot of "I think" and "I feel" and other similar statements that amount to your personal views on Liston. Totally legit.

But, it proves that Liston couldn't beat today's HWs.............how? IF I were to claim that Sonny Liston is the more talented fighter and would thus present problems that the fighters today haven't dealt with, how do we KNOW that's not true? Where is the proof that Sonny is in over his head in these match ups? Mind you, I'm not asserting that, as I honestly don't know what would happen.

You also speculate as to how a fight would go saying he wouldn't be able to bulldoze his opponents. Where is your proof that that is how the fight would go? You've seen a fight between Liston and these fighters? I think you are often presenting your views as facts just because YOU have reason to believe it's true. Is your belief of how something would go now proof?

I'll wait for you to provide conclusive proof that Sonny Liston COULD NOT beat any of the top 6 heavyweights today. Your first effort failed, go ahead and try again if you would like. I'm still interested.

I feel that Liston’s struggling to stop 194lb-ers, coupled with being beaten several opponents that could have made today’s light heavyweight or cruiserweight limits, is sufficient proof that he couldn’t bulldoze or bully today’s 245lbs behemoths, especially someone as big as Tyson Fury.

Pernell Whitaker wasn’t a big puncher at 147lbs, so I consider this as being sufficient proof that he’d be less effective at 175lbs.

Perhaps I’m being unreasonable in making such assumptions.

Look, even though size isn’t the be all and end all, it’s incredibly important.

And let’s not forget that Liston was bigger than most of his opponents and there were only a few men he faced that were roughly the same size as himself.

To be fair, there’s far more proof to support my assertions than those that prefer to base their opinion using nostalgia or evangelical faith.

This might sound a bit harsh, but for me, Sonny Liston is a more accomplished version of Luis Ortiz, with both guys being impressive fighters, but nowhere near good enough to justify their reputations/media hype.

For the record, I've provided plenty of evidence to support my stance, but you've provided none.

In fact, you've done your upmost to avoid directly addressing any of the facts I've cited. The reason for you doing this is rather obvious, since you'd be unable to provide an honest, sincere and objective opinion about my evidence without it undermining your own argument,

No one has tried to disprove my evidence, because they know they can't.

Where did you DISPROVE someone else's assertion that Liston COULD be one of the top Heavyweights in 2020? I would love to read that.

I'm not interested in undermining your argument. As I've said, I think it's a very reasonable case. Moreover, it doesn't conflict with my view whatsoever. My view on the other hand, does conflict with yours, since you seem to feel that you have proven your case and can say with 100 percent certainty what would happen in a hypothetical scenario that has never taken place and can never take place. That is why I am staying with your view and asking you to please provide conclusive evidence that undermines my take that, given that this is a hypothetical, we CANNOT know for certain what would transpire.

So far, you have been unable to disprove my claim, but I look forward to your next try.

[ValMar]

I have not considered the current HWs, their careers are not finished.

Rate them as if they just announced their retirement. Their careers are now over. Obviously guys very early in their career you can't really do. However, you should have a ball park idea on some guys who have fought for a long time. Who would be higher than say 14th?

Right now, nobody.

[margaret thatcher]

Would Billy Conn be a top 3 HW vs todays division? Beat Fury or AJ? The man did outbox Joe Louis for 12 rounds...

[jas80s]

Hard to figure a guy with a pretty short run at HW and only two meaningful fights there, and one of those even after a three plus year layoff..But, I'm going with a "no"

But, for those who don't know, I have a longstanding take on hypothetical scenarios that we cannot know for certain, so I must remain true to that.

Still, I do think it would take a minute for these behemoths to find Billy...

[Ambling Alp II]

In their first fight, Conn did much better against Louis that several opponents (Carnera, Simon, Buddy Baer ) that were much heavier than Louis.

Why? For one thing, Conn was a great boxer who was much harder to hit than larger opponents. Also, for whatever reason, Louis was off that night. This may have been the worst fight of his prime.

[margaret thatcher]

How far would Billy's skills take him in today's hw division

[Ambling Alp II]

Rate them as if they just announced their retirement. Their careers are now over. Obviously guys very early in their career you can't really do. However, you should have a ball park idea on some guys who have fought for a long time. Who would be higher than say 14th?

Right now, nobody.

That's how I see it as well. If no current heavyweight rates higher than Liston all time, then Liston would be the the best heavyweight today.

[oogiebe]

In their first fight, Conn did much better against Louis that several opponents (Carnera, Simon, Buddy Baer ) that were much heavier than Louis.

Why? For one thing, Conn was a great boxer who was much harder to hit than larger opponents. Also, for whatever reason, Louis was off that night. This may have been the worst fight of his prime.

The first Godoy fight was Louis' worst of his prime. Conn was brilliant that night. The rematch was Conn trying to avoid getting bombed rather than employing the great boxing he did in the first.

[thereverend]

I feel that Liston’s struggling to stop 194lb-ers, coupled with being beaten several opponents that could have made today’s light heavyweight or cruiserweight limits, is sufficient proof that he couldn’t bulldoze or bully today’s 245lbs behemoths, especially someone as big as Tyson Fury.

Liston was beaten by 'several opponents' who were cruiserweight or LHW size? He was only beaten 4 times, twice by Ali. That doesn't equal several times, unless you think Ali was a light heavyweight. His first loss was early in his career when he lost a Split Decision to Mike Marshall. Maybe he's the light heavyweight you're talking about? He knocked Marshall down in the 1st round but then suffered a broken jaw. Despite an injury that would end the fight for most modern fighters he continued and almost won, lost a split decision. Then two fights later he destroyed Marshall, KO.

In his 2nd to last fight, when he was considered washed up, he was knocked out versus Leotis Martin. Martin is listed as 199 lbs. Despite the KO loss he still was able to detach Martin's retina with a punch, basically ending Martin's career. You're saying this is proof that somehow Liston had trouble with smaller fighters, which means in the modern era he'd struggle against larger fighters? Maybe I'm missing something since I've never read one of your posts through because it's a tedious read. You use a lot of useless redundant language that a serious writer would want to omit, the quickest way you lose readers is boredom.

The best light heavyweight type fighter Liston fought, if that's what we're judging him on, was Floyd Patterson who got destroyed. Against big fighters for the era, over 200 lbs, (doesn't really translate to the modern era but it's all we've got) Cleveland 'Big Cat' Williams is a good example, Liston annihilated them. He had huge arms, an advantage against big men in any era. I wouldn't be confident he'd win against Fury because of the movement but for the same reason he'd win against most of the big men of this era. He'd annihilate fighters like Ortiz who'd present an easy target. Comparing Liston to Ortiz is ridiculous. Liston was a great fighter, a great champion. What has Ortiz accomplished? On the other hand if you gave Liston a modern dietician, weight trainer, and PEDs it's likely he'd clean out most of the division. If you cherry picked most of his opponents Wilder-style he'd have a similar type KO streak.

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

How far would Billy's skills take him in today's hw division

Too small come on. Also boxers training and nutrition and skills are way better today. Look at some of the bums Louis, Ali defended against. Fat talentless cruiserweights left right and centre. Anyone seen how bad chuck Wepner is? Yet he took Ali a almost 15 rounds. Or look at Tony galento. No skills at all, at all and was a fat pisshead and he had Louis on the floor. Louis only reigned that long coz there was no one decent at the time. I mean imagine an 175 lb fighter giving any top heavy a fight these days

Roy jones jr? Antonio tarver? James toney? Michale moorer?

[Ambling Alp II]

Roided to the gills, unlike the Klitschkos.

We have truly been living in the golden era for heavyweights the last 15 years or so. So many great fights.

[jas80s]

I feel that Liston’s struggling to stop 194lb-ers, coupled with being beaten several opponents that could have made today’s light heavyweight or cruiserweight limits, is sufficient proof that he couldn’t bulldoze or bully today’s 245lbs behemoths, especially someone as big as Tyson Fury.

Liston was beaten by 'several opponents' who were cruiserweight or LHW size? He was only beaten 4 times, twice by Ali. That doesn't equal several times, unless you think Ali was a light heavyweight. His first loss was early in his career when he lost a Split Decision to Mike Marshall. Maybe he's the light heavyweight you're talking about? He knocked Marshall down in the 1st round but then suffered a broken jaw. Despite an injury that would end the fight for most modern fighters he continued and almost won, lost a split decision. Then two fights later he destroyed Marshall, KO.

In his 2nd to last fight, when he was considered washed up, he was knocked out versus Leotis Martin. Martin is listed as 199 lbs. Despite the KO loss he still was able to detach Martin's retina with a punch, basically ending Martin's career. You're saying this is proof that somehow Liston had trouble with smaller fighters, which means in the modern era he'd struggle against larger fighters? Maybe I'm missing something since I've never read one of your posts through because it's a tedious read. You use a lot of useless redundant language that a serious writer would want to omit, the quickest way you lose readers is boredom.

The best light heavyweight type fighter Liston fought, if that's what we're judging him on, was Floyd Patterson who got destroyed. Against big fighters for the era, over 200 lbs, (doesn't really translate to the modern era but it's all we've got) Cleveland 'Big Cat' Williams is a good example, Liston annihilated them. He had huge arms, an advantage against big men in any era. I wouldn't be confident he'd win against Fury because of the movement but for the same reason he'd win against most of the big men of this era. He'd annihilate fighters like Ortiz who'd present an easy target. Comparing Liston to Ortiz is ridiculous. Liston was a great fighter, a great champion. What has Ortiz accomplished? On the other hand if you gave Liston a modern dietician, weight trainer, and PEDs it's likely he'd clean out most of the division. If you cherry picked most of his opponents Wilder-style he'd have a similar type KO streak.

What a great post, thanks. But, just so you know the level of thinking we are dealing with here:

It has been suggested in this thread that Sonny Liston's chances of hurting a current day heavyweight are the same as the chances that Pernell Whitaker could hurt a 175 pound fighter. Evidently, there is no difference between Pernell Whitaker's punches and those of Sonny Liston. Moreover, there is no difference between a 147 man hitting a 175 pound man and a 215 pound man (who would be bigger than that in this scenario) hitting a 260 pound man. Where is the evidence that every man's punches have the same, linear impact on their opponent? So, that argument amounts to evangelical faith in the modern fighter. This came from a guy who constantly attacks people for presenting straw man arguments.

It has been suggested that because a fighter of less weight has gone the distance with Sonny Liston, that it would be impossible for Sonny Liston to hurt a bigger man with his punches. This ignores a number of examples of smaller men hurting bigger fighters historically and that these smaller men have also had fighters of similar size to them go the distance. It also conveniently ignores examples of current day HW's being hurt by smaller fighters. This despite the fact that these modern day HWs haven't been around for a long at all. So, this argument is fallacious and thus completely worthless, and thus amounts to utter evangelical faith in the modern day fighter.

Thinking that there is even a chance that Sonny Liston could be competitive today when we have no direct evidence of what any cross era comparison would look like is evangelical faith. Yet, thinking there is a chance that even Tyson Fury (probably the best big heavy today) could never be hurt by a punch from Sonny Liston when he was dropped hard by Steve Cunningham should be considered an incontrovertible fact because a smaller fighter went the distance with Liston.
So here, what evidence there is completely flies in the face of thinking that Liston couldn't possibly hurt a modern heavy.

And still with all that, they can't even bring themselves to admit that there is no direct evidence of how a cross era fight would go because one has never taken place. All they do is pronounce something with indirect flimsy evidence and dare you to prove its false. But when asked to prove that a great fighter from the past couldn't be a great fighter today, they fall back on the same indirect, flimsy, and fallacious evidence that proves nothing, and worse, proves less than nothing about how Sonny Liston specifically would do.

Sonny Liston was a great fighter, we cannot say for sure just how successful he would be today, or even how those skills would translate to the modern era. I'm still waiting for someone to offer something other than their own opinion based on flawed research and fallacious suppositions to disprove that.

[jas80s]

And why so much attention to Liston's results on a boxrec page?

I believe that using results of fights we haven't witnessed personally to bolster any claims is laughably unreliable?

#TheHarryGrebRule

So, let's sum up, Harry Greb beat multiple hall of famers, but believing him to be top middleweight of all time is a no.

But, referencing Liston's results in fights you haven't seen to bolster a fallacious claim riddled with contradictory examples in a hypothetical scenario which contains no direct evidence that would clearly back either side of the argument.....yes.

I messed up, though. I wasted all this time destroying his feeble arguments. The troll won. DAMN!

[oogiebe]

The boy has gone eerily silent. Could he possibly have left the forum? Please lord I hope so.

[Jeff_lacy_ko]

The boy has gone eerily silent. Could he possibly have left the forum? Please lord I hope so.

He is coming up with his master ruse where he outsmarts us with a wild opinion....

[oogiebe]

The boy has gone eerily silent. Could he possibly have left the forum? Please lord I hope so.

He is coming up with his master ruse where he outsmarts us with a wild opinion....

LMFAO! I forgot about his latest 'threat.'

[Enlightened-One]

And once again I am reading a whole lot of this is how I see it and why with nothing whatsoever that would be conclusive proof that this is how the hypothetical would play out with ZERO chance that it could be any different.

You are correct, we are indeed being asked a question relating to a hypothetical situation. And I have articulated an opinion that I consider educated, since I researched Sonny Liston’s career, whilst also possessing a deep-seated knowledge of today’s heavyweight world-rated landscape.

Those that disagreed with my stance, claimed my logic was flawed and also ignored the facts, stats and evidence I cited, whilst providing nothing to support their own counter-argument.

Indeed, you have done your upmost to avoid directly addressing any of my questions or the facts and stats that I supplied.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they aren’t entitled to their own facts!

Anyway, I have never claimed that my stance is 100% certain and that there was zero chance for events to defy my expectations.

The fact you’ve claimed this means you’ve employed a strawman debating tactic, since it seems you can’t discuss matters honestly, based on the fact you’ve claimed I’m holding a stance that I’ve never conveyed.

If you disagree with me about this, then quote my words? You won’t do this though, because it can’t be done, since what you’ve said never happened in any version of reality.

What can you say that would conclusively DISPROVE the view that Liston could win? Where is even the conclusive PROOF of what would happen in the fights?

You’re now trying to employ red herring debating tactics, because you’re demanding conclusive proof about a hypothetical situation.

Your demand doesn’t relate to the topic of this thread nor any of my claims. So you’re going off-topic in order to avoid directly addressing my stance!

By the way, you used the word “hypothetical” in your response, you should probably review its definition.

Once again, you have substituted your assertion about fight styles and likely fight scenarios as a fact, when in point of fact, they are merely your suppositions based on your views, just like the suppositions of everyone else on this board.

Have I ever claimed otherwise? The obvious answer is "NO!"

It seems to me, we don't KNOW how a fight would transpire between Sonny Liston and any heavyweight today. In fact, as factual statements go, "we don't know for certain how a fight between Sonny Liston and any heavyweight today would unfold" seems like one that would be hard to disprove, but if you would like to give it a go, I'll certainly read it.

I don’t see the point for this paragraph.

Where is the conclusive evidence that my claim that we cannot know for certain what would happen if Sonny Liston fought in 2020 is not valid?

You seem to keep repeating yourself, so I’ll do it too!

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they aren’t entitled to their own facts! And that’s the reason why everyone, including yourself, refrain from reviewing or responding to the evidence I’ve cited or the questions I have posed that illustrate them.

I will say, it's nice to see you sharing your views on a topic rather than chastising others for not adequately undermining or disproving your take on a given topic to your satisfaction. I hope others are enjoying reading it as much as I am.

This isn’t intended to be a derogatory instruction, but you need to actually read my words before criticising them.

If others aggresively criticise my opinion, claiming my logic is flawed, then they need to undermine the facts, stats and evidence I used to formulate my stance.

Instead, they choose to base their own beliefs on evangelical faith, hearsay, rumour, adhering to mainstream misconceptions etc. whilst also refraining from providing any proof of their own to support their opinions.

Where did you DISPROVE someone else's assertion that Liston COULD be one of the top Heavyweights in 2020? I would love to read that.

You’ve previously employed strawman and red herring debating tactics, but now you’ve even resorted badgering.

It’s abundantly clear you’re trying to win the argument by attacking again and again with the same argument in an effort to wear me down or repeating something over and over in the hope that raw repetition alone will eventually displace the truth.

It has been suggested in this thread that Sonny Liston's chances of hurting a current day heavyweight are the same as the chances that Pernell Whitaker could hurt a 175 pound fighter.

This hasn't been suggested by anyone.

A question was asked that was intended to illustrate the fact that fighters that aren’t prolific punchers in their own natural habitat (weight class) are nearly always far less effective against vastly bigger opposition.

You ignored the question and now you’re claiming something I’ve never even written.

You also keep ignoring another question of mine that followed the same theme:

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?

It has been suggested that because a fighter of less weight has gone the distance with Sonny Liston, that it would be impossible for Sonny Liston to hurt a bigger man with his punches.

You're using straw man debating tactics again, because you're pretending you’ve successfully refuted my argument, while actually refuting “something” that I’ve never even presented.

Either quote my words or admit you're wrong.

And still with all that, they can't even bring themselves to admit that there is no direct evidence of how a cross era fight would go because one has never taken place. All they do is pronounce something with indirect flimsy evidence and dare you to prove its false.

It’s clear you’re using badgering debating tactics, because you’re desperately hoping that raw repetition alone will eventually displace the truth.

Stop repeating yourself!

But when asked to prove that a great fighter from the past couldn't be a great fighter today, they fall back on the same indirect, flimsy, and fallacious evidence that proves nothing, and worse, proves less than nothing about how Sonny Liston specifically would do.

Badgering... repeating...

I'm still waiting for someone to offer something other than their own opinion based on flawed research and fallacious suppositions to disprove that.

Here’s a novel idea, instead of “waiting” on others and criticising them for their so-called flawed evidence or opinions, why don’t you instead perform some research of your own to validate/undermine their claims or justify your own stance?

You won’t do this though, since it's clear you believe that evangelical faith, hearsay, rumour, common misconceptions is far more compelling information to base one's opinions on than real-world historical events.

And why so much attention to Liston's results on a boxrec page?

I believe that using results of fights we haven't witnessed personally to bolster any claims is laughably unreliable?

OK, so you’re essentially dismissing the usefulness of a fighter’s resume to evaluate their accomplishments.

Is there a more reliable source of information we should use?

Oh, and by the way, unlike Harry Greb, it’s fairly easy to watch many of Sonny Liston’s bouts. So we can also apply the proverbial eyeball test.

#TheHarryGrebRule

So, let's sum up, Harry Greb beat multiple hall of famers, but believing him to be top middleweight of all time is a no.

This is another example of a straw man debating tactic. I never claimed this and I don’t recall anyone else doing so either.

If you think I’m wrong or that I am somehow lying, then quote my words.

But, referencing Liston's results in fights you haven't seen to bolster a fallacious claim riddled with contradictory examples in a hypothetical scenario which contains no direct evidence that would clearly back either side of the argument.....yes.

I messed up, though. I wasted all this time destroying his feeble arguments. The troll won. DAMN!

You’re pretending something occurred that never actually happened.

All you’ve done is criticise without justifying your own stance or providing compelling proof to illustrate the reason why my opinions are allegedly incorrect.

[Ambling Alp II]

s to now,

Liston was beaten by 'several opponents' who were cruiserweight or LHW size? He was only beaten 4 times, twice by Ali. That doesn't equal several times, unless you think Ali was a light heavyweight. His first loss was early in his career when he lost a Split Decision to Mike Marshall. Maybe he's the light heavyweight you're talking about? He knocked Marshall down in the 1st round but then suffered a broken jaw. Despite an injury that would end the fight for most modern fighters he continued and almost won, lost a split decision. Then two fights later he destroyed Marshall, KO.

In his 2nd to last fight, when he was considered washed up, he was knocked out versus Leotis Martin. Martin is listed as 199 lbs. Despite the KO loss he still was able to detach Martin's retina with a punch, basically ending Martin's career. You're saying this is proof that somehow Liston had trouble with smaller fighters, which means in the modern era he'd struggle against larger fighters? Maybe I'm missing something since I've never read one of your posts through because it's a tedious read. You use a lot of useless redundant language that a serious writer would want to omit, the quickest way you lose readers is boredom.

The best light heavyweight type fighter Liston fought, if that's what we're judging him on, was Floyd Patterson who got destroyed. Against big fighters for the era, over 200 lbs, (doesn't really translate to the modern era but it's all we've got) Cleveland 'Big Cat' Williams is a good example, Liston annihilated them. He had huge arms, an advantage against big s, whcih means you can compare the men in any era. I wouldn't be confident he'd win against Fury because of the movement but for the same reason he'd win against most of the big men of this era. He'd annihilate fighters like Ortiz who'd present an easy target. Comparing Liston to Ortiz is ridiculous. Liston was a great fighter, a great champion. What has Ortiz accomplished? On the other hand if you gave Liston a modern dietician, weight trainer, and PEDs it's likely he'd clean out most of the division. If you cherry picked most of his opponents Wilder-style he'd have a similar type KO streak.

What a great post, thanks. But, just so you know the level of thinking we are dealing with here:

It has been suggested in this thread that Sonny Liston's chances of hurting a current day heavyweight are the same as the chances that Pernell Whitaker could hurt a 175 pound fighter. Evidently, there is no difference between Pernell Whitaker's punches and those of Sonny Liston. Moreover, there is no difference between a 147 man hitting a 175 pound man and a 215 pound man (who would be bigger than that in this scenario) hitting a 260 pound man. Where is the evidence that every man's punches have the same, linear impact on their opponent? So, that argument amounts to evangelical faith in the modern fighter. This came from a guy who constantly attacks people for presenting straw man arguments.

It has been suggested that because a fighter of less weight has gone the distance with Sonny Liston, that it would be impossible for Sonny Liston to hurt a bigger man with his punches. This ignores a number of examples of smaller men hurting bigger fighters historically and that these smaller men have also had fighters of similar size to them go the distance. It also conveniently ignores examples of current day HW's being hurt by smaller fighters. This despite the fact that these modern day HWs haven't been around for a long at all. So, this argument is fallacious and thus completely worthless, and thus amounts to utter evangelical faith in the modern day fighter.

Thinking that there is even a chance that Sonny Liston could be competitive today when we have no direct evidence of what any cross era comparison would look like is evangelical faith. Yet, thinking there is a chance that even Tyson Fury (probably the best big heavy today) could never be hurt by a punch from Sonny Liston when he was dropped hard by Steve Cunningham should be considered an incontrovertible fact because a smaller fighter went the distance with Liston.
So here, what evidence there is completely flies in the face of thinking that Liston couldn't possibly hurt a modern heavy.

And still with all that, they can't even bring themselves to admit that there is no direct evidence of how a cross era fight would go because one has never taken place. All they do is pronounce something with indirect flimsy evidence and dare you to prove its false. But when asked to prove that a great fighter from the past couldn't be a great fighter today, they fall back on the same indirect, flimsy, and fallacious evidence that proves nothing, and worse, proves less than nothing about how Sonny Liston specifically would do.

Sonny Liston was a great fighter, we cannot say for sure just how successful he would be today, or even how those skills would translate to the modern era. I'm still waiting for someone to offer something other than their own opinion based on flawed research and fallacious suppositions to disprove that.

Agree with of your points as well as the reverends.
As for cross era matches, we have to use common sense. We have to watch film and know what to look for. It is hard but not impossible to get a rough idea. If you can compare the 1990s to the 2000s, you can compare the the 1980s to the 2000s. Not perfect, but you can get a rough idea.
If you can compare the 1970s to the 1980s you can do the same with the 1960s. As long as we have decent film and use common sense, we can get a ball park idea between fighters of widely different eras.

You can go by win/loss records weights etc. People that know the sport know this.
We also have to come to grips that the sport didn't begin the day we became interested. Many people are not willing to do that.

[Cap]

Neven Pajkic was only 2 inches taller than Liston and nowhere near as skilled but he managed to put Tyson Fury down. If that had been Liston instead, Fury would not have gotten up.

When Liston was active there were at least 10 times as many pro boxers around as there are today. What you have now is the best of a very feeble lot.

[Thomastearns]

Neven Pajkic was only 2 inches taller than Liston and nowhere near as skilled but he managed to put Tyson Fury down. If that had been Liston instead, Fury would not have gotten up.

When Liston was active there were at least 10 times as many pro boxers around as there are today. What you have now is the best of a very feeble lot.

"What you have now is the best of a very feeble lot."

Yes, you get the feeling it's even weaker than it was 10 years ago. A peak Wladimir and Vitali would still be handing out boxing lessons from behind Manny Steward's defence.

Hopefully the resurgence of the division, mainly due to one Anthony Joshua, will continue beyond Hrgovic and Dubois. Then no doubt we'll soon be asking whether they are the best of all time.

Of course things get better all the time - it's called progress. Funny thing is that sometimes if you 'progress' long enough you might somehow find yourself back where you started from.

Anyday now we'll be heading to the moon. Wow!

[Tony1244]

Neven Pajkic was only 2 inches taller than Liston and nowhere near as skilled but he managed to put Tyson Fury down. If that had been Liston instead, Fury would not have gotten up.

When Liston was active there were at least 10 times as many pro boxers around as there are today. What you have now is the best of a very feeble lot.

Yup. While humans have become bigger, faster, and stronger, that's not the entire equation. The percentage of people participating perhaps is equally as important. In the US boxing was very common in the early and mid 20th century. Cities were littered with boxing gyms and college had boxing!

There are better Japanese baseball players than Chinese, because more Japanese play baseball. A country won't produce chess champions if almost no one plays chess.