Who beats Liston?

[p4p1]

I'm sure it's been done before, but who beats Liston if he at or near his best?

Lineal Champions
John L. Sullivan - It's doubtful someone from his era could take on someone as skilled and physical as Liston. It seems pretty clear that outmuscling Liston was not an option so it's unlikely that Sullivan could win.
James J. Corbett - I don't know enough about the guy but again it's hard to imagine someone from that era with that style of fighting beat Liston.
Bob Fitzsimmons - Too small realistically. Gets decimated.
James J. Jeffries - A big strong slugger gets destroyed by Liston.
Marvin Hart - Don't know much about this guy.
Tommy Burns - see Bob Fitzsimons
Jack Johnson - I'm in two minds. On one hand Johnson is one of the greatest heavyweights to ever live. On the other hand he arguably isn't the best heavyweight of his era. Langford one of the greatest fighters ever and Wills may have been but never had the chance to prove they were.
Jess Willard - See his Dempsey fight.
Jack Dempsey - Much like Cus D'Amato said to Tyson about Foreman, I don't think a swarming aggressive style is suicide against Liston.
Gene Tunney - Had a style that was similar to Ali's, focusing on speed rather than power. His only loss was against Greb who is Greb so that loss doesn't mean much at all. I think he could be a live dog over 15 rounds. Although Dempsey caught him pretty, often swarmers do better against guys who employ a lot of speed and movement, while boxer-punchers like Liston often don't do as well.
Max Schmeling - See Joe Louis 2
Jack Sharkey - Likely has the same ending as his Joe Louis fight possible earlier
Primo Carnera - See Baer and Louis fights
Max Baer - I would imagine a destruction. Whether he fought Louis while injured or not and the delay caused the pain killer to wear off. The fight probably goes a similar way whether he fights Louis or Liston.
James J. Braddock -
Joe Louis - I think this is where a lot of people will disagree with me. I see them as being somewhat similar. Good fundamentals, a strong jab and real power. But Louis gives away 10 inches in reach to someone who's jab is probably the most powerful in history. I think he has a punchers chance at best. I think the skills are even but Liston is just too strong.
Ezzard Charles - I have to think it's similar to what I stated for Tunney. Though IIRC Charles is a bit smaller than Tunney but he's probably the better fighter of the two. I gotta think he is a live dog.
"Jersey" Joe Walcott - If an older Louis can beat him, Liston does as well.
Rocky Marciano - Bloodbath. Marciano might be one of the toughest and strongly willed fighters ever but that just means he's getting a prolonged beating.
Floyd Patterson - We know how this one went
Ingemar Johansson - There's a reason why this fight never happened and it wasn't Sonny.
Muhammad Ali - Same result more or less
Joe Frazier - I imagine an absolute annihilation
George Foreman - I genuinely don't believe George believes he could have beaten Sonny. To be a fly on the wall in their sparring session. Would love more info on those if its available. Old version may be smarter and more wiley but His lack of speed would see him get a beating.
Leon Spinks - Total Destruction
Larry Holmes - I think he has an excellent chance against Liston. Probably better than anyone who isn't Ali. His jab, chin and skills would see him do pretty well I think.
Michael Spinks - If he was intimidated by Tyson he wouldn't have been able to make the ring walk against Sonny.
Mike Tyson - Massacre, the reach, the jab, the strength and power on top of intimidation and real toughness.
James "Buster" Douglas - This is going to be unpopular but I give the version of Buster that showed up against Tyson a chance against anyone. His reach is more or less the same as Liston's, his jab that night was perfect. He looked quick and powerful.
Evander Holyfield - ATG, tough, great skills but I just see him getting a hiding. His toughness and heart will keep him around for a sustained beating.
Riddick Bowe - No idea, he's something of an enigma to me. He's big and he's good or even great. But I'm not sure that's enough against Liston.
Michael Moorer - Hiding.
Shannon Briggs - Hiding
Lennox Lewis - Arguably the last truely great heavyweight. Hes taller than Sonny and for the first time in Sonny's career he would be facing someone with the same reach as he had. KO's against less than great opPosition do not bode well for him though. Yes he was unmotivated and it showed and yes he won rematches in emphatic fashion. But it does show that his chin was the one thing about him that wasn't great. Liston will hit him at some point and I don't know if he could just shake it off.
Hasim Rahman - Hiding
Wladimir Klitschko - Great, powerful big man. In the end too chinny and would be KTFO.
Tyson Fury - I don't see him winning. He could use his size to make it more difficult for Liston that we would expect. But I doubt he could actually be effective at anything else. He looks slow compared to the footage of Liston. I know the footage is old but I still think there's relevance there. Liston's ace in the pocket against these huge heavyweights compared to most of his contemporaries are his 84 inch reach. It doesn't matter that he is giving away 8 or so inches in height. If Wilder can catch Fury with his total lack of boxing skill the vastly superior Liston would knock him out after outboxing him all night.

Non-Lineal Champions
Sam Langford - Conventional wisdom says to me he is just too small. A great reach for his height but he is still giving away 10 inches.
Harry Wills - I just don't know much about this guy other than he may have been the best HW in the world at one stage.
Vitali Klitschko - He's big, he's strong he has a reach disadvantage. He is as tough as probably anyone, he has shown a great chin. That chin probably means he is in for one hell of a beating.

In the end despite his relatively low all time rating compared to some of the guys mentioned. I think the only guy who beats him clearly and consistently is Ali. Holmes I think has a good chance. while Tunney and Charles' movement and style could make them live dogs.

Liston seems like such as enigma in a lot ways. His skills and physical assets mean that he should be right there at the top with Louis and co. He was just unlucky to be there when Ali was hitting his prime. Of his 4 losses, 1 came in his 8th fight against a guy with over 25 who was on a decent run. Liston's jaw was broken early in the fight. 2 against Ali, that means nothing. His final loss was when he was at least 40. Politics ensured that he never got another shot at the title during Ali's exile.

So what do you guys agree with or disagree with? Are there any other guys you think could have beaten him?

[rimmjobb]

I'm sure it's been done before, but who beats Liston if he at or near his best?

Lineal Champions
John L. Sullivan - It's doubtful someone from his era could take on someone as skilled and physical as Liston. It seems pretty clear that outmuscling Liston was not an option so it's unlikely that Sullivan could win.
James J. Corbett - I don't know enough about the guy but again it's hard to imagine someone from that era with that style of fighting beat Liston.
Bob Fitzsimmons - Too small realistically. Gets decimated.
James J. Jeffries - A big strong slugger gets destroyed by Liston.
Marvin Hart - Don't know much about this guy.
Tommy Burns - see Bob Fitzsimons
Jack Johnson - I'm in two minds. On one hand Johnson is one of the greatest heavyweights to ever live. On the other hand he arguably isn't the best heavyweight of his era. Langford one of the greatest fighters ever and Wills may have been but never had the chance to prove they were.
Jess Willard - See his Dempsey fight.
Jack Dempsey - Much like Cus D'Amato said to Tyson about Foreman, I don't think a swarming aggressive style is suicide against Liston.
Gene Tunney - Had a style that was similar to Ali's, focusing on speed rather than power. His only loss was against Greb who is Greb so that loss doesn't mean much at all. I think he could be a live dog over 15 rounds. Although Dempsey caught him pretty, often swarmers do better against guys who employ a lot of speed and movement, while boxer-punchers like Liston often don't do as well.
Max Schmeling - See Joe Louis 2
Jack Sharkey - Likely has the same ending as his Joe Louis fight possible earlier
Primo Carnera - See Baer and Louis fights
Max Baer - I would imagine a destruction. Whether he fought Louis while injured or not and the delay caused the pain killer to wear off. The fight probably goes a similar way whether he fights Louis or Liston.
James J. Braddock -
Joe Louis - I think this is where a lot of people will disagree with me. I see them as being somewhat similar. Good fundamentals, a strong jab and real power. But Louis gives away 10 inches in reach to someone who's jab is probably the most powerful in history. I think he has a punchers chance at best. I think the skills are even but Liston is just too strong.
Ezzard Charles - I have to think it's similar to what I stated for Tunney. Though IIRC Charles is a bit smaller than Tunney but he's probably the better fighter of the two. I gotta think he is a live dog.
"Jersey" Joe Walcott - If an older Louis can beat him, Liston does as well.
Rocky Marciano - Bloodbath. Marciano might be one of the toughest and strongly willed fighters ever but that just means he's getting a prolonged beating.
Floyd Patterson - We know how this one went
Ingemar Johansson - There's a reason why this fight never happened and it wasn't Sonny.
Muhammad Ali - Same result more or less
Joe Frazier - I imagine an absolute annihilation
George Foreman - I genuinely don't believe George believes he could have beaten Sonny. To be a fly on the wall in their sparring session. Would love more info on those if its available. Old version may be smarter and more wiley but His lack of speed would see him get a beating.
Leon Spinks - Total Destruction
Larry Holmes - I think he has an excellent chance against Liston. Probably better than anyone who isn't Ali. His jab, chin and skills would see him do pretty well I think.
Michael Spinks - If he was intimidated by Tyson he wouldn't have been able to make the ring walk against Sonny.
Mike Tyson - Massacre, the reach, the jab, the strength and power on top of intimidation and real toughness.
James "Buster" Douglas - This is going to be unpopular but I give the version of Buster that showed up against Tyson a chance against anyone. His reach is more or less the same as Liston's, his jab that night was perfect. He looked quick and powerful.
Evander Holyfield - ATG, tough, great skills but I just see him getting a hiding. His toughness and heart will keep him around for a sustained beating.
Riddick Bowe - No idea, he's something of an enigma to me. He's big and he's good or even great. But I'm not sure that's enough against Liston.
Michael Moorer - Hiding.
Shannon Briggs - Hiding
Lennox Lewis - Arguably the last truely great heavyweight. Hes taller than Sonny and for the first time in Sonny's career he would be facing someone with the same reach as he had. KO's against less than great opPosition do not bode well for him though. Yes he was unmotivated and it showed and yes he won rematches in emphatic fashion. But it does show that his chin was the one thing about him that wasn't great. Liston will hit him at some point and I don't know if he could just shake it off.
Hasim Rahman - Hiding
Wladimir Klitschko - Great, powerful big man. In the end too chinny and would be KTFO.
Tyson Fury - I don't see him winning. He could use his size to make it more difficult for Liston that we would expect. But I doubt he could actually be effective at anything else. He looks slow compared to the footage of Liston. I know the footage is old but I still think there's relevance there. Liston's ace in the pocket against these huge heavyweights compared to most of his contemporaries are his 84 inch reach. It doesn't matter that he is giving away 8 or so inches in height. If Wilder can catch Fury with his total lack of boxing skill the vastly superior Liston would knock him out after outboxing him all night.

Non-Lineal Champions
Sam Langford - Conventional wisdom says to me he is just too small. A great reach for his height but he is still giving away 10 inches.
Harry Wills - I just don't know much about this guy other than he may have been the best HW in the world at one stage.
Vitali Klitschko - He's big, he's strong he has a reach disadvantage. He is as tough as probably anyone, he has shown a great chin. That chin probably means he is in for one hell of a beating.

In the end despite his relatively low all time rating compared to some of the guys mentioned. I think the only guy who beats him clearly and consistently is Ali. Holmes I think has a good chance. while Tunney and Charles' movement and style could make them live dogs.

Liston seems like such as enigma in a lot ways. His skills and physical assets mean that he should be right there at the top with Louis and co. He was just unlucky to be there when Ali was hitting his prime. Of his 4 losses, 1 came in his 8th fight against a guy with over 25 who was on a decent run. Liston's jaw was broken early in the fight. 2 against Ali, that means nothing. His final loss was when he was at least 40. Politics ensured that he never got another shot at the title during Ali's exile.

So what do you guys agree with or disagree with? Are there any other guys you think could have beaten him?

I think you are in love with Liston. Guy was champ for a cup of coffee. Beat cruiserweight Floyd Patterson.

[Fray Bentos]

Would have gotten 'old' against George Chuvalo in a 15 rounder in Toronto.

[rimmjobb]

Chris Byrd would beat Liston easy.

[Seamus]

I think Marty Marshall beats him.

[littlepug]

Pointless pitting fighters from vastly different eras against each other, especially heavyweights as they have always been a physically evolving division, different eras have differences in training techniques, boxing skills, length of fights, tolerances by referees, medicine, nutrition, and social, financial and political landscapes which all play a part in shaping a fighter.So that stuff aside where do you have the fight? back in time to the earliest fighters era or in the future in the most recent fighters era ? Or to make it fair are we gonna have let’s say Liston born in Dempseys time or perhaps Dempsey born in Listons time ? Either way a different fighter would be produced. It’s daft.

[rimmjobb]

Pointless pitting fighters from vastly different eras against each other, especially heavyweights as they have always been a physically evolving division, different eras have differences in training techniques, boxing skills, length of fights, tolerances by referees, medicine, nutrition, and social, financial and political landscapes which all play a part in shaping a fighter.So that stuff aside where do you have the fight? back in time to the earliest fighters era or in the future in the most recent fighters era ? Or to make it fair are we gonna have let’s say Liston born in Dempseys time or perhaps Dempsey born in Listons time ? Either way a different fighter would be produced. It’s daft.

Liston is overrated. Don't you think? Barely champ for a cup of coffee. Then got slapped around by Ali.

[p4p1]

Pointless pitting fighters from vastly different eras against each other, especially heavyweights as they have always been a physically evolving division, different eras have differences in training techniques, boxing skills, length of fights, tolerances by referees, medicine, nutrition, and social, financial and political landscapes which all play a part in shaping a fighter.So that stuff aside where do you have the fight? back in time to the earliest fighters era or in the future in the most recent fighters era ? Or to make it fair are we gonna have let’s say Liston born in Dempsey's time or perhaps Dempsey born in Liston's time ? Either way a different fighter would be produced. It’s daft.

I think a lot of change happened from say Sullivan's to the maybe latter part of the dempsey era. After that I think most of the techniques and strategies have remained pretty similar. I don't think the Heavyweights now are any better than Heavyweights from era's past. I think that Foreman was able to be so successful in the 90s while in his 40's and Holyfield was able to do the same thing a decade later while in his 40's shows that boxing or at least heavyweight boxing hasn't evolved or improved like other sports have.

My reasons for posting this was it's hard to place Liston if you were rating guys on how they would go against each other. It's hard rating him in general, Marciano may have been champ for longer but does anyone think that Liston wouldn't wipe the floor with him? The same can be said about a lot of HW champions when comparing them to Liston.

If you pit some of the guys from the older era against he current guys you would have to conclude that the size difference would be an important factor. But it's not a factor for Liston, yeah he will give away height and weight but will likely still retain the reach, speed and strength advantage against most guys.

[evrenb]

Pointless pitting fighters from vastly different eras against each other, especially heavyweights as they have always been a physically evolving division, different eras have differences in training techniques, boxing skills, length of fights, tolerances by referees, medicine, nutrition, and social, financial and political landscapes which all play a part in shaping a fighter.So that stuff aside where do you have the fight? back in time to the earliest fighters era or in the future in the most recent fighters era ? Or to make it fair are we gonna have let’s say Liston born in Dempseys time or perhaps Dempsey born in Listons time ? Either way a different fighter would be produced. It’s daft.

How little time is devoted to the actual , rich history of the sport. Instead make believe is created which has no merit in itself. It will never happen, it never did happen and as you said correctly it's pointless even considering it hypothetically. Thought there was a fantasy forum for this. ??

[rimmjobb]

Liston's best wins were clearly before he was champ.

He didn't do much after becoming champ.

[DrDuke]

Pointless pitting fighters from vastly different eras against each other, especially heavyweights as they have always been a physically evolving division, different eras have differences in training techniques, boxing skills, length of fights, tolerances by referees, medicine, nutrition, and social, financial and political landscapes which all play a part in shaping a fighter.So that stuff aside where do you have the fight? back in time to the earliest fighters era or in the future in the most recent fighters era ? Or to make it fair are we gonna have let’s say Liston born in Dempseys time or perhaps Dempsey born in Listons time ? Either way a different fighter would be produced. It’s daft.

The truth, which is rarely understood. The sport was totally different in the beginning of the previous century. As if it was a some other sport. Fighters simply aren't allowed to perform this way today. At its dawn boxing was just about fighting. They weren't aiming to outbox opponents. Competitors came there in small gloves, they were simply about breaking each other down, with grabbing, with inside hustling, with the dirty tactics by the modern standards. If it was possible to trasport those fighters with a time machine and allow to perform in such way against the modern fighters, the old ones would have advantages, but if everything went according to the modern rules, the current ones would have advantages.

[dr_devious]

John L. Sullivan - no chance too crude
James J. Corbett - no chance too small
Bob Fitzsimmons - no chance too small
James J. Jeffries - no chance too crude
Marvin Hart - no chance too small
Tommy Burns - no chance too small
Jack Johnson - not sure how his style holds up in the modern era, got a chance if it does but I favour Liston
Jess Willard - no chance too crude
Jack Dempsey - punchers chance but likely too small and crude
Gene Tunney - too small
Max Schmeling - very good but not good enough for Liston
Jack Sharkey - good but not nearly good enough for Liston
Primo Carnera - no chance too crude
Max Baer - good but not nearly good enough for Liston
James J. Braddock - no chance too small
Joe Louis - 50:50 fight. Louis is the greater heavyweight but Liston has the tools to put a big dent in him
"Jersey" Joe Walcott - very good but not good enough for Liston
Rocky Marciano - Liston in a more difficult fight than expected
Floyd Patterson - We know how this one went
Ingemar Johansson - Liston far too much for Ingo
Muhammad Ali - Same result more or less
Joe Frazier - Difficult fight to predict, I'd bet on Sonny
George Foreman - 50:50 fight between the two greatest heavyweight wrecking machines of all time
Leon Spinks - Total Destruction
Larry Holmes - Holmes wins on points
Michael Spinks - Would die of fright
Mike Tyson - Liston brutalizes him in 3 or 4 rounds
James "Buster" Douglas - Sonny all the way
Evander Holyfield - Sonny wrecks him in a brutal fight
Riddick Bowe - Liston beats him up eventually
Michael Moorer - Hiding.
Shannon Briggs - Hiding
Lennox Lewis - Liston knocks him out
Hasim Rahman - Hiding
Wladimir Klitschko - Liston knocks him out quickly
Tyson Fury - Fury would fiddle about and win a few rounds but Liston gets to him eventually

[AntonioMartin]

Many of the larger Heavyweights from the 90s to now. Not all but a decent number.

To me, Liston isnt quite the monster he has been made out to be. Also the mobster connection makes me wonder how many of his wins and losses were on the up and up.

I still think that, from what Ive seen he beats a good number of them but not all. Many can beat him too.

[margaret thatcher]

Find Sonny to be rather overrated here tbh, some of this stuff about him facilely smashing up basically any other hw great that ever lived is funny

[Seamus]

And to think of it. The guy's 2 best wins came against chinny Floyd Patterson, but he easily beats just about everyone in history.

[AntonioMartin]

Find Sonny to be rather overrated here tbh, some of this stuff about him facilely smashing up basically any other hw great that ever lived is funny

Me 2!

[dalcumly]

2 things in this type of debate.
In 1900 for example the average height of a man in the western world was about 5' 7" meaning that James Jeffries at around 6'2" was a big guy. If you follow this on through the decades you might get an idea of how heavyweights would fair. Today I understand that the average height is now around 5'9". So James Jeffries would be around 6'4", Dempsey around 6'2", Louis around 6' 3" and so on.
As far as Liston is concerned I would go the opposite way from some comments and say he was under rated. There is strong circumstantial evidence that Liston was born around 1927, meaning he was 35 when he won the title and 37 when he lost it.
Totally fearless, well schooled, thunderous puncher and had a reasonably good in defence.

[Ambling Alp II]

The age thing has been long debunked.
Liston would have beaten the majority of heavyweight champions.
He lost to Ali and beat Patterson.

More often than not, would have lost to Johnson, Louis, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Holyfield, and Lewis

Tyson would have been a pick 'em.

Would have won more often than not against Jeffries, Dempsey, Tunney, Charles, Walcott, Marciano, and Norton. Probably would have beat Langford, Jeannette, and McVey the majority of the time.

Hard to imagine him losing to anyone else.

[bwu]

The age thing has been long debunked.
Liston would have beaten the majority of heavyweight champions.
He lost to Ali and beat Patterson.

More often than not, would have lost to Johnson, Louis, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Holyfield, and Lewis

Tyson would have been a pick 'em.

Would have won more often than not against Jeffries, Dempsey, Tunney, Charles, Walcott, Marciano, and Norton. Probably would have beat Langford, Jeannette, and McVey the majority of the time.

Hard to imagine him losing to anyone else.

Yeah, this pretty much nails it down. The only thing I could add is seeing Liston pound Jeffries and Marciano for round after round, but the two failing to cave. Liston, exhausted from his efforts, then loses while ahead ala Corbett and Walcott. Those are maybes, of course.

[Djanders44]

My Opinion to beat Liston: Jeffries. Johnson. Dempsey. Baer. Louis. Marciano. Ali. Frazier. Foreman. Holmes. Tyson. Holyfield. Lewis. (I think Dempsey. Marciano, Frazier, and Tyson have style problems, but can overcome those if they hang tough with Liston and get some early respect. Baer's problem is he wasn't really better than Liston, but he was crazy, so it's a bit iffy. I think Baer could confuse and outlast Liston.)


EDIT: I forgot Holmes, and added him.

[AntonioMartin]

Marty Marshall...
Muhammad Ali
Leotis Martin...

Anyone else you can think about?

[Controversial]

.I think that Foreman was able to be so successful in the 90s while in his 40's and Holyfield was able to do the same thing a decade later while in his 40's shows that boxing or at least heavyweight boxing hasn't evolved or improved like other sports have.

Different styles and strengths and weaknesses. Foreman relied on his physical strength, chin and power in his comeback, he was never the fastest, slickest or a mover and if anything the extra weight in his comeback probably helped him. Holyfield was more about punch output, reflexes, combinations, fitness, speed which all decline with age.

[Cojimar 1946]

Pointless pitting fighters from vastly different eras against each other, especially heavyweights as they have always been a physically evolving division, different eras have differences in training techniques, boxing skills, length of fights, tolerances by referees, medicine, nutrition, and social, financial and political landscapes which all play a part in shaping a fighter.So that stuff aside where do you have the fight? back in time to the earliest fighters era or in the future in the most recent fighters era ? Or to make it fair are we gonna have let’s say Liston born in Dempsey's time or perhaps Dempsey born in Liston's time ? Either way a different fighter would be produced. It’s daft.

I think a lot of change happened from say Sullivan's to the maybe latter part of the dempsey era. After that I think most of the techniques and strategies have remained pretty similar. I don't think the Heavyweights now are any better than Heavyweights from era's past. I think that Foreman was able to be so successful in the 90s while in his 40's and Holyfield was able to do the same thing a decade later while in his 40's shows that boxing or at least heavyweight boxing hasn't evolved or improved like other sports have.

My reasons for posting this was it's hard to place Liston if you were rating guys on how they would go against each other. It's hard rating him in general, Marciano may have been champ for longer but does anyone think that Liston wouldn't wipe the floor with him? The same can be said about a lot of HW champions when comparing them to Liston.

If you pit some of the guys from the older era against he current guys you would have to conclude that the size difference would be an important factor. But it's not a factor for Liston, yeah he will give away height and weight but will likely still retain the reach, speed and strength advantage against most guys.

Liston is not likely to have a strength advantage over guys more than 40 pounds heavier like many of todays top heavies

[adislav123]

how long was sonny's reach for real now?

he defo had freakishly big bear claws of fists.

but for a guy 6 feet and a bit 84'' just seems outlandish.

some say even ali's 79" reach seemed longer others insist on the apish 84 inch. and everything inbetween. quite some discrepancy.
???

[Controversial]

how long was sonny's reach for real now?

he defo had freakishly big bear claws of fists.

but for a guy 6 feet and a bit 84'' just seems outlandish.

some say even ali's 79" reach seemed longer others insist on the apish 84 inch. and everything inbetween. quite some discrepancy.
???

I think Liston’s reach was exaggerated, Ali’s was 78” but think it was listed as 82” by some