BoxRec

dr_devious wrote:I just think there was something amiss about the fights, Sonny was probably a little past his best and the second fight was rumoured to be a tank job.

I think he'd have gone the distance all things being even, he wasn't a flat track bully he'd gone the distance in his first loss with a broken jaw

2 points.

Regarding Ali, I just think that he's all wrong for Sonny, lightning quick and frustratingly mouthy - a bad mixture for someone of Sonny's temperament - who was totally convinced of his own superiority.

As for him being "more than a bully" -maybe so. But I do suspect that he quit enjoyed the fear that hrs instilled in to his opponents. A lot like Mike Tyson as I think about it.

And yeah, i'd be picking Holmes to Wimbledon on points even though Liston's style does appeal to me, I prefer watching aggressive fighters.

Liston may or may not have been in his peak when he fought Ali in '64, but one thing that cannot be denied is that Ali wasn't in his prime.

He was still yet to develop into the truly great fighter he was to become & he still handled Liston with relative ease.

That suggests to me that Ali was all wrong for Liston & is just better all round.

I'm sure i read that Liston could have been up to 8 years older than the age he went by.

He appeared to throw the second fight in my eyes. Also wasn't Ali a 7/1 under dog in the first fight and that too was a fishy ending.

Ali definitely looked good against Liston, but both fights were unbelievably fishy endings.

Id go for Holmes speed advantage to take the win.

You only need look at photos of Liston's face post-Ali I. He was beaten & bloodied.

- 'T'is the silly spring season upon us in this bovine pasture with mushrooms and daisies popping up everywhere.

Prime Liston loses when directed by the mob, otherwise a midround KO of dear Lar.

Talk about larded records, neilson is 8-2 against former, future champs and Lar 10-0, but only 1-5 against current titlists, 0-5 against the beltholders actually beating another champ for titles.

He ain't never beating a prime sonny told to win. Too great a gulf of talent.

i'd pick larry holmes over liston ,holmes never had the speed of foot of ali but he was quicker than liston and i see him just staying outside enough to frustrait liston and take a win either late stoppage or points

BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:Talk about larded records, neilson is 8-2 against former, future champs and Lar 10-0, but only 1-5 against current titlists, 0-5 against the beltholders actually beating another champ for titles.

Your statistics of course cannot express crucial information such as the fact Larry Holmes was 36, 38, 42 and 45 years of age in that run of 0-5.

When Liston grew old he was splattered by Leotis Martin. Meanwhile a 42 year old Larry Holmes performed better versus Holyfield than Mike Tyson did, and at 45 he performed better versus McCall than Lennox Lewis had done.

Your point is obviously unsound if you have to obscure the facts to make it.

Tuan_Jim wrote:


Your point is obviously unsound if you have to oobscure the facts to make it.

- You of course just unsound, period.

Fat Lar 0-6 against current belt holders actually winning a title fight if we include Neilson, the Ibo title. Never attempted unification in his prime against a talented laden era of more than a half dozen champs all fighting each other.

Skipped out on prime Ali, Joe, George, and Ken as well, no more than a boy against prime Sonny's MAN...keep it real or keep it teal and tan for your silly vapors fan when Lar goes down and out.

Ali just plain mugged Liston in the first fight, even though he was given the liniment gift that should have assured Sonny's victory.

Ali beat him so bad, that Liston could never find the will to even attempt put up a struggle in the next go round.

And of course the Ali naysayers to this day want desperately twist themselves into knots to convince us that it was some sort of threat, or magic that created these outcomes.

It's simple math, Ali > Liston period.


I think Holmes would probably have a good night, if he could successfully avoid the incoming. But Liston, would have a punchers chance undoubtedly.

Just as he had against Ali....except both Ali and Holmes were pretty well Iron Jawed fellas. So it's a long shot for Liston. But you can never count Liston or Foreman out IF the opportunity arises.


If you have an open mind, just watch Liston's last lengthy fight before Patterson, and then watch his first fight after Ali......They will tell you all you need to know. I won't give details, but if you watch, you will clearly see why Liston was just not going beat Ali under any circumstances shy of a hail Mary.....and I think the same goes for Holmes.

But you will need to do your homework and watch those two fights.


The two Patterson fights just do not give up enough style info to see what it is I'm talking about.

So there.....do your homework, and report back. And if after watching those two fights, if you think you have determined that Liston should beat them both, please come back and inform us just why you are so imaginative.

BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:


Your point is obviously unsound if you have to oobscure the facts to make it.

- You of course just unsound, period.

Fat Lar 0-6 against current belt holders actually winning a title fight if we include Neilson, the Ibo title. Never attempted unification in his prime against a talented laden era of more than a half dozen champs all fighting each other.

Skipped out on prime Ali, Joe, George, and Ken as well, no more than a boy against prime Sonny's MAN...keep it real or keep it teal and tan for your silly vapors fan when Lar goes down and out.

You don't know the facts. He did attempt a unification - he was scheduled to fight Gerrie Coetzee in June 1984. Fight fell through for reasons that had nothing to do with Holmes or Coetzee.

I think Liston would beat Holmes but your assessment of Holmes is too emotional and biased to be taken seriously. When you're having to hold Brian Nielsen against him - a split decision loss at the age of 47, and for a "title" that Nielsen won against clubfighter Tony la Rosa - you're pretty desperate.

Also, could you try write normally, for your own sake? You don't have the IQ or literary ability to write in this stylised 'character' fashion. Thank you.

BoxBuzz wrote:Ali just plain mugged Liston in the first fight, even though he was given the liniment gift that should have assured Sonny's victory.

Ali beat him so bad, that Liston could never find the will to even attempt put up a struggle in the next go round.

And of course the Ali naysayers to this day want desperately twist themselves into knots to convince us that it was some sort of threat, or magic that created these outcomes.

It's simple math, Ali > Liston period.


I think Holmes would probably have a good night, if he could successfully avoid the incoming. But Liston, would have a punchers chance undoubtedly.

Just as he had against Ali....except both Ali and Holmes were pretty well Iron Jawed fellas. So it's a long shot for Liston. But you can never count Liston or Foreman out IF the opportunity arises.


If you have an open mind, just watch Liston's last lengthy fight before Patterson, and then watch his first fight after Ali......They will tell you all you need to know. I won't give details, but if you watch, you will clearly see why Liston was just not going beat Ali under any circumstances shy of a hail Mary.....and I think the same goes for Holmes.

But you will need to do your homework and watch those two fights.


The two Patterson fights just do not give up enough style info to see what it is I'm talking about.

So there.....do your homework, and report back. And if after watching those two fights, if you think you have determined that Liston should beat them both, please come back and inform us just why you are so imaginative.

Ali was quick enough to avoid the incoming from Sonny.

I have some doubts about Larry possessing a sufficient quantity of quick.

He would need more than his jab in this one.

But wouldn't bet much either way.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

dr_devious wrote:Nobody knew his real age and he'd had a very hard life, not hard to believe he was somewhat faded in 1964.

I'm not saying peak Liston would have beaten Ali or trying to minimise a fabulous victory

He was still at his peak going into that fight. There isn't a single scrap of evidence to say otherwise.

One must possess the courage to recognize what is instead of what they hope it to be.

'59 Sonny would have been a tougher proposition for '64 Ali. (not saying Sonny wins)

yancey wrote:'59 Sonny would have been a tougher proposition for '64 Ali. (not saying Sonny wins)

That's just your opinion mate and I disagree. You don't have any evidence to back it up though.

Tuan_Jim wrote: You don't know the facts. He did attempt a unification - he was scheduled to fight Gerrie Coetzee in June 1984. Fight fell through for reasons that had nothing to do with Holmes or Coetzee.

I think Liston would beat Holmes

- Ahhh, such delectable dimwittery.

I do believe you just damned your hero with the faintest of praise, oh blessed be the irony that appears lost on you. Redemption though, you agree that Liston beats Holmes. I was confident that you could be reclaimed, so there is more hope for you to come if you continue upon this path of pugilistic enlightenment.

I've been thinking about this one and have come to the conclusion that Holmes is a class above. Ali beat Liston easily the first time despite being blinded for a round. Second time Liston just didn't want to know. Liston's record is actually not that impressive. Yes he was a very hard puncher with a long reach but he was slow and could be hit too. He didn't have the best defence and more won by either that ramrod jab or overpowering smaller men. the best men on his record are Machen (pts win), Williams, Patterson and Zora Folley. his record for beating top guys was over about 3 years.

Compare this to Holmes who went 48-0 made 20 odd title defences against pretty much all the top contenders. He was without question the dominant heavy in the world for the best part of 7 years. He was 43 when he beat ray mercer and gave Evander trouble. He's a guy like foreman who spanned eras and even when he was pretty much the shell of the man he was, he could still beat fringe contenders easily and hang with champs like mcCall we he was 46.

So Holmes is faster, much more mobile, has an infinitely better record, faced more good fighters over a longer period and came up sparring in wars with the greatest heavyweight ever. Even ignoring all these facts there's one other - Holmes was much much tougher. Liston quit on his stool against ali and was basically a bully fighter. Holmes came back from being knocked down on numerous occasions. He was a better and a greater fighter and he'd have won this match up.

I disagree that Holmes record is that much better. It's very close. Patterson (whom Liston crushed) was about as good as Norton, (whom Holmes barely beat).
Liston did get badly by Clay (Ali) but Holmes wouldn't have done much better.
Machen, Williams, Folley were about as good as the other top guys Holmes beat. Holmes just more of them.
I think Holmes was was slightly better, but it's arguable.

My guess its that Holmes wins this more often than not. However, Holmes had close calls (Snipes, Shavers, Norton) where he escaped where Liston would have finished him off.

I think Holmes wins 2 out of 3.

Liston quit on his stool against ali and was basically a bully fighter.

My ass. People like to point him out as a bully who quit when the going got tough. He didnt quit when getting hammered with bombs by quite possibly the hardest puncher of all time in Cleveland Williams. Including one that broke his nose. It's certainly debatable who had more heart.

Holmes was much much tougher

How was Holmes much tougher? Liston fought 6 rounds with a broken jaw. Did Holmes ever do this? Even if he is tougher, is he "much much" tougher?

Let's just say they're equal in both departments? Though I think Liston has the edge in both.

Larry beats Sonny on a 10-5, 11--4 decision. He pulls away in the later rounds, using movement and that tremendous jab.

Prime Liston for me.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

dr_devious wrote:Sonny was an absolute beast at his peak

Don't you think that makes Clay/Ali's wins over Liston even more exceptional?

No... because Clay/Ali beat an old Sonny Liston -- not the peak 50's version who was much better... Holmes beats ANY Sonny Liston and ANY Muhammad Ali.

I'll take Sonny clean. Bet the end result would look about like what happened when an aged Holmes fought Tyson. Mid rounds KO.

At his business peak, King changed his itinerary constantly because he was paranoid about being assassinated or somebody putting thugs on him to beat the sh!t out of him. If they were correct in knowing when and where King was going to show up he would have bought it a couple of times. I think Mike Tyson was successful in having King worked over by true professionals on 1 occasion. They busted his ass good.

keithmoonhangover wrote:He was still at his peak going into that fight. There isn't a single scrap of evidence to say otherwise.

There's tons of evidence that Liston was an old man.

Even Clay said "I don't believe Liston is 32. He's an old man. He looks old enough to be my father." Liston had 25 brothers and sisters... One of them was also named Charles so Sonny used his birth certificate because he was about 10 or 12 years younger. That's what Jack Nilon claimed. He said they did it because there were boxing laws being enacted at that time that required boxers to retire at a certain age.. California passed one requiring boxers retire at 36. Many stories you read on line are similar to this "In his last fight, against Chuck Wepner in June of 1970, he won a 10th round technical knockout. At the time of this last fight, Liston claimed to be 38, but many think he was closer to 50."

That particular storyhttp://www.encyclopedia.com/people/spor ... nny-liston talks about Liston being born in a shack, in a manner that didn't require a birth certificate, and he was named by a midwife... It also states his mother gave various contradictory dates for his birth.

BoxBuzz wrote:Ali just plain mugged Liston in the first fight, even though he was given the liniment gift that should have assured Sonny's victory. Ali beat him so bad, that Liston could never find the will to even attempt put up a struggle in the next go round. And of course the Ali naysayers to this day want desperately twist themselves into knots to convince us that it was some sort of threat, or magic that created these outcomes.

BuzzBox there was no liniment... Neither Liston or his cornermen were ever charged or accused of anything like that...so you're full of it.

Ali didn't beat Liston bad. In fact, though Liston was badly injured when he had to quit---the fight was even on the cards.

Liston got up before Walcott could even start counting over him in the rematch... Only the referee can count you out and Liston never received an official count...so Liston was robbed.. And how can you explain Ali not being disqualified for not going to a neutral corner??? Has any boxer in fistic History more flagrantly disobeyed a referee's orders to go to a neutral corner???? You won't answer that.

And if Liston intended to quit... Why did he get up without a referee's count and square off to fight??? Why didn't he just wait to be counted out??? And how was it that he was easily able to duck and dodge every follow up punch Ali threw at him??? Another question you won't answer.

I think 1930 is about right for Liston's year of birth, that ties in with the limited records available and what boxrec has listed for him. That makes him 40 when he died and 34/35 when he fought Ali. He was jailed in 1950 so he would've been around 20 years old which makes sense too. Some people say he was born in 1928 (and even earlier) but for such a troublesome youngster it seems unlikely that he would evade police until he was 22 or older.