BoxRec

p4p1 wrote:would liston frazier be a war or wouldnt it be that type of fight?

Short or long and whoever won, I personally think it would have been a heck of a fight.

granberry wrote:

yancey wrote:

granberry wrote:Bottom Line:

Yank Durham would not let Frazier in the ring with Liston.

He also advised Smoke to retire after Ali I.

Wish Joe would have taken that advice.

Durham died in August, 1973. He was only 53.

So Frazier had no one looking out for his interests in the 2nd Ali fight (where Eddie Futch did nothing while Tony Perez gave Ali over 100 warnings for pulling Frazier's head down without ever taking a point away from Ali) or for the 3rd Ali fight.

Cornermen can count for a lot. Notice Ali did little fouling in the first Frazier fight with Durham in Frazier's corner. It was the referee Merchante who fouled Frazier in that fight.

You know, I read an interview with Gil Clancy where he said if he had been Frazier's manager in the third Ali fight that he would have definitely sent Joe out for the 15th round.

Clancy's reasoning was that Ali was ready to go and could have been knocked out with one more good shot from Frazier.

Frazier was almost knocked down by Eddie Machen, who was washed up when Frazier fought him.

Frazier would have been in great danger against Liston, who would have landed first.

Durham avoided Liston on Frazier's way up.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Durham didn't want to risk it, though that's not to say he conclusively thought Frazier couldn't beat Liston.

Myself, I would take Frazier to beat Liston in 1968, & by stoppage, at that. Liston was losing power (the snap was going, if you watch the footage), & he wasn't busy enough to get Frazier out of there, for mine. He hadn't the energy. Frazier would have broken him down, despite some hairy moments.

I would suggest that Bill McMurray, Billy Joiner, Henry Clark, Sonny Moore, Willis Earls, Roger Rischer, and Amos "Big Train" Lincoln might challenge your assessment that Liston had lost his snap by 1968.

Post-1965, Sonny was 15-1 with 14 kayoes. Most of his opponents, while not top 5 contenders, were all solid fighters capable of giving anyone a rough evening.

It always seemed to me that the top guys avoided Liston like the plague.

Liston was very effective no doubt afterwards. But I think he would not have been effective enough to beat Frazier at this time.

Granberry,
You point about Machen really does not prove that much because after all Liston was stopped twice by Ali yet was in war every time he fought Frazier at any stage/

Oh...and Ali beat Foreman...yet Foreman beat Frazier twice.....and so on and so forth.

Other than being common opponents how could you compare Machen's style to say Liston ?

Robinson wrote:Liston was very effective no doubt afterwards. But I think he would not have been effective enough to beat Frazier at this time.

Granberry,
You point about Machen really does not prove that much because after all Liston was stopped twice by Ali yet was in war every time he fought Frazier at any stage/

Oh...and Ali beat Foreman...yet Foreman beat Frazier twice.....and so on and so forth.

Other than being common opponents how could you compare Machen's style to say Liston ?

Machen and Liston fought--12 rounds.

Get the film and you can answer your own question with both in the ring at the same time.

I have seen that film. And Floyd Patterson also beat Machen oh and who KO'd Machen in won round.

If you read what I said, the whole fighter A beats B but loses to C who beats A means very little as I know you know.

What I was trying to establish is as a fighter who would you compare a Machen to that would help further your argument...

I personally do not feel that Machen is a Frazier styled fighter, as awkward as he is.
I also do not think that he is a Liston type of fighter either.

So I am curious to understand..asides from the common opponent angle what point your making.

Thanks again

Kym

Robinson wrote:I have seen that film. And Floyd Patterson also beat Machen oh and who KO'd Machen in won round.

If you read what I said, the whole fighter A beats B but loses to C who beats A means very little as I know you know.

What I was trying to establish is as a fighter who would you compare a Machen to that would help further your argument...

I personally do not feel that Machen is a Frazier styled fighter, as awkward as he is.
I also do not think that he is a Liston type of fighter either.

So I am curious to understand..asides from the common opponent angle what point your making.

Thanks again

Kym

Machem was definitely not a Frazier or a Liston styled fighter.

Just thinking about Machen, it is sort of hard to think of someone comparable. I always thought he was kind of a patient, defensive oriented, counter puncher type. Maybe he was somewhat similiar to a Zora Folley.

Archie Moore, perhaps? I'm not sure, I haven't seen enough Machen film.

After I posted it I tried thinkng of who he reminded me of. I guess in some ways perhaps he is like a smaller Norton or a better Weaver.

But then I would only use those comparisons loosely.

Robinson wrote:After I posted it I tried thinkng of who he reminded me of. I guess in some ways perhaps he is like a smaller Norton or a better Weaver.

But then I would only use those comparisons loosely.

Yes, a smaller Norton, I can see that.

Im going to watch some Machen now.

Robinson wrote:After I posted it I tried thinkng of who he reminded me of. I guess in some ways perhaps he is like a smaller Norton or a better Weaver.

But then I would only use those comparisons loosely.

VERY loosely.

LOL.

I like the way the clueless are always ignorant of when a fighter discussed was his real self.

Machen (along with Folley) was in his prime when Patterson was champion.

Years before the fights mentioned here.

Machen was past his best when he fought Patterson (who was also well past his prime years).

That fight should have taken place while Patterson was champion.

Cus D'Amato can be thanked for stinking up boxing while Patterson was champion by refusing to let him fight his number one contenders, Machen and Folley, and instead having him fight Pete Rademacher, Roy Harris, Brian London etc.

granberry wrote:

Robinson wrote:After I posted it I tried thinkng of who he reminded me of. I guess in some ways perhaps he is like a smaller Norton or a better Weaver.

But then I would only use those comparisons loosely.

VERY loosely.

LOL.

I like the way the clueless are always ignorant of when a fighter discussed was his real self.

Machen (along with Folley) was in his prime when Patterson was champion.

Years before the fights mentioned here.

Machen was past his best when he fought Patterson (who was also well past his prime years).

That fight should have taken place while Patterson was champion.

Cus D'Amato can be thanked for stinking up boxing while Patterson was champion by refusing to let him fight his number one contenders, Machen and Folley, and instead having him fight Pete Rademacher, Roy Harris, Brian London etc.

I agree that Machen was in his prime earlier, but we were discussing styles, and to my knowledge his style didn't change radically as he got older.

Machen at his best was a master boxer.
And not a bad puncher.
I remember Marciano saying that he thought Machen was the most deserving of getting a shot at Patterson's title.

In those days you had fighters like Machen who were a measuring stick.

No one beat Machen except those who went on to win the title (Liston, Johansson).

granberry wrote:Machen at his best was a master boxer.
And not a bad puncher.
I remember Marciano saying that he thought Machen was the most deserving of getting a shot at Patterson's title.

In those days you had fighters like Machen who were a measuring stick.

No one beat Machen except those who went on to win the title (Liston, Johansson).

Granberry,

Prime to prime, how do you think Machen-Patterson and Folley-Patterson
would have played out?

p.s. I've always linked Folley and Machen in my mind....both were treated unfairly and both died young.

yancey wrote:
Granberry,

Prime to prime, how do you think Machen-Patterson and Folley-Patterson
would have played out?

p.s. I've always linked Folley and Machen in my mind....both were treated unfairly and both died young.

Answer to Machen or Folley vs patterson when he held the title:

I don't know--but I certainly would have liked to find out.
Cus D'Amato committed a crime against those two.
And he hurt boxing badly in doing that because the heavyweight championship affects general interest in boxing.

Liston, Machen, and Folley---the big contenders during Patterson's holding of the title-- all died prematurely.

Liston on a mob hit called the "hot shot," Machen walking off a balcony while he was in a hospital (drugged?), and Folley slipping near a children's swimming pool and splitting his head open on the concrete.

I really would have liked to have seen patterson give Folley and Machen shots during his reign.

I think he would have won, though it would not have been easy.

I know that Machen was at his best long before what was mentioned up above and like I said I was trying to finger other heavies that he seemed like nothing more or nothing less.

And you are right while awkward he did seem like a lot better a boxer than both a Norton and Weaver/

Granberry how do you Think Machen would do in his peak against a good boxer mover like a peak Ali ?

Machen gave Doug Jones a lopsided beating.

The same Doug Jones beat Ali.

granberry wrote:Machen gave Doug Jones a lopsided beating.

The same Doug Jones beat Ali.

I just checked the record books again for you gran....and it still has Ali winning that fight.

Robinson wrote:I really would have liked to have seen patterson give Folley and Machen shots during his reign.

I think he would have won, though it would not have been easy.

I know that Machen was at his best long before what was mentioned up above and like I said I was trying to finger other heavies that he seemed like nothing more or nothing less.

And you are right while awkward he did seem like a lot better a boxer than both a Norton and Weaver/

Granberry how do you Think Machen would do in his peak against a good boxer mover like a peak Ali ?

Ali by UD.

The record books say Ali beat Jimmy Young, Jose Torres beat Eddie Cotton, Bob Foster got a "draw" with Ahumada, Nelson got a draw with Jeff Fenech in their first fight, Napoles didn't lose the title to Armando Muniz in their first fight, and Ali beat Doug Jones.

The films of those fights show otherwise.

granberry wrote:The record books say Ali beat Jimmy Young, Jose Torres beat Eddie Cotton, Bob Foster got a "draw" with Ahumada, Nelson got a draw with Jeff Fenech in their first fight, Napoles didn't lose the title to Armando Muniz in their first fight, and Ali beat Doug Jones.

The films of those fights show otherwise.

No mention of you in any Ring Record books (or anything else boxing-related) though, I see.

Ive seen the fight of Liston against Henry Clark(which aired on ABC Wide World of Sports commented by Howard Cossell and Angelo Dundee) which is about the best I seen Liston in his comeback fights.
Liston was rporet to fight Ellis if he won that fight which he did.
However Liston looked at least half a beat slower then he did in 1962.
Dick Sadler had said that Sonny Liston had broken his hand during the fight with Henry Clarke.
Liston also had the re-occuring shoulder injury in the late 1960's that result from the first fight with Ali(or when he was training for that fight) .
That would probably explain why his comeback record consists largely off journeymen and former sparring partners 1966-1970.

Brutu wrote: That would probably explain why his comeback record consists largely off journeymen and former sparring partners 1966-1970.

Wrong.

The contenders refused to fight Liston.

Granberry

who do you feel at that time could have beaten Liston...around the time of
the WBA elimination tournament...

Thanks again

Kym