BoxRec

Despite the official scorecards, Ali – Liston I was not really evenly contested prior to Liston quitting on his stool with lumps around both eyes. While he was the aggressor during many of the rounds, he really had little success hitting Ali and was countered effectively throughout. Whether his shoulder was hurt or not is irrelevant, because if it was hurt, it was probably injured because he was swinging and missing with his hard, ponderous punches. I guess everyone sees things differently, but to my eyes, Liston landed little in the way of telling blows, and if Sonny truly was a puncher in the class of Foreman and Shavers, as several posters keep claiming, then if he had landed telling punches, the relatively green 22 year old Ali should have been sprawled on the canvas.

Ambling Alp wrote:Nice. What a class act. I'm sorry that I don't have your real knowledge of fights.

You started this buddy, implying I hadn't seen the fight because I saw it differenlty from you. Are you one of these fellows who like to hit out but can't take the counterpunch?

I'm not presenting quasi-facts. I going by what really happened in the fight. You seriously think the fight was even? Wow. No, Liston didn't win the first two rounds.

He did on the judges' scorecards.

You seriously think that Liston really had a sore shoulder?

The medical reports afterwards confirmed this.

Come on. I didn't think anyone really believed that. the sore shoulder sorry was an excuse. He was getting hurt, he was getting marked up, he knew he couldn't hit Ali cleanly.

This is all your freelancing interpretation.

He knew he wasn't going to last 9 more rounds. He quit because he knew he wasn't going to win.

Sure, but the injured shoulder may (or may not) have played a key part in this.

So what if people still thought Liston would win the rematch? People thought he would win the first one as well. What people think is going to happen isn't important. What really happened does.

Seems the point on "with hindsight" (you, today) and "without hindsight" (they, then) is too elaborate for you.

P

Ambling Alp wrote:
You may find the first fight odd, but the first Ali-Liston fight tells us everything we need to know. Ali toyed with Liston.

The same fighter who was staggered badly by a Doug Jones right hand 15 seconds into their fight, was clobbered by the much smaller Jones and had to be given a ridiculous "decision" after the beating he took from Jones

the same fighter whose nose was bloodied by 185-pound Henry Cooper 20 seconds into their fight

and then floored by Cooper---

Yes--that poor excuse for a fighter, who showed he had NO DEFENSE and was very hurtable by overweight lightheavyweight Doug Jones and 185 lb Henry Cooper--as well as showing he had no punching power against either---

SUDDENLY has a perfect defense against Sonny Liston.

As you cluelessly wrote

"the first Ali-Liston fight tells us everything we need to know. "

It certainly does:

It tells us that a poor excuse for a fighter who struggled with Doug Jones and Henry Cooper had a fixed fight with Liston.

Ambling Alp wrote:Nice. What a class act. I'm sorry that I don't have your real knowledge of fights.
I'm not presenting quasi-facts. I going by what really happened in the fight.
You seriously think the fight was even? Wow. No, Liston didn't win the first two rounds. It doesn't matter who is the aggressor, it matters who is effective.

You seriously think that Liston really had a sore shoulder? Come on. I didn't think anyone really believed that. the sore shoulder sorry was an excuse. He was getting hurt, he was getting marked up, he knew he couldn't hit Ali cleanly. He knew he wasn't going to last 9 more rounds. He quit because he knew he wasn't going to win.

So what if people still thought Liston would win the rematch? People thought he would win the first one as well. What people think is going to happen isn't important. What really happened does.

It wasn't a sore shoulder . . .he tore his rotator cuff. It was confirmed by the ringside physician, his own doctors, and those who knew him. Just as granberry goes way overboard with his hatred of Ali, so do some Ali proponents who refuse to believe that Liston ACTUALLY got injured a la Vitali Klitscko v Chris Byrd. The fact that Liston had his best round previously and Clay landed VERY little in round 6th point to this conclusion as well. It was a competetive fight but far far away from any one-sided beating.

As to the first two rounds, I would Clay won the 1st round fairly clearly through his ring generalship (although he landed very little), while the 2nd was a clear round for Liston.

3rd-Clay had his best flurry of the fight in the first minute of the round, Liston comes back with good body work in the last half of the round. Some score this even. I give it to Clay since his flurry in the beginning was more impressive.

4th-Very uneventful round. I shade it to Liston based on the harder punches landed.

5th-The famous blind round, clearly Listons

6th-Another uneventful round, Liston loses the round based on inactivity but slips the wide majority of Clay's attempts.

I have it even after 6 (Clay 1, 3, and 6 . .Liston 2,4, and 5)

silkov wrote:
Williams was still good enough to go 10 rounds with Chuvalo in the early 70s.... he was still a decent fighter even then!...

Cleveland Williams was a physical cripple when he "fought" Ali.

He had an entirely different build from the time before he was shot.

The huge half healed scar rising up out of his boxing trunks is perfectly visible in any photo of his "fight" with Ali.

When they sewed him up after removing one kidney and ten feet of his small intestine Cleveland Williams was left with a completely different upper body as compared with before the time he was shot, with his pectorals yanked downward and his midsection non existent.

All this is visible at a glance to anyopne with a competent knowledge of Williams before he was shot.

His weight went down to 150 ppounds in the hospital where he was treated after he was shot, a year and a half before he "fought" Ali.

Cleveland Williams' shriveled left leg for 8-9 inches above the knee, from nerve damage caused by the bullet he was shot with, is visible in any photo of his "fight" with Ali.

Can you imagine if Joe Louis or Jack Dempsey fought an opponent in this crippled condition

and anyone tried to call it their "greatest fight" and one that proved they were the "greatest of all time" because of their "performance" against such a crippled opponent?

Yet that is exactly what the Ali industry sells to its clueless pawns

who then regurgitate the same talking points word for word onto sites like this.

pundit wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:Nice. What a class act. I'm sorry that I don't have your real knowledge of fights.

You started this buddy, implying I hadn't seen the fight because I saw it differenlty from you. Are you one of these fellows who like to hit out but can't take the counterpunch?

I'm not presenting quasi-facts. I going by what really happened in the fight. You seriously think the fight was even? Wow. No, Liston didn't win the first two rounds.

He did on the judges' scorecards.

You seriously think that Liston really had a sore shoulder?

The medical reports afterwards confirmed this.

Come on. I didn't think anyone really believed that. the sore shoulder sorry was an excuse. He was getting hurt, he was getting marked up, he knew he couldn't hit Ali cleanly.

This is all your freelancing interpretation.

He knew he wasn't going to last 9 more rounds. He quit because he knew he wasn't going to win.

Sure, but the injured shoulder may (or may not) have played a key part in this.

So what if people still thought Liston would win the rematch? People thought he would win the first one as well. What people think is going to happen isn't important. What really happened does.

Seems the point on "with hindsight" (you, today) and "without hindsight" (they, then) is too elaborate for you.

P

I "started this?" I asked if you had actually seen the fight. Why is that not a legitimate question? Then you say that I don't have a real knowledge of fights. You couldn't have just said something like "Yes, I saw the fight", Does criticizing me personally make you feel that much better?

You really think that the fight was "dead even", that Liston shoulder was really hurt, that if Liston wasn't hurt that he had a good chance of winning? Wow.

You don't find it hard to believe that after years of waiting for a title shot, that Liston would give up the heavyweight championship of the world (in an even fight) because of a sore shoulder?

Of course what does it matter what really happened? What's important is what the betting odds were for the 2nd fight. :(

The officials had the fight even so that means it really was even? Officially it was even , but it was pretty obvious that Ali was the better fighter. Do you really agree with the scoring of every fight?

By the way, officially Ali won the fight. Officially, Liston didn't come out for the 7th round. We don't have to speculate about "what would have happened if". We know.

Ambling Alp wrote: I "started this?" I asked if you had actually seen the fight. Why is that not a legitimate question?

A pretty patronizing "question" that insinuates that
(i) I had not seen an absolute classic of heavyweight boxing history, and
(ii) I would make statements about a fight I had not seen.
Basically this accuses me of cheating.

Then you say that I don't have a real knowledge of fights. You couldn't have just said something like "Yes, I saw the fight", Does criticizing me personally make you feel that much better?

Boy are you touchy.

You really think that the fight was "dead even", that Liston shoulder was really hurt, that if Liston wasn't hurt that he had a good chance of winning? Wow.

Look up what I wrote earlier. The fight was dead even on the scorecards at the time of the stoppage--this is simply a fact. True, by the 6th Ali clearly had the upper hand. To what extent this was due to Liston's shoulder injury is something that necessarily remains unknown.

And this was my starting point: the Ali vs. Liston fights were both so odd that they ALONE don't give us a definitive answer about how prime Liston compares to prime Ali. What gives us a more definitve answer is Ali's later career: the guy who annilihated Terrel or Williams wihtin the next couple of years seems unbeatable for pretty much every heavyweight in history, Liston included.

You don't find it hard to believe that after years of waiting for a title shot, that Liston would give up the heavyweight championship of the world (in an even fight) because of a sore shoulder?

A torn rotator cuff, buddy. Know what that is? It relates to a "sour sholder" as tubercolosis relates to a cold.

Of course what does it matter what really happened? What's important is what the betting odds were for the 2nd fight. :(

I don't know why it's so difficult to transport the ghist of the argument. Let me try again.

FACT: Sonny Liston was the betting favorite also before his second fight with Ali (although by a smaller margin).

POSSIBILITY ONE: the first fight was the shootout victory for Ali that you claim, demonstrating beyond doubt that Ali was much better than Liston. The trouble is that in this case the boxing fans of the early 60s must have been total idiots. They failed to see the obvious. Something Ambling Alp sees immediately today.

POSSIBILITY TWO: the first fight alone seemed inconclusive--Ali and Liston split the early rounds, and when Ali took charge Liston was fighting injured. In this case the contemporaries can be forgiven: with an inconclusive first bout and Liston's history as the most feared heavyweight on the planet, it seems rational to favor him again.

Possibility two seems much more plausible, at least to me. If we think today that Ali was much better than Liston it is because we enjoy the hindsight of Ali's entire career, which includes those victories over Williams and Terrell soon after the Liston fights -- maybe the most stunning performances ever of a heavyweight. But we do not do so because of Ali vs. Liston I as you claim. As said, if this was so, Ali's superiority should have been common knowledge before the refight--and it wasn't.

Wow I thought this was a hypothetical fight between the 1959 Liston and a 36-37 year old Marciano

Anyways...as much as I do love the Rock, him going up against Sonny Liston at this juncture in his career, had he fought on this long, would have for sure been likened to ROCKY 4, without Rocky pulling a last round kayo, and really without making much an assault on Liston.

Despite that being said, I don't see Rocky quitting on his stool or giving up. He would have sooner been beaten to death, gashed, lacerated, and knocked down multiple times, before he ever would give anyone the satisfaction of beating him any other way.

Liston would win by technical knock out, if not a genuine kayo, in 10 rounds, maybe 8 depending on how good Liston came into shape for that night. But make no mistake, Rocky wouldn't have stopped coming after Liston.

If only these two met in their primes...could very well be one of the greatest fights of all time.

Homicide Henry, I'm sorry for talking about this again on the Liston-Marciano thread but I feel that Should answer Pundit's last comments.

Pundit,
I'm sorry if asking you if you saw the fight was a patronizing question. I thought when you said that the fight was even, you may have referring to the official scorecards. Almost everyone besides the judges thought Ali was winning easily at the time of the stoppage.

Yes I am "touchy" when some says that I don't have "real knowledge" about fights. I'm sure you would have loved it if I would have said something like that about you.

I was asking if you (not the judges) thought the fight was dead even, and if Liston didn't have the "shoulder injury" if he would have had a good chance of winning. Apparently you do.

As for the sore shoulder, that is what Liston himself claimed it was. That is how it's described in every book and every article that I have ever read about this fight describes it. I have never heard anything about a torn rotator cuff until this thread.

The injury excuse has long been discredited. There is is absolutely no evidence of it bothering him during the fight. He is throwing punches with it throughout the fight. There are witnesses who claim that Liston threw a chair with his left hand in the dressing room after the fight.
He was getting beat up and he quit. It was obvious that he wasn't going to win.

As for the odds on the 2nd fight? who knows? The odds on some fights seem strange. Dempsey-Tunney II was considered about even by the oddsmakers before the fight. This despite the fact that Tunney won every round in their first fight. Does that mean that Tunney didn't dominate Dempsey in the first fight?

pundit wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:

pundit wrote:Both Ali Liston fights were so odd that they give us little guidance as to "what would have happened if".

That said, I find it hard to see any heavyweight in history beat the Ali who demolished Big Cat Willams or Earnie Terrell. Neither Williams or Terrell was in the class of Liston, of course (and Williams was beyond his peak), but they were still very competent heavyweights, and Ali did not get hit once while peppering his opponents with bucketloads of blistering quick combinations.

P

You may find the first fight odd, but the first Ali-Liston fight tells us everything we need to know. Ali toyed with Liston. Liston couldn't hit him, while Ali could hit and hurt Liston. Liston shouldn't have quit so easily, but he wasn't go the distance much less win. This is as plain as day.

What you describe applies at best to the sixth round. Overall the fight was dead even by the time Liston quit.

Don't forget that Liston was also favorite before the second fight. If Ali would have "toyed" with Liston the first tme around, it's hard to see how people would have come to that assessment before the rematch.

The fight wasn't "dead even." Ali was clearly in charge. And it was close on the scorecards because Ali spent a round and a half blind.

Decagon wrote:

pundit wrote:It is NOT irrelevant at all that Liston was the betting favorite also before the second fight. It shows the evaluation of people of the Ali's and Liston's strenghts based on tyhe first fight, and WITHOUT hindsight of the second fight and Ali's ensuing career. And based on the first fight only people still thought Sonny was the better heavyweight.

At the very least, it shows that Granberry's assertion that everyone on the East Coast knew the fight was going to be a dive was an out-and-out lie.

decagon---as if I need to ask--

what contact have you had with mob people?

LOL

And by the way, I think Liston being favored in the rematch was more a result of his lingering aura of invincibility than of anything that happened in the first fight. For a modern comparison, look at how Tyson was still favored to beat Holyfield in their rematch- do you think the first fight between them indicated to people that Tyson was better?

Marciano Frazier wrote:And by the way, I think Liston being favored in the rematch was more a result of his lingering aura of invincibility than of anything that happened in the first fight. For a modern comparison, look at how Tyson was still favored to beat Holyfield in their rematch- do you think the first fight between them indicated to people that Tyson was better?

BILLYGOAT Holyfield was the better butter.

He proved that without question as soon as the 2nd fight started.

Marciano Frazier wrote:And by the way, I think Liston being favored in the rematch was more a result of his lingering aura of invincibility than of anything that happened in the first fight. For a modern comparison, look at how Tyson was still favored to beat Holyfield in their rematch- do you think the first fight between them indicated to people that Tyson was better?

That's the entire point -- Ali vs. Liston I did not destroy Liston's aura of invincibility. For this there had been too many question marks around that fight.

As for Holyfield vs. Tyson, the fact that the bookies had Tyson ahead for the refight shows as much as with Ali vs. Liston that the first fight had not been enlough to settle the superiority issue. Many thought Tyson had been ill-prepared and had underestimatd Holy, while Holyfield had put in a non-repeatable once-in-a lifetime performance. In this case I would say that not even Tyson vs. Holyfield II really settled things, as the refight was competitive and close until the incident. It was only after Tyson vs. Botha that most boxing fans concluded that Tyson was a shadow of his former self. And Holyfield rose to full status as the dominant heavyweight after his impressive performance in the refight against Michael Moorer.

pundit wrote:

Marciano Frazier wrote:And by the way, I think Liston being favored in the rematch was more a result of his lingering aura of invincibility than of anything that happened in the first fight. For a modern comparison, look at how Tyson was still favored to beat Holyfield in their rematch- do you think the first fight between them indicated to people that Tyson was better?

That's the entire point -- Ali vs. Liston I did not destroy Liston's aura of invincibility. For this there had been too many question marks around that fight.

As for Holyfield vs. Tyson, the fact that the bookies had Tyson ahead for the refight shows as much as with Ali vs. Liston that the first fight had not been enlough to settle the superiority issue. Many thought Tyson had been ill-prepared and had underestimatd Holy, while Holyfield had put in a non-repeatable once-in-a lifetime performance. In this case I would say that not even Tyson vs. Holyfield II really settled things, as the refight was competitive and close until the incident. It was only after Tyson vs. Botha that most boxing fans concluded that Tyson was a shadow of his former self. And Holyfield rose to full status as the dominant heavyweight after his impressive performance in the refight against Michael Moorer.

Yes, I agree that most people thought Tyson had been ill-prepared and that Holyfield' performance was non-repeatable. I think that is basically what they thought about Liston and Ali as well. When the "invincible" guy loses, a lot of people look to rationalize it and don't accept that he was beaten by the better man, hence Liston being favored in the Ali rematch. However, Liston was soundly defeated in the first Ali fight.

The Liston who fought Ali did not look much different from the Liston who beat Williams and Machen. Machen used good movement and he took Sonny 15 rounds. Ali was much bigger and faster than Machen, with a much better jab. Ali-Liston I is a definitive fight. You're telling me Liston wouldn't beat Williams or Machen or Patterson on that night? I think he clearly would.

Either way, not sure what Ali-Liston has to do with Liston-Marciano... totally different fight.

I Feel Fine wrote:The Liston who fought Ali did not look much different from the Liston who beat Williams and Machen.


Machen used good movement and he took Sonny 15 rounds. .

"The Liston who fought Ali did not look much different from the Liston who beat Williams and Machen. "

Not to you, since you don't know the basics of the subject.

The Machen-Liston fight was 12 rounds.

But that doesn't matter to an "authority" like yourself.

LOL

I nominate you to take gasbag Bert Sugar's place when he gives up the ghost.

granberry wrote:

I Feel Fine wrote:The Liston who fought Ali did not look much different from the Liston who beat Williams and Machen.


Machen used good movement and he took Sonny 15 rounds. .

"The Liston who fought Ali did not look much different from the Liston who beat Williams and Machen. "

Not to you, since you don't know the basics of the subject.

The Machen-Liston fight was 12 rounds.

But that doesn't matter to an "authority" like yourself.

LOL

I nominate you to take gasbag Bert Sugar's place when he gives up the ghost.

My apologies, it was a 12 round fight. I have seen Liston-Machen, however. If you want evidence that I have, Liston lost points for low blows... and any question you want to ask me about Liston-Machen I'd be willing to answer to show that I've seen the fight.

Liston on that night was not much better than the Liston whose ass was handed to him by Clay.

I think you know where you can shove the rest of your post.

I Feel Fine wrote:

granberry wrote:

I Feel Fine wrote:The Liston who fought Ali did not look much different from the Liston who beat Williams and Machen.


Machen used good movement and he took Sonny 15 rounds. .

"The Liston who fought Ali did not look much different from the Liston who beat Williams and Machen. "

Not to you, since you don't know the basics of the subject.

The Machen-Liston fight was 12 rounds.

But that doesn't matter to an "authority" like yourself.

LOL

I nominate you to take gasbag Bert Sugar's place when he gives up the ghost.

My apologies, it was a 12 round fight. I have seen Liston-Machen, however. If you want evidence that I have, Liston lost points for low blows... and any question you want to ask me about Liston-Machen I'd be willing to answer to show that I've seen the fight.

Liston on that night was not much better than the Liston whose ass was handed to him by Clay.

I think you know where you can shove the rest of your post.

It his hilarious that IFEEL FINE, an eager candidate for the position of drunken Bert Sugar's successor as top incompetent boxing "authority" and "expert"

brings up Eddie Machen.

Eddie Machen beat the hell out of DOUG JONES, winning a lopsided decision and hurting Jones several times.

In comparison, DOUG JONES beat the hell out of Ali, staggering Ali as soon as their fight started with a right hand.

Ali showed he had had no punching power throughout his fight with Jones, although Ali was a head taller and 25 pounds heavier than Jones.

Based on their fights with Jones, Machen was a far superior fighter to Ali.

He hurt Jones, which Ali could not

and Machen beat Jones thoroughly which Ali did not.

Ali "won" against Jones when he was given a ridiculous "decision" after Jones beat him thoroughly.

And that was only TWO FIGHTS before Ali was supposedly able to beat Liston.


The TWELVE ROUND Liston-Machen fight was equal to a KO win for Liston.

Machen embarrassed himself by running away as fast as he could for the entire fight.

When Liston's body shots broke him in half, Machen claimed he was hit low, which he was not.

The rests he was awarded were the only reason he stayed the distance.

He lost the fight by an embarrassingly lopsided margin.

Liston's condition was shown by his energy still left after the fight as he taunted Machen while they waited for the decision by feinting at him and moving around him.

IFEEL FINE's clueless comments on that fight, including displaying his ignorance by stating it was a 15 round fight,

qualify him for today's MOST LIKELY TO SUCCEED DRUNKEN BERT SUGAR award.

Keep the crap coming.

It is becoming clearer with each granberry post that Ali was nothing more than a holigraphic projection. A person who never actually existed but in fact was placed into our gestalt conciousness via subconcious subliminal mind waves.

How was this accomplished? By the military industrial complex along with the chemical companies such as Dow and D-Con...whose sole purpose for such a charade was to sell mass quantites of roach spray....purely for profit.

That granberry has taken the time to bring us all up to speed on these matters is appreciated. The truth IS out there.

BoxBuzz wrote:It is becoming clearer with each granberry post that Ali was nothing more than a holigraphic projection. A person who never actually existed but in fact was placed into our gestalt conciousness via subconcious subliminal mind waves.

How was this accomplished? By the military industrial complex along with the chemical companies such as Dow and D-Con...whose sole purpose for such a charade was to sell mass quantites of roach spray....purely for profit.

That granberry has taken the time to bring us all up to speed on these matters is appreciated. The truth IS out there.

It is clear with each post buzz makes that he doesn't have a clue what boxing is.

But he did hear Joe Frazier SING.

Did you ever see Joe Frazier throw a left hook, buzz?

Of course not.

Not even the one that knocked Ali flat on his back.

His singing could do as much damage as any left hook in his arsenal. And it was an honor to have met him. Had I shared with Joe my opinion of his pipes I'm afraid I might not be here today to have these spirited debates with you.

granberry, I'm just a big fan of boxing, nothing more nothing less. I like to read on the subject and of course I have a big library of recorded fights. I've attended a fair amount of fights in my life as well, preferring them over other live sporting events. I have never laid claim to being a grand master expert on the sport. But I do claim to be an enthusiast. I probably read just about every post in these and other boxing forums around the world. I went for many years without posting, just reading. I obviously have developed some opinions as have you.

How do you come by your expertise? I think I've read that you claim to be a former fighter, or part of a training team of some sort. You seem to have some pretty well earned knowledge, and yet you take that and invest it some of the odder assumptions and theories that I have had the opportunity to read. Your one of those folks who can certainly appear to be wrong on occasion, but it is clear that you are never in doubt.

And I did actually see that spectacular left hook that caught Ali and landed him flat on his back. (and that he sprung back up from just as spectacularly) Ali may not have seen it coming but he sure paid attention to the playbacks it would seem.... because then what I saw with Ali is a boxer who learned from his mistakes, went back, reflected and put a better plan together and ultimately solved the puzzle. The next two fights with Joe he showed he could learn from his mistakes, and from the lessons that others taught him. So well in fact that in the end, though Joe would not lose his belief in himself, those who cared about Joe thought it best to save him from a final pointless round of hopelessy attempting to beat a man who at this point, had his number.

He also engineered a plan to defeat a fighter that Joe couldnt hang with for 7 rounds in two attempts. That's why it is so hard to accept your assertion that This fighter did not actually exist and was only a holigraphic projection summomed by cospiracists whose only angle was to secure obscene profits.

granberry wrote:It his hilarious that IFEEL FINE, an eager candidate for the position of drunken Bert Sugar's successor as top incompetent boxing "authority" and "expert"

brings up Eddie Machen.

Eddie Machen beat the hell out of DOUG JONES, winning a lopsided decision and hurting Jones several times.

In comparison, DOUG JONES beat the hell out of Ali, staggering Ali as soon as their fight started with a right hand.

Ali showed he had had no punching power throughout his fight with Jones, although Ali was a head taller and 25 pounds heavier than Jones.

Based on their fights with Jones, Machen was a far superior fighter to Ali.

He hurt Jones, which Ali could not

and Machen beat Jones thoroughly which Ali did not.

Ali "won" against Jones when he was given a ridiculous "decision" after Jones beat him thoroughly.

And that was only TWO FIGHTS before Ali was supposedly able to beat Liston.


The TWELVE ROUND Liston-Machen fight was equal to a KO win for Liston.

Machen embarrassed himself by running away as fast as he could for the entire fight.

When Liston's body shots broke him in half, Machen claimed he was hit low, which he was not.

The rests he was awarded were the only reason he stayed the distance.

He lost the fight by an embarrassingly lopsided margin.

Liston's condition was shown by his energy still left after the fight as he taunted Machen while they waited for the decision by feinting at him and moving around him.

IFEEL FINE's clueless comments on that fight, including displaying his ignorance by stating it was a 15 round fight,

qualify him for today's MOST LIKELY TO SUCCEED DRUNKEN BERT SUGAR award.

Keep the crap coming.

Thank you for your one dimensional commentary. I feel enlightened.

Yes, Machen beat Jones much more clearly than Clay did. Perhaps because Machen wasn't 17 fights into his pro-career, perhaps not. But they, Machen and Ali, had many common opponents, I'll have you know. One was Floyd Patterson, who defeated Machen. Ali of course stopped Patterson twice. Another common opponent was Ernie Terrell, who beat Machen for that WBA title. Though, to be fair, perhaps Machen was older by then. Either way, Ali dominated Terrell, winning almost every round. Looking at boxrec, I see he stopped Brian London in ten rounds, Ali did it in three.

Then there was Machen's loss to Folley and his draw with Williams, and we know what Ali did to them in their fights. But, those guys were not the same when Ali fought them so we won't use those examples. As a boxing fan, I understand that there is a difference between a fighter in his prime and a fighter when he's very young or very old. I think it reflects on your standing as a boxing fan that you find it perfectly acceptable to compare the performance of a fighter at 17-0 who apparently trained for a five round fight to a veteran with 44 fights.

Machen also lost to Mildenberger I see here, but again, that's the end of Machen's career and I don't feel that's a fair example, either. Ditto Joe Frazier.

Styles make fights, and Machen dominating Jones vs. Clay winning a close decision against Jones does not = Machen is better than Clay. When looking at all their common opponents, Clay was much more dominant overall. The only thing we see here that is telling is that when Clay was very young he struggled with an opponent who prime Machen dominated, and when Machen was old he lost to opponents who prime Ali dominated. So, try sticking to the subject at hand instead of reverting back to your ad nauseum ravings about Doug Jones almost beating a pre-prime Ali... prime Ali would slap Doug Jones around

Now, my point in naming Machen in his fight against Sonny Liston wasn't that Machen put on any sort of great performance. My point was that Liston didn't look too different in that fight compared to how he looked against Clay the first time. He approached the fight the same way and he threw about as many punches and I did not see any major decline in his performance from the Machen fight to the Clay fight... he didn't look all that different. And if someone like Machen could take him the distance perhaps that lends itself to the idea that Liston might have difficulty getting to a mobile fighter. Just a theory, as I don't believe any of Liston's other prominent opponents used much movement, certainly not Williams or Patterson.

Clay-Jones was not a robbery, and Joe Frazier was an excellent vocalist.

Well, at least the first thing I said is true.

I Feel Fine wrote

"Yes, Machen beat Jones much more clearly than Clay did. Perhaps because Machen wasn't 17 fights into his pro-career, perhaps not.”

You clueless members of the Ali industry fail to comprehend that Ali supposedly miraculously turned into the “greatest of all time” two fights after he got clobbered by Doug Jones---

when Ali supposedly was able to “beat” Sonny Liston.

Pretty quick “transformation,” huh ?

LOL

“Machen and Ali, had many common opponents, I'll have you know. One was Floyd Patterson, who defeated Machen. Ali of course stopped Patterson twice.”

Ali—at his supposed best—never scored a knockdown in two fights with Henry Cooper.

Patterson—far past his best---knocked out Cooper for a ten count.

For the first Ali-Patterson “fight,” Patterson showed up with a bad back. The Vegas doctor should not have okayed Patterson for the fight, but the Vegas commission wanted their percentage.

Patterson’s cornerman, Dan Florio, tried to give Patterson chiropractic adjustments to his back in the corner between rounds.

Fighting an opponent in this condition, Ali showed he had NO punching power as the fight dragged on into late rounds.

And this was the very fight after Ali supposedly had the punching power to “knock out” Sonny Liston with a single punch in the first round.

Quite an inconsistent fighter, Ali was.

LOL

How did he lose the magic punch so completely in his very next fight after “knocking out” Liston with a single punch?


The second Patterson-Ali fight took place when Patterson was far past his best days—and neither fighter was in shape.

Patterson’s deltoids, chest, and arms were shrunken at this time—as if he had not been working out regularly.

At his best, Patterson had HUGE deltoids in comparison to the rest of his frame.

Neither of the two Ali-Patterson “fights” you dredge up prove a thing,

Except that Ali had no punching power.


”Ten there was Machen's loss to Folley and his draw with Williams, and we know what Ali did to them in their fights.”


Machen fought a Folley ten years younger than the old, tired Folley Ali fought.

Machen also fought a draw with Folley, which you omit to mention.

Zora Folley knocked out Henry Cooper for a ten count with a single right hand in the second round.

Ali, supposedly at his best, fought Cooper twice and never scored a knockdown.


As is typical of a clueless Ali industry shill, you bring up the Cleveland Williams-Ali “fight.”

None of your mentors in the Ali industry have ever let you in on the fact that Cleveland Williams was a physical cripple for his “fight” with Ali, missing one kidney, ten feet of his small intestine, and with a shriveled left leg above the knee from nerve damage from the bullet he was shot with at point black range a year and a half before he “fought” Ali.

“I think it reflects on your standing as a boxing fan that you find it perfectly acceptable to compare the performance of a fighter at 17-0 who apparently trained for a five round fight to a veteran with 44 fights.”

I think it demonstrates your status as a clueless Ali industry stooge when you regurgitate the Ali industry talking point just above---

when in reality two fights later Ali supposedly was the “greatest of all time” as he supposedly was able to “beat” Sonny Liston.

And of course your mentors from the Ali Industry neglect to tell you the obvious---that Doug Jones—whom Ali struggled with two fights before he was supposedly able to beat Liston

was a head shorter than Ali, twenty-five pounds lighter than Ali

and had fought as a 175 pounder for most his career.

Of course, such things must not be allowed to be mentioned,

Or HOW could the Ali industry sell its very flawed product?

Granberry, what's your take on Ali - Foreman?

The long version being preferred.