Larry Holmes 1980 vs. Sonny Liston 1959
Posted: 04 Dec 2006, 18:10
What do you think.
Bad error. Just corrected.Sweet Scientist wrote:I'm thinking Liston was in jail in '57...and that he was a bit inexperienced at the time...maybe 1961 would be a better year for a more even matchup...in '57 I'd take Holmes in a unanimous decision...by '60-'61...could be a real close, tough fight...
Now we know you are a complete idiot, when it comes to boxing.....They had the two best jabs in HW history IMO
Hmmmm... so Mr. Expert who would you nominate as the two best HW jabbers in history. I'd be surprised if either Holmes or Liston would be outside your top 5.ringsider wrote:Now we know you are a complete idiot, when it comes to boxing.....They had the two best jabs in HW history IMO
And you say others have no idea of boxing?ringsider wrote:Holmes could jab, but that was about it, he threw it too hard most of the time. Liston's jab was was clubber. Just because a fighter has a hard jab, doesn't make it a great jab. You jab too hard, you mess up your balance, and ability to follow with the right and a decent hook. Jabbing is about setting up your other punches. You can't be trying to knock a guy's block off with every jab.
Ali had a better jab
Joe Louis
Lennox Lewis.
Riddick Bowe even!
Tyson(before he forgot what a jab was)
Ezzard Charles
Even George Foreman jabbed decent when he turned it down a bit. He used it to set everything up, ala Micheal Moore....
I don't know the history betwen you folks, but suggesting that someone is nuts who says Liston and Holmes had great jabs but then coming up with George Foreman simply isn't particularly compelling.ringsider wrote:I would concede Holmes, as that is all he had was a jab. But as I said just because a fighter has a hard jab doesn't make it a great jab. Liston for example.....![]()
So then I have 3 maybe 4 of your top 5, and you disagree with me, and say I have exposed myself? What does what you say about my knowledge or opinions say about yours.....if we agree on 60-80% of the jabbers?![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
No you are completely wrong. The best way to keep an opponent off balance (and to protect yourself from counters over your jab) is to fire you straight left hard and fast. Both Liston and Holmes were very good at this, rendering their opponents helpless b/c straight nose busting punches kept damaging their rythym. Too hard???!? What are you talking about. You'll only get off-balance after throwing a hard jab if you are an amatuerish fighter. Liston and Holmes didn't have that problem at all. They were certainly better jabbers than Lennox Lewis, Tyson, and Bowe . . .ringsider wrote:Holmes could jab, but that was about it, he threw it too hard most of the time. Liston's jab was was clubber. Just because a fighter has a hard jab, doesn't make it a great jab. You jab too hard, you mess up your balance, and ability to follow with the right and a decent hook. Jabbing is about setting up your other punches. You can't be trying to knock a guy's block off with every jab.
Ali had a better jab
Joe Louis
Lennox Lewis.
Riddick Bowe even!
Tyson(before he forgot what a jab was)
Ezzard Charles
Even George Foreman jabbed decent when he turned it down a bit. He used it to set everything up, ala Micheal Moore....
No, I think YOU have the idiot berth all sewn up when it comes to boxing!ringsider wrote:Now we know you are a complete idiot, when it comes to boxing.....They had the two best jabs in HW history IMO
Holmes and Liston had far better jabs than Lewis, Lewis pawed with his so called 'jab' and if his jab was so effective how comes he was outjabbed badly by Mercer? The same Mercer who who completly outjabbed by a 42 year old Holmes, or what about an old Holyfied in their rematch?. Lewis also was outjabbed by Bruno and even failing to get friggin Briggs of him, not even mentioning where instead of using his jab to fend off fighters like an old, shot, unprepared, unmotived Tyson he held them instead.ringsider wrote:Holmes could jab, but that was about it, he threw it too hard most of the time. Liston's jab was was clubber. Just because a fighter has a hard jab, doesn't make it a great jab. You jab too hard, you mess up your balance, and ability to follow with the right and a decent hook. Jabbing is about setting up your other punches. You can't be trying to knock a guy's block off with every jab.
Ali had a better jab
Joe Louis
Lennox Lewis.
Riddick Bowe even!
Tyson(before he forgot what a jab was)
Ezzard Charles
Even George Foreman jabbed decent when he turned it down a bit. He used it to set everything up, ala Micheal Moore....
Well said to you.RazorKO wrote:Holmes and Liston had far better jabs than Lewis, Lewis pawed with his so called 'jab' and if his jab was so effective how comes he was outjabbed badly by Mercer? The same Mercer who who completly outjabbed by a 42 year old Holmes, or what about an old Holyfied in their rematch?. Lewis also was outjabbed by Bruno and even failing to get friggin Briggs of him, not even mentioning where instead of using his jab to fend off fighters like an old, shot, unprepared, unmotived Tyson he held them instead.ringsider wrote:Holmes could jab, but that was about it, he threw it too hard most of the time. Liston's jab was was clubber. Just because a fighter has a hard jab, doesn't make it a great jab. You jab too hard, you mess up your balance, and ability to follow with the right and a decent hook. Jabbing is about setting up your other punches. You can't be trying to knock a guy's block off with every jab.
Ali had a better jab
Joe Louis
Lennox Lewis.
Riddick Bowe even!
Tyson(before he forgot what a jab was)
Ezzard Charles
Even George Foreman jabbed decent when he turned it down a bit. He used it to set everything up, ala Micheal Moore....
If Lewis had a jab the least he would could of done is to use it against this dreadful version of Tyson but he was incapable of doing so and proceeded to turn this fight into a wedding ceremony, if it could be any fight where Tyson was to loose his mentality - It would of been this fight and one has to admire Tyson for controlling his temper after being hugged to death for 8 rounds. The Tua fight was also as pittiful.
No offense RazorKO, but I can predict exactly when you'll show up on a thread and exactly what you'll say, it getting somewhat tedious.RazorKO wrote:Holmes and Liston had far better jabs than Lewis, Lewis pawed with his so called 'jab' and if his jab was so effective how comes he was outjabbed badly by Mercer? The same Mercer who who completly outjabbed by a 42 year old Holmes, or what about an old Holyfied in their rematch?. Lewis also was outjabbed by Bruno and even failing to get friggin Briggs of him, not even mentioning where instead of using his jab to fend off fighters like an old, shot, unprepared, unmotived Tyson he held them instead.ringsider wrote:Holmes could jab, but that was about it, he threw it too hard most of the time. Liston's jab was was clubber. Just because a fighter has a hard jab, doesn't make it a great jab. You jab too hard, you mess up your balance, and ability to follow with the right and a decent hook. Jabbing is about setting up your other punches. You can't be trying to knock a guy's block off with every jab.
Ali had a better jab
Joe Louis
Lennox Lewis.
Riddick Bowe even!
Tyson(before he forgot what a jab was)
Ezzard Charles
Even George Foreman jabbed decent when he turned it down a bit. He used it to set everything up, ala Micheal Moore....
If Lewis had a jab the least he would could of done is to use it against this dreadful version of Tyson but he was incapable of doing so and proceeded to turn this fight into a wedding ceremony, if it could be any fight where Tyson was to loose his mentality - It would of been this fight and one has to admire Tyson for controlling his temper after being hugged to death for 8 rounds. The Tua fight was also as pittiful.
At the same time, it's certainly true that hitting and holding was a bit of a LL speciality.J-C wrote:No offense RazorKO, but I can predict exactly when you'll show up on a thread and exactly what you'll say, it getting somewhat tedious.RazorKO wrote:Holmes and Liston had far better jabs than Lewis, Lewis pawed with his so called 'jab' and if his jab was so effective how comes he was outjabbed badly by Mercer? The same Mercer who who completly outjabbed by a 42 year old Holmes, or what about an old Holyfied in their rematch?. Lewis also was outjabbed by Bruno and even failing to get friggin Briggs of him, not even mentioning where instead of using his jab to fend off fighters like an old, shot, unprepared, unmotived Tyson he held them instead.ringsider wrote:Holmes could jab, but that was about it, he threw it too hard most of the time. Liston's jab was was clubber. Just because a fighter has a hard jab, doesn't make it a great jab. You jab too hard, you mess up your balance, and ability to follow with the right and a decent hook. Jabbing is about setting up your other punches. You can't be trying to knock a guy's block off with every jab.
Ali had a better jab
Joe Louis
Lennox Lewis.
Riddick Bowe even!
Tyson(before he forgot what a jab was)
Ezzard Charles
Even George Foreman jabbed decent when he turned it down a bit. He used it to set everything up, ala Micheal Moore....
If Lewis had a jab the least he would could of done is to use it against this dreadful version of Tyson but he was incapable of doing so and proceeded to turn this fight into a wedding ceremony, if it could be any fight where Tyson was to loose his mentality - It would of been this fight and one has to admire Tyson for controlling his temper after being hugged to death for 8 rounds. The Tua fight was also as pittiful.
You've brought up Lewis' "dirty tactics" vs Bruno several times, while at the same time excusing all the stuff Tyson has pulled of the years. Now not only are we supposed to forgive Tyson his past fouls but actually commend him when he doesn't foul.