Listons toughness was underrated, thanks to Liston doing that thing that the Yanks despise so much- quitting with a shoulder injury. Then he was stopped in the rematch too easily, and it cemented a false image of the guy as a bully, a front-runner, a thug who faded away when he was stood up to. The background to the 2nd fight with Ali was that Ali had done his hernia and the fight was postponed. Liston was reputedly in great shape and had to come back down from his peak and try again for the rematch. Allegedly he never hit the heights in the 2nd camp that he did the first. The 2nd fight was sham anyways- Ali legitimately clocked Liston, but Walcott got the count and the re-start all wrong. He was probably already over 40 by the time Ali fought him anyways. Liston bombed out Cleveland Williams, having taken Williams best shots before getting the better of Williams. So.....its not likely he was soft. If Liston hit as hard as 170lb Billy Bob Conn I would give him a chance with Louis.
Dempsey was so hard that basically he couldnt find opponents for 2 and 3 year stretches of his reign as champeen He did have that fight with Georges Charpentier, the fighting Frenchman, not to be confused with the equally bummish Scott LeDouche, another fighting Frenchman.
Tommy Farr took Louis the distance by fighting in a croutch and covering up while losing every round as Louis chopped him up with his jab... showed a good jab? it was the only punch Farr threw in the fight, he basically decided early on he could not win but would last the distance... the fight was a washout, nothing even remotely competetive about it... the quivalent would be to say that "Morade Hakkar frustrated Bernard hopkins by flashing good footwork" Louis was a bigger, stronger man than Floyd Patterson, he had one of the best jabs of all time (Patterson didnt really jab other than as a means to try and get closer and find his range) and when Louis got up or recovered from being hurt, he annihlated people, better competetition than Floyd Patterson's, which during his reign was hands down the worst at that time since the days of Marvin Hart, and would continue to be the worst up until Vitali Klitschko's (though I would argue that Floyd's title challengers were actually lesser than Vitali's) ... Joe Louis would do the EXACT SAME THING to FLoyd Patterson... he and Liston were very similar in their approaches and strengths, the difference being that Liston was perhaps 5-10 pounds heavier than Louis, and Louis was considerably faster of hand than Liston... Joe Louis compares far more favorably to Sonny Liston than he does Floyd Patterson Louis rebounded from being outsmarted by a cagey Max Schmeling (who hit like a bastard with his right hand) to go on one of the most gargantuan winning streaks in history (including a shocking butchery of that same Schmeling inside of one round) ... Floyd Patterson was knocked senseless by Ingemar Johannsen, a one trick pony with the chin of a little girl, he had to struggle mightily to beat him in the returns Louis rightly is rated as one of the greatest heavyweights ever to live while Patterson is correctly thought of as a talented, skillful but ALWAYS VULNERABLE and undersized heavyweight Louis/Liston have a lot in common, Louis and Patterson have hardly anything in common
Louis and Patterson have in common what I said they had in common- handspeed and vulnerability. Schmelling had a decent right- as decent a right as a man of his size might have. I would regard the rematch between Louis and Schmelling with a goodly degree of scepticism. Schmelling was never in the fight, sure, and Louis might have beaten him anyway- but I wouldnt be so fast as to parlay their rematch into meaning a whole load. Schmelling was left on his own in his dressing room, and pelted with debris on the way to the ring. Farr did far better in his fight with Louis than the judges felt he did. I thought Farr being given 1 round was most biased. The point remains that Farr used the jab to negotiate the fight. Now try a guy with a better, longer jab and something else to go with it. Anyways- I think Liston was really a brute, a powerful man with a great jab and a very decent chin. Liston would remind me more of Foreman than of Joe Louis, although Liston seemed throughout his tenure as champ to show more maturity than Foreman {in Georges first reign}. Liston could chop a man down over the distance if he had to.
Irish, you are mad. Liston's tenure at champ = Floyd Patterson, Cassius Clay.................oh wait, that's it. :: Louis and Patterson have absolutely nothing in common, as CDogg already stated.
Its bollox to say they have nothing in common. Liston knocked out Cleveland Williams when Williams was in his pomp. He stopped Patterson twice with no difficulty, he also knocked out Wepner in 10 rounds when he, Liston, was very much past his best and may well have been 40+ years of age by then. At the youngest he was 38. And Liston stopped Wepner coming off a loss to Leotis Martin. Martin won that fight with a great shot but actually had to retire after thanks to an injury he picked up in that same fight. When Liston beat Machen over the distance in 1960 he showed a maturity which Foreman did not show in his first tenure as champ. We saw what happened when Foreman couldnt get people out of there- he tended to lose- a trait which followed him into his 2nd stint as champion also. Liston also knocked out the dangerman Nino Valdes- who couldn't get a look-in during the Marciano era. Wiped him out in 3. People sleep on Liston like he was some sort of a bum, because thats how he was portrayed in that era- a dumb Mob bully.:shit::shit::shit:
In fairness to Foreman, he did decision Peralta (not as good as Machen, but still no mean feat) at a fast clip very early, & then stopped him very late on in their rematch --- though I generally agree with your sentiment that Liston was a little better over longer distances than Foreman. The notion of Liston as the heartless, front-running bully with no ticker has got to be one of Boxing's all-time great con-jobs. You know my sentiments regarding the ignorance of those who call Klitschko, "Quitali," etc. for retiring in the Byrd fight (guaranteed, such people have never experienced that injury, absolutely guaranteed), & Liston has had to put up with much the same stupidity --- except for the better part of fifty years now. It's one of Boxing's great myths, IMO.
Wow- we agree on something!!!:Thumbs: Liston, when he did his shoulder versus Ali, was already well advanced in terms of years.Today, a heavyweight is in his prime from the age of 33, 34, 35, all things being equal. Back then, with guys taking fights on short notice, not letting injuries heal, inferior nutrition etc, 35 was an old heavyweight. When Ali fought Foreman, they thought Ali was an old man, crazy to be fighting that sort of fight. Liston, from what I have read up on it, would have been well past his best by the time he lost to "Clay" in their first fight. Also at that age, getting in shape and staying there would have been harder, which is why he suffered so badly with the delayed rematch.
Exactly which fight points to Liston not being a front running bully? The one time he spent 12 rounds low-blowing Eddie Machen?
You're right. They were both black. Cleveland Williams was a knockout artist who was exposed by Liston. He's got a win over Terrell and not much else of note. Got knocked out plenty. Dangerous opponent but never exactly stepped up. Chuck fucking Wepner. You're going to hang your hat on Chuck fucking Wepner. Guy was a trialhorse who got famous because he didn't get knocked out by Ali, like he was supposed to. He just took a beating instead. Front........................ruuuuuuuunnnnnnnnnnnnnner!!!!!!! In a non-title fight that had Liston low-blowing Machen for 12 rounds because he couldn't knock him out. The same Eddie Machen that almost got killed by Ingemar a couple years earlier in 1 round. ..........and I don't give a fuck about Foreman. This is about my dislike of Liston. :nono: This is the biggest joke of all. Valdes was a shell by the time Liston fought him........and he was never very good to begin with. Valdes may be the biggest myth of that period. A big guy who would have caused problems for Marciano? Bullshit!! Guy was supposedly a wealth of potential who couldn't beat anybody around him whenever he got the chance to step up to the next level. Has a fluke win over Ezzard Charles but would lose to some other can, everytime he got anywhere near a title shot. Perhaps this is what annoys me the most. The revisionist history. Liston was never portrayed as a mob bully until rumors started after he laid down against Ali twice. As a matter of fact he was hyped up in the press on a near constant basis from 1958 until he lost to Ali. Floyd Patterson and Cus D'Amato caught a lot of flak for years, until he finally fought him. It approached Tyson levels. Liston was the unbeatable monster and he was heavily favored by the Press and onlookers against Ali in both fights. Liston was never portrayed as a bum...........and I didn't call him one either. The Patterson fights were good wins, and they made his career. Unfortunately that has nothing to do against the tag I placed on him. Those fights remind me exactly of Tyson's win against Michael Spinks. Spinks was a great fighter, but it was a bad match-up for him......and he knew it. Liston was a very good Heavyweight. I don't deny that. He was a scary guy. I don't hold a grudge against anybody who is a fan of Liston. I'm annoyed when people claim Liston would have wiped the floor with somebody like Joe Louis because he had a scary persona and outweighed him by 10 lb's or so. Liston did nothing in his career to prove he had half the fortitude of Joe Louis......and he certainly doesn't beat him strictly on a skill or evolutionary difference. :shit: As far as this argument goes. You put the best Joe Louis in the ring against the best Sonny Liston............Sonny quits long before the fight is over.
everything you said here was either just wrong or blatant, sympathetic revisionism (Schmeling getting killed in the 2nd fight somehow having little to do with joe Louis) Farr didnt outjab Louis, Louis scored the almost entirely with his own jab while Farr crouched and survived... the fight was not competetive, attempting to make it seem so 70 years later doesnt change what was... the fight was a one-sided fight with Farr gaining notoriety because he didnt die Schmeling had a monster right hand you cant compare Patterson's vulnerability (against some of the most hideous opposition ever faced by any heavyweight champ in history) with Louis's Patterson was iced in ONE ROUND, twice... He was annihlated, brutally knocked out, full ten count on three separate occassions Louis wasn't knocked out inside of 10 until he was shot, and even then it still took Rocky Marciano eight rounds to get rid of him... Louis suffered a monotonous 12 round battering from Schmeling, getting hit with literally dozens of perfect counter right hands before he finally succumbed... Louis suffered some flash knockdowns in fights, he wasnt FINISHED OFF... he got up and opponents got butchered, that simple... comparing Louis's "vulnerability" to Patterson's is like comparing Felix Trinidad's to Terry Norris's, totally inaccurate As for the Liston/Foreman comparison, its always been a poor one in my eyes... other than their surly reps and their power, there is basically no real stylistic comparison... Foreman SOMETIMES used a jab (it was effective when he did, but people who think he was using it steadily seem to be confusing the 45 year old George with the George of legend) ... Foreman had ATROCIOUS technique, he threw wild, roundhouse punches, often off-balance, in crude combinations... Liston threw his punches with proper form and economy, exactly as Louis did... Liston and Louis were both equipped with sharp, heavy jabs that they used consistently to set up everything they did, they bothy had stiff, powerful right crosses and they each had all-time left hooks, all of them thrown with proper technique... Foreman threw wild, unorthodox punches with hideous technique and used his jab only when he remembered to use it... the only thing he has in common with Liston is that he looked mean and was unpopular... Louis and Liston have explictly similar techniques... Patterson's technique is nothing like Louis's and he was about 50 times more vulnerable
Why can't videos be embedded in this section godfather, dave? Get it fix... Sonny Liston http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYA4qt-LBmA&nofeather=True Joe Louis http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPIoyH6c8PI George Foreman http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11OEDQ4C_fY Louis and Liston have very similar styles... Foreman and Louis both seem to share a similar stance, both seem to have their hands open and at chest height...AND THAT is IT.... Liston and Foreman NOTHING...
Louis would fuck Liston's life, IMO. I'm thinking 6 rounds. The difference in balance, footwork, accuracy, hand speed, poise is just way too much.
