If Sonny Liston fought in the 1990's ....

[El Radar]

How would he do? He would be fighting in the silver era (with the 1970's being considered the golden era) and how do you think he would do against the likes of Lennox Lewis, Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield and Riddick Bowe? Do you think he would come unstuck against a top contender like Tommy Morrison, Donovon Ruddock, Andrew Golota or Ray Mercer?

[frankenfrank]

Lewis would have outpointed him.
Tua KO'd him.
Holyfield would have a 'W' over him somehow , maybe some 2:1 in a trilogy. Ali stopped him twice (though at least one doubtful) so holyfield had not smaller chances.
McCall would have gone the distance or even stop him.
with tyson , bowe i don't know.

[El Radar]

I don't know about Tua knocking him out. People do remember him mostly for his aggressive infighting but he could bo when needed and against someone like Tua it would be necessary. I don't know if Holyfield would have the power to keep him of him, but I would give him a good chance due to his lions heart.

[ramalinga]

Liston was great in his ear but gets overrated H2H in fantasy matchups. He was a good boxer puncher but he wouldn't physically bully around or intimidate Holyfield, Lewis, Bowe, McCall. His losses to Ali were quite telling about his mental makeup when it came to really facing adversity.

[McGrain]

I suspect he would have done really, really well. For sure he would get his title crack earlier, being an American KO artist. Assuming he was peaking with Tyson on the slide, he'd have no issues there. I pick Liston to beat Lewis, and it's one of my more assured picks, but I could definitely be wrong, and I think those two meet 2-3 times to settle the thing. Those would be epic fights.

Holyfield would be a really intersting fight. On the face of it, Liston has almost every concievable advantage, BUT Holyfield has that nice heart/generalship/stamina mix that might drag Sonny into a mad brawl with Holfyield taking a horrible hiding but coming out of with a stoppage win.

With guys like Lewis and Holyfield around, and with Sonny's mentality, I don't think he dominates the era totally. On the other hand, I think he suffers less damaging losses than Lewis did and might come out of a "shared era" of domination looking slightly more polished.

[Unforgiven]

There were some good fighters in the 1990s, but I think it was a relatively weak era for heavyweights.
The 1980s was better for heavyweights, there were still several good young American heavyweights in the 80s - the 90s saw that dying out, and of the non-American heavyweights only Lennox Lewis stood out. Having said that, the heavyweight fights and fighters of 10-20 years ago were a much better quality than we have now. A respectable bunch.

Liston in the 1990s ? Well, he's probably destined to lose in an upset in almost any era, but at his best or close to it he'd be capable of beating just about everyone who fought in the 1990s. I think a prime Holyfield might have the best chance against an on-form Liston, with a disciplined fight strategy, all his strength, durability and determination, and his superb counter-punching - but I wouldn't bet on him.

Oliver McCall might be able to get work as Liston's sparring partner, but the idea that he'd ever come close to beating him or even competing much in a real fight is preposterous. I know the 90s heavyweights are being overrated when McCall is being held up as anything special.

[Ezzard]

Think he'd have beaten them all except for Holyfield.

[Holmes' Jab]

He beats Holyfield, Bowe, Tyson, Tua, Golota, Ruddock etc. 50/50 against Lewis.

[Bummy Davis]

Trouble with Holyfield and Lewis but I would not count him out.

[mr. magoo]

I suppose it depends on who the best opponents he was matched up with were and WHEN he fought them. The early to mid 90's would have been a tough time for him to capture the crown. Bowe, Holyfield and Lewis were for the most part in their primes. The contender list was pretty dense as well. From about 1994 -1997, you had fragments of the title floating around with men like Frank Bruno, Oliver McCall and Bruce Seldon holding them. I have no doubts that he would have made short work of these fighters. Moorer would be a sitting duck for Liston as well. The Tyson who fought Ruddock and Stewart in 1991 might pose a big threat, but a 1995-1996 version probably wouldn't be as much of a problem..

Overall, I think he does well, but I don't see him as establishing himself as the dominant sort of force that he did in the early 60's. The talent pool was simply too deep.

[Stevie G]

A prime Liston would have done really well in the 90's. He would have beaten a past his best Tyson,Bowe and Holyfield. Lennox Lewis is the only one that I can imagine him losing to,and even that match has it's imponderables. Such as,what would happen if Liston connects with Lennox's chin.

[Longhhorn71]

Key thing is who would fold when Liston puts "the evil eye" on them at the weigh-in.

Then at the fight he would start to severely beat them about the head and shoulders.

[ChrisPontius]

He'd have struggled a lot, but at least have picked up a belt in the fragmented mid 90's time or perhaps undisputed if things turns out well.

First of all, he would be anything but the "big, bad bear"; at 6'0 212lbs, he'd give up size to just about every opponent. Second, the 90's had much better fighters than his own era. Of his best opponents: Machen was a one-handed, slick cruiserweight and Patterson a weak chinned, swarming cruiser, Williams was a strong man with speed and power, but often came up short and never really proved himself.. in fact, he only beat one ranked contender during his entire career.

Lewis, Holyfield, 90's Tyson and Bowe are easily levels above them and would annihilate them. The second tier guys like Tua, Ruddock, Ibeabuchi, Bruno, Moorer, Morrison, Tucker and Briggs are at least on the same level as the first tier bunch that Liston beat, in a head-to-head sense.


Lastly, let's not forget that he lost to and got knocked down by a mediocre lightheavyweight in Marshall. He hadn't reached his peak quite yet, but at the same time, people will say that he was 34-36 years of age when he faced Ali, which would've made him 24-26 years old in that loss; in other words, his physical peak. Can't have it both ways.

[McGrain]

First of all, he would be anything but the "big, bad bear"; at 6'0 212lbs, he'd give up size to just about every opponent.


You really think this is what he weigh if he turned pro in '91?

He'd be 225 with cracking reach and strength.

[McGrain]

Lastly, let's not forget that he lost to and got knocked down by a mediocre lightheavyweight in Marshall. He hadn't reached his peak quite yet, but at the same time, people will say that he was 34-36 years of age when he faced Ali, which would've made him 24-26 years old in that loss; in other words, his physical peak. Can't have it both ways.

You seem to be saying that Liston's peak is defined by his age? He was 7-0 when he lost to Marshall - you really think that's relevant to how he would do when he matched top HW's of the 90's era when he was at 22-0? Seems silly to me, to take that position because he was 24...for me, Liston's loss to the greatest HW who ever lived, one of the greatest fighters, isn't much to do with Liston's age.


But it's probably slightly more relevant than his age at the time of his loss to Marshall, which is meaningless.

[El Radar]

Oliver Mccall is a good enough heavyweight but I don't see how people think he beats Liston really. The more interesting question to me is if he goes 12 with him. He only lost inside the distance once and that was due to the mental breakdown against Lewis. However there isn't a large number of notable punchers on his resume really. Tony Tucker could bang (but to my knowladge never knocked out a notable heavy), as could a prime Larry Holmes but he was well past that when they fought. I don't know if he could go the distance with Liston, but very few heavyweights probably could stop him.

[mr. magoo]

You really think this is what he weigh if he turned pro in '91?

He'd be 225 with cracking reach and strength.


That's speculative. He may very well have been bigger, then again he may have turned out exactly the same. When analyzing head to head matchups, we have to go by the assumption that how a man was in his day, would be the way that he'd show up elsewhere.

[McGrain]

That's speculative. He may very well have been bigger, then again he may have turned out exactly the same. When analyzing head to head matchups, we have to go by the assumption that how a man was in his day, would be the way that he'd show up elsewhere.


We're not analysing head to head match ups; we're answering the question, "If Sonny Liston fought in the 1990's..." and my answer is "..he would likely be bigger given that heavyweights in the 90's were bigger than those in the 50's/60's". It's speculative, but probably less speculative than head to head speculation, as Chris himself will tell you.

[mr. magoo]

We're not analysing head to head match ups; we're answering the question, "If Sonny Liston fought in the 1990's..." and my answer is "..he would likely be bigger given that heavyweights in the 90's were bigger than those in the 50's/60's". It's speculative, but probably less speculative than head to head speculation, as Chris himself will tell you.

True,

Chris however clearly listed Liston as being around 212 lbs, indicating ( to me ) that he is operating under the assumption that this was how Liston would show up. At no point did he illude to the fact that Liston would be bigger had he been brought up in a later era. And frankly, its not unreasonable to think that 212 may have been his natural weight even during the 90's. There were still loads of guys back then who were around 6'0", 212 Lbs. Also, how do we know that adding an additional 15 lbs would have helped him?

[McGrain]

Chris however clearly listed Liston as being around 212 lbs, indicating ( to me ) that he is operating under the assumption that this was how Liston would show up

That's what I was disputing. Undermining Liston's chances based upon size naturally brings up the question of what Liston would weigh in a different era.

As with every other fighter, the extra weight would help him in cerain ways and hurt him in others.

[mr. magoo]

That's what I was disputing. Undermining Liston's chances based upon size naturally brings up the question of what Liston would weigh in a different era.

As with every other fighter, the extra weight would help him in cerain ways and hurt him in others.

Indeed, but in order to equalize Liston's chances, we'd have to make the assumption that he'd be bigger. I don't know that he would be. He might very well have been a larger fighter who could benefit from additional weight, then again he might have stayed the same, or been handicapped from any such weight gain. Right now all we have to go by is that fact that he was 6'1", 212 lbs in his prime, and that that's what he'd likely be going in against the 90's crew.

Now, being the smaller man of the bunch, does this mean that he'd be automatically doomed? No, absolutely not. But, I do think that it would place him at a disadvantage, given that he was usually larger than most of his opponents, wheras here he'd be on the other end of the spectrum. Furthermore, the larger men of this era, were talented and fought very well at these size dimensions. These were not men like Gerard Zech. Bowe, Lewis, and several others would have posed a real problem for Liston in my opinion, as would Holyfield.

[Quick Cash]

He beats Holyfield, Bowe, Tyson, Tua, Golota, Ruddock etc. 50/50 against Lewis.

I have the same view. I think he knocks out the majority of the lower-tiered stragglers, posts a convincing win over Bowe over 12, and beats Holyfield in a competitive, up-and-down affair. He'd also assuredly knock out a post-prison Tyson.

I'd tip Lennox to handle him, though I have argued for Liston not so long ago. It could go to either man by the slightest of edges.

I also think he'd stop the relics, Holmes and Foreman, in the 90's.

A fight with Ibeabuchi would be most interesting especially if Liston is starting to decline by then.

[rm36]

He would be the unified champion

[rm36]

Lastly, let's not forget that he lost to and got knocked down by a mediocre lightheavyweight in Marshall. He hadn't reached his peak quite yet, but at the same time, people will say that he was 34-36 years of age when he faced Ali, which would've made him 24-26 years old in that loss; in other words, his physical peak. Can't have it both ways.

It was his eighth pro fight. How can you judge him on that ?

[ChrisPontius]

You seem to be saying that Liston's peak is defined by his age? He was 7-0 when he lost to Marshall - you really think that's relevant to how he would do when he matched top HW's of the 90's era when he was at 22-0? Seems silly to me, to take that position because he was 24...for me, Liston's loss to the greatest HW who ever lived, one of the greatest fighters, isn't much to do with Liston's age.

But it's probably slightly more relevant than his age at the time of his loss to Marshall, which is meaningless.

It was just a sidenote. I could expand on it, but let's not derail the subject here.

You really think this is what he weigh if he turned pro in '91?

He'd be 225 with cracking reach and strength.

Yes, i think so. Look at him. He is incredibly bulky already at 212lbs; he was on "natural" steroids, if you will. And even at that weight, his feet were stuck in the mud.

Many consider his sixty second destruction of Bethea to be his peak fight, and he weighed 204lbs for that one; this was when he was 28-30 years of age, and had already more or less matured into his frame. And it's not like he was lacking in power or strength in the first place. At 225lbs he'd be moving slower than Valuev and not really gaining much other than some (already abundant) physical strength.

Like Magoo says, it's speculation how well he'd handle it, but it's a given that he's not going to be faster.


At 6 feet, he's going to be a short un non the less.


We're not analysing head to head match ups; we're answering the question, "If Sonny Liston fought in the 1990's..." and my answer is "..he would likely be bigger given that heavyweights in the 90's were bigger than those in the 50's/60's". It's speculative, but probably less speculative than head to head speculation, as Chris himself will tell you.

How he'd do in the 90's, is analysing head to head matchups only, and certainly speculative, yes.


As i indicated more extensively in my initial post, i think the step up in class AND size would pose several problems for him.

[Bill Butcher]

Lewis would have outpointed him.
Tua KO'd him.
Holyfield would have a 'W' over him somehow , maybe some 2:1 in a trilogy. Ali stopped him twice (though at least one doubtful) so holyfield had not smaller chances.
McCall would have gone the distance or even stop him.
with tyson , bowe i don't know.

You obviously have never seen Liston outside of the Ali fights.

I think Liston beats all the 90s HWTs tho Lewis might outpoint him but Id still favour Liston, the guy was a very good boxer, could hit like a truck & knew how to finish a man, he`d be dominant in this era, it took the greatest HWT that ever lived at his peak to beat him & Liston still took 2 rds of the 6 fought.

Dont underrate Sonny Liston, he was easily a top 10 all time HWT.

[essexboy]

Liston cleans out the division apart from Lewis who its a close battle with. Holyfield could always spring a suprise but a prime Liston dominates him in a way that makes Bowe look a pussycat. A few rose-tinted glasses for the 90's era here me thinks.

[Muchmoore]

I give a prime Holyfield with the right gameplan perhaps the best chance to beat Liston. I picked Sonny over Lewis in the other thread and gave my reasons, I'm not going to post those again but I'd make Liston the favorite in that match. Bowe at his best would be a tough fight for anyone, if Liston caught him at the exact right time for Bowe he would of been in a scrap. I struggle to pick an 80's Tyson over Liston, a 90's Tyson would be a fairly big underdog.

I think Evander, if he sticks and moves enough may be able to frustrate Liston and win in a battle of will. If Holyfield gives Liston a few headbutts, we may see Liston retaliate by getting points deducted for low blows and/or take him out of his gameplan.

[junior-soprano]

Lewis would have outpointed him.
Tua KO'd him.
Holyfield would have a 'W' over him somehow , maybe some 2:1 in a trilogy. Ali stopped him twice (though at least one doubtful) so holyfield had not smaller chances.
McCall would have gone the distance or even stop him.
with tyson , bowe i don't know.

WOW you clearly don't think to highly of liston. i see it totally different. the only tough one would be lennox lewis. whom i see winning of sonny 3 or 4 out of 10. (sonny beating lennox most of the times tough). holyfield had a great heart so no ko but sonny will take a ud over him. tua wouldn't make it to round 7 same goes for mcCall and Bowe.
as for tyson. well mike was really strong and really fast and could take a punch as well but psychological he would have already lost. and in mike's case that counts for something. so maybe a ko in the late rounds or otherwise a ud in favour of sonny

[McGrain]

Look at him. He is incredibly bulky already at 212lb.

:huh

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Guy looks concaved to me. He could hold more weight comfortably.

[ChrisPontius]

:huh



Guy looks concaved to me. He could hold more weight comfortably.

I disagree. Look at him at 218 lbs here, he already sports somewhat of a belly (not a flat one anyway):

[Only registered and activated users can see links]



It remains speculative whether he succesfully can or can not, but it's certain that it would slow his lack of speed down even further, as well as hinder his stamina... which we've never seen beyond 12 rounds in the first place. For instance, i think a guy like Joe Louis shows more potential to gain ~10lbs because he was an explicit 15 round fighter who was taller and more lanky.



But aside from that, fact remains that his usual size and strength advantage would vanish, and he'd take a big step up in class.

[Pusnuts]

Lewis would go to town on him IMO, he would do ok for a few rounds with his jab but too slow and Lewis loved to beat up bullys
Lewis had big problems with Mercer but Mercer was better than Liston IMO and Lewis was pre-Manny, same in Bruno fight where he had trouble with a jab but was not in his prime.

Competitive fight with Holyfield, decision either way, probably Holyfield as a bit slicker

Would probably beat the likes of Morrison but old time heavyweights are overrated IMO, their physical attributes (except stamina) are of course way below todays but the so called 70-s golden era wasnt really that deep in heavyweight talent compared to todays so-called poor era.


Top contenders like Ken Norton werent really that skilful and Frazier was almost totally one-handed.

[Seamus]

There were some good fighters in the 1990s, but I think it was a relatively weak era for heavyweights.
The 1980s was better for heavyweights, there were still several good young American heavyweights in the 80s - the 90s saw that dying out, and of the non-American heavyweights only Lennox Lewis stood out.

Is this serious? The 80's was as flacid an era as ever existed. Holmes occasionally showing his genius but mostly going through his bums, followed by the not so overwhelming blow-up Mike Spinks and rounded out by admittedly great Tyson feeding on mediocre fighters, fat-asses and drug addicts. Meanwhile, the contenders were, well, mediocre, fat ass drug addicts. But they were American, which should count as something right? The best mediocre fat-ass drug addicts in the world.

If nothing else, the 90's featured much harder hitters in the declining Tyson, Ruddock, Tua, Bowe, Morrison, Moorer, ancient Foreman and of course Lewis.

[Pusnuts]

The current heavyweight era is not bad at all, you have some good African and East European fighters, and 2 of the best heavyweights (Klit Brothers) to ever lace up gloves. Its only a poor era for fans of American heavyweights.
The lower divisions are absolutely brimming with talent this last 10 years or so.
Sorry a bit off topic

[mr. magoo]

I agree with Chris.

Adding additional weight would have likely hindered Liston's abilities more so than enhancing them. He was a big man no doubt, but he did not have the structural frame of a super heavyweight, which is exactly what he'd be up against in the 90's. Frankly, I think Evander Holyfield was a bigger man in the 210 Lb range. He was nearly 6'3, and at 210 lbs, was virtually all muscle mass without even so much as an ounce of additional baggage.

Liston enjoyed pounding on 190 Lb men for most of his career, as well as fighters who either sported a style that played into his hands, or just weren't that good. Cleveland Williams, Eddie Machen, Floyd Patterson, etc. were decent fighters, but they all had noticable limitations as seen in both their fights on film as well as in their records.

If Liston's prime had stretched from around 1990-1994, he'd be looking at a first tier group consisting of Evander Holyfield, Mike Tyson, Riddick Bowe and Lennox Lewis. The second tier included George Foreman, Razor Ruddock, Michael Moorer, Tim Witherspoon, Tony Tucker, and Ray Mercer. No way does Liston make it through that gauntlet without suffering at least a few defeats, and frankly I don't see him being dominant at all..

[Bummy Davis]

He'd have struggled a lot, but at least have picked up a belt in the fragmented mid 90's time or perhaps undisputed if things turns out well.

First of all, he would be anything but the "big, bad bear"; at 6'0 212lbs, he'd give up size to just about every opponent. Second, the 90's had much better fighters than his own era. Of his best opponents: Machen was a one-handed, slick cruiserweight and Patterson a weak chinned, swarming cruiser, Williams was a strong man with speed and power, but often came up short and never really proved himself.. in fact, he only beat one ranked contender during his entire career.

Lewis, Holyfield, 90's Tyson and Bowe are easily levels above them and would annihilate them. The second tier guys like Tua, Ruddock, Ibeabuchi, Bruno, Moorer, Morrison, Tucker and Briggs are at least on the same level as the first tier bunch that Liston beat, in a head-to-head sense.


Lastly, let's not forget that he lost to and got knocked down by a mediocre lightheavyweight in Marshall. He hadn't reached his peak quite yet, but at the same time, people will say that he was 34-36 years of age when he faced Ali, which would've made him 24-26 years old in that loss; in other words, his physical peak. Can't have it both ways.


true and good point about the age factor

[The Mongoose]

vs. Holyfield: Liston TKO 8


[Only registered and activated users can see links]



vs. Lewis: Liston KO 2

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


vs. Tyson: Liston KO 5

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Bowe holds a press conference and throws his belt in the trash.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]



vs. Golota: Liston KO1



[Only registered and activated users can see links]


vs. Morrison: Liston KO 1

[Only registered and activated users can see links]



vs. Foreman: Liston TKO 11 (Foreman disputes the stoppage)

[Only registered and activated users can see links]





vs. Mercer: Liston UD 12 (Mercer feels he was robbed)

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

vs. Tua: Liston UD 12 (Crowd violently jeers Tua's lackluster effort)

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

vs. Moorer: Liston KO1 (arrested for murder after the fight)

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Boilermaker]

If Liston was born in the 90s, i think it would have changed the way many people think about things today. Particularly the evolutionists. Firstly, Liston would have been likely a light heavyweight champion through the late 90s, early 90s. Not necessarilly unified, but he would have got a shot at and taken apart more than a few alphabet holders in the era just after Spinks. I tend to think that he would get his shot at Tyson around about the Douglas fight, and like Douglas, he would simply be too good for this version of Tyson. From there, assuming that he outboxes Bowe and Lennox, which i think he would, then he would reign for quite a while, probably until tyson gets out of jail, at which time, i think he would beat Tyson. Holyfield would take the leap up to 3rd best of the era with a win over Tyson, and eventually Lewis would probably end his reign in a rematch, by which time, Liston would be getting on and Lewis, although coming into his own would be seen as being lucky to catch the aging champions, Holyfield, Tyson and Liston. After losing to liston, it is also quite likely that Liston makes the second phase of his comeback. Although he would probably eventually get KOd by one of the superheavys, i think it also likely that he would be the one who KOs Vlad in the same manner that Lamon Brewster or Even Corrie Sanders did.

If this all went down somewhere like this, then the best fighters in the socalled super heavy era would have been all 200-220 smaller fighters. I think that this would keep the evolution theorists in line, much like the small Prime version of Tyson did for a long time.

[sauhund II]

vs. Holyfield: Liston TKO 8


[Only registered and activated users can see links]



vs. Lewis: Liston KO 2

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


vs. Tyson: Liston KO 5

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Bowe holds a press conference and throws his belt in the trash.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]



vs. Golota: Liston KO1



[Only registered and activated users can see links]


vs. Morrison: Liston KO 1

[Only registered and activated users can see links]



vs. Foreman: Liston TKO 11 (Foreman disputes the stoppage)

[Only registered and activated users can see links]





vs. Mercer: Liston UD 12 (Mercer feels he was robbed)

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

vs. Tua: Liston UD 12 (Crowd violently jeers Tua's lackluster effort)

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

vs. Moorer: Liston KO1 (arrested for murder after the fight)

[Only registered and activated users can see links]
LOL, and then you woke up, Liston the Big Bear, so tough, quites TWICE against a green relative light punching Clay, even with cheating he could not get it done.

Big "Mafia" lol, enforcer, evil staredown ? If good ol' Sonny would be going to "enforce" aka run his mouth in the nineties Compton/Pacomia/South Central etc....he would be coming out in a bodybag. Fact not fiction.

Liston would be a contender in the 90's, thats it, maybe picking up a ABC belt but otherwise he will go good nite against the majority of your list.Slow as molasses with feet stuck not in mud but cement while going up against guys who are easily as skilled as himself,20-30 solid muscle heavier, can take a shot and are not fighting skinny middle/cruiserweights, lol, little Liston is going in for a rude surprise especially when he will get hit with power by big man like he has never felt before.................he will find a way out like in the Clay fights.

[fists of fury]

To me this is one of the deepest eras in heavyweight history.

You had the 'big four' of Lewis, Holyfield, Tyson and Bowe. Then, you had a strong supporting cast of other belt holder or contenders like Big George, Bruno, McCall, Ruddock, Mercer, Morrison, Tua, Moorer, Briggs...the list goes on.

Certainly a formidable line-up. For the most part, a puncher's line-up. Even Holyfield, not maybe a true puncher, could certainly hurt you with accumulation. He rocked Bowe several times and stopped Tyson among other things...so he too could hurt you.

I do think Sonny would probably make his debut at around 208-210 pounds, and like guys like Mercer and others, eventually top out at around 225-235. In some ways it would certainly help him, but perhaps as noted above he could be a little slower too.

To be honest, I don't think he dominates like he did his own era. There is simply too much talent, too many bangers to emerge unscathed. He'd be a top 5 heavyweight sure, but for me it's hard to envision Liston walking through the likes of some of those guys listed above, and not picking up a loss here or there.

Put it this way - to have a decently long run as champ, he'd have to be matched carefully.

[McGrain]

I disagree. Look at him at 218 lbs here, he already sports somewhat of a belly (not a flat one anyway):

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

You've posted a picture of Sonny Liston probably in the worst shape of his career. Why?

Well for Patterson I, he is listed as having a 33" waist. That's smaller than Johannson, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes and Jersey Joe Walcott, for example. Whatever you think of Liston's gut in this picture, he could stand to add two inches here quite comfortably.

His arms could quite easily be more muscular also. According to what I have Liston has a bigger biceps than every champion that preceeded him aside from Jess Willard. Of the 90's guys, Bonecrusher Smith, Buster Douglas, Mike Weaver, Lennox Lewis, Oliver McCall, George Foreman and Frank Bruno all have bigger arms. In other words, as you well know, HW musculatur got bigger in the 90's. Liston's musculature would get bigger too. He's a slender HW with a SHW's physicality (some measurements) to begin with. I find the idea that Liston couldn't hold more weight bizarre.

Maybe the "natural steroids" you've referred to aren't as effectice as the real thing?

[fists of fury]

Regarding Liston's size, I don't see why he could not weigh around 225-235 if he were fighting today. Guys like Mercer, Morrison and Moorer all began at around 214 pounds, and ended up at least 10 pounds heavier as their careers progressed. Mercer was not a tall guy either, around 6'1", and he was well into the 220's as his career progressed.

Even Tua, who ended up a blubbery 245, made his debut in the low 200's.

One could be cynical and say that it was more a result of overeating than anything, but probably weight training and *ahem* other factors played a role too.

Liston was what? 212-214 at his heaviest...adding say, 10 extra pounds of muscle (if needed) in the 90's would not be a problem at all.

[ChrisPontius]

You've posted a picture of Sonny Liston probably in the worst shape of his career. Why?


I like to go by facts rather than speculation, and fact is that he looked like this at 218 lbs.


Well for Patterson I, he is listed as having a 33" waist. That's smaller than Johannson, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes and Jersey Joe Walcott, for example. Whatever you think of Liston's gut in this picture, he could stand to add two inches here quite comfortably.


Maybe, maybe not. You have picked a single measurement, which are never too reliable anyway. I could turn it around and say that his smaller waist is an indication that he was not as big a man as the likes you mentioned, who in turn are all a step or two below the 90's heavyweights in the same department.



His arms could quite easily be more muscular also. According to what I have Liston has a bigger biceps than every champion that preceeded him aside from Jess Willard. Of the 90's guys, Bonecrusher Smith, Buster Douglas, Mike Weaver, Lennox Lewis, Oliver McCall, George Foreman and Frank Bruno all have bigger arms. In other words, as you well know, HW musculatur got bigger in the 90's. Liston's musculature would get bigger too. He's a slender HW with a SHW's physicality (some measurements) to begin with. I find the idea that Liston couldn't hold more weight bizarre.

Maybe the "natural steroids" you've referred to aren't as effectice as the real thing?


No doubt they could be. But would it be of any help? As i said, he wasn't exactly a speed devil and would only add more mass to slow him down, for what are likely only marginal power/strength gains.

I think the "he'd be at xxx lbs" arguments are silly because they are purely speculation? Would Jack Johnson sport Vitali Klitschko's stature today, as he was a "giant" for his time? For me there's way too much speculation. We know the fighters as they are and that's all we can go by.

[McGrain]

I like to go by facts rather than speculation,

Ring, who derided Liston's training for the first fight as "a joke" (contemporary, not retrospect), plus biographers Tosches and Steen are satisfied that this is fact rather than speculation. So am I.

and fact is that he looked like this at 218 lbs.

And I posted another picture where he DIDN'T look like that weighing 5lbs lighter.



Maybe, maybe not. You have picked a single measurement, which are never too reliable anyway.

I picked TWO measurements, one for the arm, one for the waist.

I could turn it around and say that his smaller waist is an indication that he was not as big a man as the likes you mentioned, who in turn are all a step or two below the 90's heavyweights in the same department.

You could, but i'm sure you wouldn't, with the waist being an indicator of a fighter "in trim" and measurements like chest (where Liston is bigger than most of the men to come after him) tend to be indicators of an overall frame for a man in shape.

A good example is Griffith. He had a huge chest for a ww so when he added weight and moved up a division and added 10lbs
it was without dififculty.




No doubt they could be. But would it be of any help? As i said, he wasn't exactly a speed devil and would only add more mass to slow him down, for what are likely only marginal power/strength gains.

This is a valid argument, and I don't know the answer. Like every other HW I think he would be helped in certain areas and might hinder him in others.

I think the "he'd be at xxx lbs" arguments are silly because they are purely speculation?.

This thread calls for speculation. Any "what if?" question does. Speculating about Sonny's physical make up seems a reasonable thing to do in a thread about how Sonny would have done in another era.

[ChrisPontius]

Ring, who derided Liston's training for the first fight as "a joke" (contemporary, not retrospect), plus biographers Tosches and Steen are satisfied that this is fact rather than speculation. So am I.


I don't really put much stock in biographies, but that Ring article sounds interesting. Do you have a copy of it?



I picked TWO measurements, one for the arm, one for the waist.



Okay, i just think it's a silly game, for three reasons:

1. The measurements are unreliable at best and widely exaggerated at worst.
2. They don't say all that much. A while ago, someone here was showing that Charles and Dempsey were only one inch or so away from a superheavyweight like Lewis in most department.... thus they're nearly as big, etc. Of course that doesn't fly.
3. Some people can add and carry weight a lot better than others, when having identical initial dimensions.


You could, but i'm sure you wouldn't, with the waist being an indicator of a fighter "in trim" and measurements like chest (where Liston is bigger than most of the men to come after him) tend to be indicators of an overall frame for a man in shape.

A good example is Griffith. He had a huge chest for a ww so when he added weight and moved up a division and added 10lbs
it was without dififculty.


Sure, and i don't doubt that Liston could add the weight, but how much would it improve him?

To extend your example: Griffith indeed added the weight, and certainly more than held his own at middleweight, but was he as good a middleweight as he was a welterweight?

Would a 225lbs Liston be as good against the big guys from the 90's as the 204-214lbs Liston was against the cruiserweights he beat in his own era, Williams aside?



This thread calls for speculation. Any "what if?" question does. Speculating about Sonny's physical make up seems a reasonable thing to do in a thread about how Sonny would have done in another era.

That's fair. I guess i just don't like the "he would've been thiiis big today" stuff, as you may have noticed.










p.s. 1-0 ;)

[McGrain]

Ip.s. 1-0 ;)


:twisted::twisted:

[Bummy Davis]

If Liston was born in the 90s, i think it would have changed the way many people think about things today. Particularly the evolutionists. Firstly, Liston would have been likely a light heavyweight champion through the late 90s, early 90s. Not necessarilly unified, but he would have got a shot at and taken apart more than a few alphabet holders in the era just after Spinks. I tend to think that he would get his shot at Tyson around about the Douglas fight, and like Douglas, he would simply be too good for this version of Tyson. From there, assuming that he outboxes Bowe and Lennox, which i think he would, then he would reign for quite a while, probably until tyson gets out of jail, at which time, i think he would beat Tyson. Holyfield would take the leap up to 3rd best of the era with a win over Tyson, and eventually Lewis would probably end his reign in a rematch, by which time, Liston would be getting on and Lewis, although coming into his own would be seen as being lucky to catch the aging champions, Holyfield, Tyson and Liston. After losing to liston, it is also quite likely that Liston makes the second phase of his comeback. Although he would probably eventually get KOd by one of the superheavys, i think it also likely that he would be the one who KOs Vlad in the same manner that Lamon Brewster or Even Corrie Sanders did.

If this all went down somewhere like this, then the best fighters in the socalled super heavy era would have been all 200-220 smaller fighters. I think that this would keep the evolution theorists in line, much like the small Prime version of Tyson did for a long time.

Interesting, does that mean we would have missed all those fat heavyweight leaning contests....Yes the Heavyweight diviision is the only one that has no weight limit and it has hurt the division

[McGrain]

I don't really put much stock in biographies, but that Ring article sounds interesting. Do you have a copy of it?

I do, but not to hand. If it's important I can dig it out for you? This won't be until Monday night/Tuesday as I am away now and won't be back until then.

The article is about the possibility of a rematch between Liston and Ali (the Ring is really, really down on the idea by the way, although they don't quite come out and say it). The paragraph calls for Liston to be observed by the commission due to his training for the first fight being so lax.

Possibly fair enough on the books, but I do think it's interesting that they both line up.



Okay, i just think it's a silly game, for three reasons:

1. The measurements are unreliable at best and widely exaggerated at worst.
2. They don't say all that much. A while ago, someone here was showing that Charles and Dempsey were only one inch or so away from a superheavyweight like Lewis in most department.... thus they're nearly as big, etc. Of course that doesn't fly.
3. Some people can add and carry weight a lot better than others, when having identical initial dimensions.

My position would be - Liston is a very big man for his weight and could carry extra weight without coming in fat. HW's come off "thicker" in the modern era, it's just the way things have gone. If you think otherwise, I do disagree, but probably it's best left.



Sure, and i don't doubt that Liston could add the weight, but how much would it improve him?

To extend your example: Griffith indeed added the weight, and certainly more than held his own at middleweight, but was he as good a middleweight as he was a welterweight?

My guess is that Liston would be no better with the extra weight, but i'd also hazard a guess that he'd be no worse. That is in very general terms, and only a guess. I don't think ten-fifteen pounds would make much difference IF the fighter in question trains with this weight in tow, and trains properly. Where he would benifit - it becomes more difficult for bigger men to manhandle him and it gives him a better "pivot" from which to deploy his own formidable strength. Overall, I think I would prefer to see him come in a little heavier in the 90's.

As to Griffith, he was an exceptional MW, certainly. He would do worse in the MW division in head to head terms. But Griffith doesn't appear to deteriorate on film when he steps up to middle. The fighter himself was no better and was no worse.

Would a 225lbs Liston be as good against the big guys from the 90's as the 204-214lbs Liston was against the cruiserweights he beat in his own era, Williams aside?

Looking to skillset and physical assets, I think he would absolutley excell. Liston fared worse against movers and runners than he did against guys who came to meet him or tried to draw him in, which is where the advantages size provides lie. In other words, the fighters who enjoyed the widest physical advantages in terms of bulk would be the ones most vulnerable to his assets. The rest is in the detail, and of course, very complex and highly debatable.

[Stevie G]

I agree with Chris.

Adding additional weight would have likely hindered Liston's abilities more so than enhancing them. He was a big man no doubt, but he did not have the structural frame of a super heavyweight, which is exactly what he'd be up against in the 90's. Frankly, I think Evander Holyfield was a bigger man in the 210 Lb range. He was nearly 6'3, and at 210 lbs, was virtually all muscle mass without even so much as an ounce of additional baggage.

Liston enjoyed pounding on 190 Lb men for most of his career, as well as fighters who either sported a style that played into his hands, or just weren't that good. Cleveland Williams, Eddie Machen, Floyd Patterson, etc. were decent fighters, but they all had noticable limitations as seen in both their fights on film as well as in their records.

If Liston's prime had stretched from around 1990-1994, he'd be looking at a first tier group consisting of Evander Holyfield, Mike Tyson, Riddick Bowe and Lennox Lewis. The second tier included George Foreman, Razor Ruddock, Michael Moorer, Tim Witherspoon, Tony Tucker, and Ray Mercer. No way does Liston make it through that gauntlet without suffering at least a few defeats, and frankly I don't see him being dominant at all..
The thing is,if we're transplating Liston into the 90's,he would probably be bigger proportionately. No doubt weighing around 225-230 lbs.

[mr. magoo]

The thing is,if we're transplating Liston into the 90's,he would probably be bigger proportionately. No doubt weighing around 225-230 lbs.


You're about 3 pages late on that topic. We've already been through the whole " if he was fighting now, he'd weigh XYZ, etc "

[Arka]

For me Sonny's peak was around 59/60 and ,no, he didn't seem slow then.

[frankenfrank]

WOW you clearly don't think to highly of liston. i see it totally different. the only tough one would be lennox lewis. whom i see winning of sonny 3 or 4 out of 10. (sonny beating lennox most of the times tough). holyfield had a great heart so no ko but sonny will take a ud over him. tua wouldn't make it to round 7 same goes for mcCall and Bowe.
as for tyson. well mike was really strong and really fast and could take a punch as well but psychological he would have already lost. and in mike's case that counts for something. so maybe a ko in the late rounds or otherwise a ud in favour of sonny
i really don't think too highly on anyone and when i do , correct me.
you are wrong in everything you wrote even about holyfield who could be and was stopped as you should know and probably do.
ike ibeabuchi , darroll wilson , lennox lewis did not stop tua , why could sonny ? and why do you think tua wouldn't land his bomb (sonny short enough for him) and put him to sleep just like moorer , ruiz and wilson.
how would he KO mccall ? mccall faced BIG guys like akiwande , lewis , tucker and wasn't stopped (i don't consider his crack breakdown a stoppage for that matter). also bruno and yanqui diaz were big and strong and didn't stop him.
liston was smaller of the above , maybe except wilson.
KOind patterson a supermiddleweight who wanted to be the heavyweight champion of the world is not such a proof for power.
i agree liston was a hard and dangerous puncher , but don't exaggerate.
with tua everything could happen except liston koing tua.
it ranges from tua ko1 liston (wilson,ruiz,moorer) to liston ud12 (draw/robbery) tua (ibeabuchi).
just not liston stopping tua.

[Pusnuts]

Liston today would be similar build to Rahman IMO except maybe 10lbs less, esp in the legs where he has quite skinny legs and a big barrell chest, not dissimilar styles too except prime Sonny may have been a bit faster and probably a better close-in fighter.
Both guys have the long strong jabs.

Hard to rate the old heavyweights vs modern because cant find much footage of them punching up, most of their opposition was cruiserweights or light heavyweights, they didnt have to cope with the enormously strong (but also well-schooled) superheavyweights of today. Any 6'4+ guys they fought were bums or not very good so I havent seen Sonny Listons high overhand right which is the punch to KO Lennox Lewis. Or a leaping hook which he is too slow footed for.

[SuzieQ49]

Lastly, let's not forget that he lost to and got knocked down by a mediocre lightheavyweight in Marshall. He hadn't reached his peak quite yet, but at the same time, people will say that he was 34-36 years of age when he faced Ali, which would've made him 24-26 years old in that loss; in other words, his physical peak. Can't have it both ways.


Marciano arguebably lost to Tiger Ted Lowry at 25 years old. Whats your point? Liston was extremley green at the time, and the decision was very controversial. In case you didnt know, Marshall was a ring magazine top 10 contender. Name me a heavyweight champion who took on a ring magazine top 10 man in his 7th pro fight! In case you didnt hear, he beat the bejesus out of Marshall 2 times shortly afterward.


Lewis, Holyfield, 90's Tyson and Bowe are easily levels above them and would annihilate them.

But they would certainly not annihilate Liston. In Fact, I pick Liston to beat all of them.

The second tier guys like Tua, Ruddock, Ibeabuchi, Bruno, Moorer, Morrison, Tucker and Briggs are at least on the same level as the first tier bunch that Liston beat, in a head-to-head sense.

So in essence your agreeing Liston would streamroll through these guys much like he did against patterson, machen, folley, williams, valdez, dejohn.



First of all, he would be anything but the "big, bad bear"; at 6'0 212lbs, he'd give up size to just about every opponent.

Liston proved he did could defeat top men of all sizes. Holyfield and Tyson would be no bigger than he. Nor Lennox or Bowe would enjoy any reach advantage, and certainly not a power advantage.

[SuzieQ49]

Oh, I forgot to add. I see Liston as undisputed champion. On Listons best night, I do not see anyone of the 1990s beating him.

[janitor]

To be honestwith you, even if Liston was 210 lbs I think he would have to tools to take apart any of the top fighters of the 90s on a given night.

The package that Liston brought to the table was exceptional. He really had verry few weakneses as a fighter from a technical standpoint.

The issue now as in his own era would be how long he could retain his focus for.

[mr. magoo]

I've been thinking about this a lot over the past day or so, and frankly with all due respect to every all time great that ever lived, the early 90's would have been a treachurous time for any great man to get through....

Evander Holyfield, Lennox Lewis, Riddick Bowe and Mike Tyson were all historically great fighters in their primes, yet not a single one them got past maybe 1994 without a loss. In fact, if a 1967 Muhammad Ali at the peak of his powers were fighting sometime between 1990-1994, I would certainly pick him to be the best of the bunch, but I can't help but think that he'd suffer at least one defeat along the way.

Taking a look at some of the names who I think were either at or near the top of the division in mid to late 1991..

Not necessarily going by any official rating system.

1991
-Evander Holyfield
-Mike Tyson
-Razor Ruddock
-George Foreman
-Riddick Bowe
-Lennox Lewis
-Ray mercer
-Tim Witherspoon
-Tony Tucker
-Michael Moorer

Of the above mentioned names, something like 8 of them held either the lineal title or an alphabet fragment at one time or another, and some of them were even repeat champions. The vast majority were larger men with good athleticism, reasonable skill, power, durability and used their size well. Some of them even went on to fighting well into old age, and about 5 or 6 of them are considered all time greats by most. Now granted, a few were past their best by 1991, but still very active and competitive.

I mean can anyone really see ANY all time great going through that treachurous list without a single loss of some sort?

[Pusnuts]

Michael Moorer sucked at heavyweight IMO, he always looked a like a KO waiting to happen, Tua was badass in the late 90s also

[Boilermaker]

Interesting, does that mean we would have missed all those fat heavyweight leaning contests....Yes the Heavyweight diviision is the only one that has no weight limit and it has hurt the division

One can only hope!

If you think about it though, the dominant world heavyweight champion has always influenced the direction of the sport.

If you start with say, Joe Louis, he pretty much put the nail in the coffin of the old time stance and the length of his dominance meant the next generation were all emulating the joe Louis stance. Rocky Marciano, who was known to be in brilliant shape for every fight and the next generation tried to emulate him, and pretty much were in great shape. Then came Ali. A heavyweight dancer who liked to showboat and float. The next generation emulated Ali. Then Tyson, the fearsome killer with devasting KO power. His impact was so great that not only did the next generation try to emulate him by pumping iron and trying to get that same KO power. Next was Lennox Lewis, with the Straight punching and clinching, utilising size and reach advantage, and a clinch to nullify and protect from the KO punch. I think that we see most boxers (and promoters) prefer this talent.

Vlad is the prime example, as it has helped his career when he switched to these tactics, and since he seems the next champion, it looks like it will be some time before someone tries to stop emulating this style.

What boxing really needs at the moment is for a small fighter to come through and absolutely dominate Vlad on points or by late KO (not come from behind) and then go on to have a decent reign. That is the only way that the present trend will be reversed.

And being honest, i dont really see how that is going to happen at the moment. The only decent smaller fighters campaining at heavyweight, simply dont seem to be all that good at the moment. It would be good if it was David Haye but surely most see that as unlikely. I think the hugging will continue for quite a while yet.

[The Mongoose]

LOL, and then you woke up, Liston the Big Bear, so tough, quites TWICE against a green relative light punching Clay, even with cheating he could not get it done.

Big "Mafia" lol, enforcer, evil staredown ? If good ol' Sonny would be going to "enforce" aka run his mouth in the nineties Compton/Pacomia/South Central etc....he would be coming out in a bodybag. Fact not fiction.



Obviously, I was being very tongue in cheek. I still would have to favor Liston over all of them though.

-Tyson was great at slipping the jab and scoring from midrange, but so was the quicker Patterson. Think Iron Mike can absorb more punishment but the end result is the same. Bowe doesn't bring anything Big Cat couldn't, durable big man with fast hands, deep arsenal, and huge power.. still can't take the fight to Liston. Only real wildcard is Holyfield and Lewis. Though he could stick and move sometimes, Holyfield would run into the same problems he did against Bowe, can't win the outside or the inside consistently and end up taking too much punishment. Steward era Lewis won't take the fight to a big puncher like Liston, he'll fight behind his reach and smother him on the inside..but I don't think he can pull an Ali as crafty and mobile as he was for a big man. He also never fought a full fight on the back paddle, often dropping his hands and getting suckered into exchanges..something he can do against Holyfield or the lethargic short armed Tua but I fear Liston will make quick work of such a situation.

Great fighters just all wrong for Liston but how knows, bigger upsets have happened. Now Ruddock, Moorer, Morrison, McCall, and Golota..give me a break.

Yes, losing twice to "The Greatest" is absolutely shameful. That should define his career, not his incredible performances and victories.

Lol, at the second comment: Your right though, Liston don't know nothing about being a true "G" growing up in South Central. Not sure what that has to do with boxing.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Seamus]

It's good to see Liston remains the most over-glorified heavy on this forum. Personally, I think he would struggle with Seldon, Hide and the like. He was great for the 50's/early 60's. He'd be average in the post modern era, where his best assets of size and strength would be matched by the entire top-10.

[fists of fury]

I've been thinking about this a lot over the past day or so, and frankly with all due respect to every all time great that ever lived, the early 90's would have been a treachurous time for any great man to get through....

Evander Holyfield, Lennox Lewis, Riddick Bowe and Mike Tyson were all historically great fighters in their primes, yet not a single one them got past maybe 1994 without a loss. In fact, if a 1967 Muhammad Ali at the peak of his powers were fighting sometime between 1990-1994, I would certainly pick him to be the best of the bunch, but I can't help but think that he'd suffer at least one defeat along the way.

Taking a look at some of the names who I think were either at or near the top of the division in mid to late 1991..

Not necessarily going by any official rating system.

1991
-Evander Holyfield
-Mike Tyson
-Razor Ruddock
-George Foreman
-Riddick Bowe
-Lennox Lewis
-Ray mercer
-Tim Witherspoon
-Tony Tucker
-Michael Moorer

Of the above mentioned names, something like 8 of them held either the lineal title or an alphabet fragment at one time or another, and some of them were even repeat champions. The vast majority were larger men with good athleticism, reasonable skill, power, durability and used their size well. Some of them even went on to fighting well into old age, and about 5 or 6 of them are considered all time greats by most. Now granted, a few were past their best by 1991, but still very active and competitive.

I mean can anyone really see ANY all time great going through that treachurous list without a single loss of some sort?

This is exactly right. I mean, you take off the top four guys, and you still have a fairly deep division loaded with fighters that could beat you.
I can't think of another era, and this includes the 70's, where this happens.
Liston isn't dominating this era by any means.

[The Mongoose]

Liston 6'0" 212 lbs 84" reach/Williams II 6'3" 215 lbs 80" reach

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


Holyfield 6'2" 205lbs 78" reach/Bowe 6'5" 235 lbs 81" reach

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Haye]

You guys would seriously favour Liston to be number 1?

Certainly most of you know a lot more than I do on the old timers. When I've seen Liston, I always felt he was a little crude in comparison, but that jab of his was magnificent, like an arm that was way to big for his body.

[The Mongoose]

It's good to see Liston remains the most over-glorified heavy on this forum. Personally, I think he would struggle with Seldon, Hide and the like. He was great for the 50's/early 60's. He'd be average in the post modern era, where his best assets of size and strength would be matched by the entire top-10.

Seldon and Hide were real beasts!


[Only registered and activated users can see links]


[Only registered and activated users can see links]

At least the phantom punch connected on Liston.

[The Mongoose]

You guys would seriously favour Liston to be number 1?

Certainly most of you know a lot more than I do on the old timers. When I've seen Liston, I always felt he was a little crude in comparison, but that jab of his was magnificent, like an arm that was way to big for his body.


Very underrated hand speed and defense. Williams is a much stronger man and he surprises Liston with quick combos on the inside that bust his nose and appear to hurt him. However, Liston adjusts and is slipping most of his attacks by the end of the round while not only finding range with his jab but also going to work on the inside with quick short arm combos himself. Liston is a rare fighter that was just as effective on the inside as well as the out...fast mobile fighters that made him go on the chase caused him the most trouble.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Quick Cash]

Liston wouldn't come out undefeated however he will certainly dominate along with Lewis. In many ways the injection of Liston into the 90's does more to simplify things than complicate them.

It's customary to have Tyson, Bowe, Holyfield, and Lewis as the 4 top candidates in the category of greatest heavyweight fighter at this time; they did the most work and came out with the best results, but insert Liston into the equation and i feel the breadth between them becomes more apparent.

Tyson accomplished nothing worthy of an all-time-great status during this time. A potential stoppage loss to Liston along with his losses to Holyfield and subsequent knockout against Lewis while past his prime effectively eliminates him from discussion, in my opinion. Tyson earned his ranking in the 80's; he was not a very significant factor in the 90's, in hindsight.

Bowe is a bit of a mystery. He beat Holyfield 2 to 1 but he didn't do anything else. If he were to lose to Liston (and I think this is guaranteed to be the easiest time Liston will have against the 90's top shelf), it would certainly clarify the situation for all of us.

Holyfield would make a fight out of it. He's already pegged as one of the best to fight out of the 90's, commonly top 2 in the era post-Tyson. However, he comes up short here against Sonny and that will only serve to further tarnish his up-and-down career.

The true winners here will be Lewis and Liston, with Lennox being the more long-lived champion lasting up to the new millenium.

[mcvey]

:huh

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Guy looks concaved to me. He could hold more weight comfortably.
More weight would be a detriment not an advantage imo .ie Briggs,make Liston even slower.

[Stevie G]

It's good to see Liston remains the most over-glorified heavy on this forum. Personally, I think he would struggle with Seldon, Hide and the like. He was great for the 50's/early 60's. He'd be average in the post modern era, where his best assets of size and strength would be matched by the entire top-10.
As I've pointed out on another thread,Liston was a big heavyweight in his own era,so proportionately if he was peaking in the 90's he would be bigger than he was inreality. Probably about 230-235 lbs.

[mr. magoo]

This is exactly right. I mean, you take off the top four guys, and you still have a fairly deep division loaded with fighters that could beat you.
I can't think of another era, and this includes the 70's, where this happens.
Liston isn't dominating this era by any means.


Agreed,

And frankly I don't really see ANY all time great going through that gauntlet without picking up at least one "L". Muhammad Ali and Joe Louis would have competed honorably, perhaps even established themselves as the best among peers, but dominate? I don't know. As mentioned before, no one including Tyson, Bowe, Lewis, Moorer or Holyfield got past the dawn of the 90's without losing at least one fight...

[Boilermaker]

Agreed,

And frankly I don't really see ANY all time great going through that gauntlet without picking up at least one "L". Muhammad Ali and Joe Louis would have competed honorably, perhaps even established themselves as the best among peers, but dominate? I don't know. As mentioned before, no one including Tyson, Bowe, Lewis, Moorer or Holyfield got past the dawn of the 90's without losing at least one fight...

A bit like the dawn of the 30s, hey? No one got throught the 30s title holders without losing at least one fight either.
Noone, not Schmeling, Sharkey, Baer or Braddock got through this dawn either. You give Louis any chance of making it through without the L?:good

[janitor]

You guys would seriously favour Liston to be number 1?

Certainly most of you know a lot more than I do on the old timers. When I've seen Liston, I always felt he was a little crude in comparison, but that jab of his was magnificent, like an arm that was way to big for his body.

I think that he would have been clear number 1 at some point in the decade.

To understand how Liston works watch him against sombody like Cleavland Williams. Watch what Williams does then look at how Liston anticipates it and reacts to it.

Watch his fights with Floyd Patterson and see how he backs up just enough to keep Patterson constantly in the killing zone without breaking a sweat himself.

When you study footage of him you will see that he is a good long range fighter, a good infighter and he is good in between.

He is a verry complet package. Apart from hand speed he really dosn't have any weakneses.

[Boilermaker]

Actually, what about the 1890s, Sullivan, Corbett, Fitzsimmons, Jackson, Sharkey. No one went through that undefeated eigher. Maybe Jeffries had a decent shot though!

Or the 1900s with Jeffries, Hart, Burns, and Johnson, throw in Willard, Langford, Jeanette and McVey into that group noone went through them either.

[SuzieQ49]

It's good to see Liston remains the most over-glorified heavy on this forum. Personally, I think he would struggle with Seldon, Hide and the like. He was great for the 50's/early 60's. He'd be average in the post modern era, where his best assets of size and strength would be matched by the entire top-10.


:lol::lol::lol::lol::rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

[SuzieQ49]

If you want to see a lean mean sonny at his fastest best...take a look at him at 204lb rock solid against wayne bethea. He steamrolls bethea in 58 seconds. Wayne was never stopped before or after. It was a massacre. The year was 1958.

[red cobra]

Prime '59-'61 Sonny Liston would have beaten them all, especially Bowe and Holyfield, with their penchant for aggresiveness, but would have lost to the more conservative defensively Lennox Lewis, the best of his age, IMO. Lewis by a 15 round decision, or quite possibly a late tko.

[Seamus]

If you want to see a lean mean sonny at his fastest best...take a look at him at 204lb rock solid against wayne bethea. He steamrolls bethea in 58 seconds. Wayne was never stopped before or after. It was a massacre. The year was 1958.

I dare say I probably own more Liston footage than damn near anyone on this board. I've seen them all. His era was very, very weak, nowhere near the athletic ability and power of the heavies in the 90's. He was a great heavy for his day; he would be quite good at best in the 90's.

[Chris Warren]

I pretty much agree with ChrisPointus 100 percent. People tend to overrate fighters of the past because they here so called boxing experts tell them they were good. Liston was a slow, slow, slow fighter who best wins came against guys alot smaller than him. Well he beat Cleveland Williams but that isnt saying much.

Liston's chin isnt as great as you people pretend either. Besides Williams and Ali how many other 205 plus pound modern heavyweights did he face? How many of them were huge punchers? Williams has a nice Ko record but who did he fight and knock out that you would consider top level?

I doubt Liston could even beat a guy like Hasim Rahman

[SuzieQ49]

Besides Williams and Ali how many other 205 plus pound modern heavyweights did he face?


Nino Valdez? 6'3 211lb. The man who you claim the great rocky marciano "ducked"

also Mike Dejohn? 6'5 205lb...A whale of a left hook!


As for Slow, if you want to see slow watch George Foreman. Liston would have had a field day with him in his prime.

[SuzieQ49]

dare say I probably own more Liston footage than damn near anyone on this board. I've seen them all. His era was very, very weak, nowhere near the athletic ability and power of the heavies in the 90's.

Lets break this down


1. What on film do these guys lack that 1990s had?

2. What makes these 1990s fighters look so much more athletic than the 1960s guys?

As far as I am concerned the 1990s heavies looked soft and tired compared to Listons era. Only in the 1990s would two 45 year olds be able to compete on a world class level. How Embarrasing. Only Prime 25-30 year old Workhorses were competitive during Listons era.


You claim the 1960s guys of Listons era lacked athleticism...I certainly do not see it


[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]


Do the 1990s guys really appear more athletic? These guys are young and built like rocks.

From the film i have seen and from the knowledge I have accumulated on this era, it was a very strong one.

Why?


Consistency

Most of the World Class Contenders during this era were all 25-30 years old. This meant that the men competiting for the world championship were all young, in there primes, putting up there best performances. This enhances competition. How many eras throughout heavyweight history were filled with such Live Prime Opposition? All the old men got weeded out during Listons era.


Balance


Some eras are typically ruled with punchers, others boxers. This era had a definitive balance between both powers thus creating a large talent gap. You had your dangerous punchers(Williams, Valdez, Dejohn, Liston, Johannson) and you had your highly skilled technicians (Machen, Folley, Patterson, Johnson)...You had both Quality and Quantity. The 2nd teir guys like Summerlin, Bethea, H Carter, Miteff, Cooper, Lavorante, Cleroux, Chuvalo were all young and capable of upsetting World Class men on a given night. If you look at the 1990s you will see a large group of menacing punchers. However, it lacks balance. In that group of powerful punchers, lacks a very good technician. Did the 1990s have any technicians outside of perhaps Lennox Lewis?

Film

I'll be dammed if I have seen better technically brilliant skills than fighters like Machen, Folley, and Harold Johnson on film. That included fighters today. We still have yet to see a fighter come along with the technique, speed, and power patterson all combined into one. Even the Big Sluggers like Williams,Johannson, Liston, Valdez were far from crude and displayed formidable Jabs on film. Speaking of Jabs, I dont think there has been a era in heavyweight history that was filled with such great jabbers.

[JohnThomas1]

I pretty much agree with ChrisPointus 100 percent. People tend to overrate fighters of the past because they here so called boxing experts tell them they were good. Liston was a slow, slow, slow fighter who best wins came against guys alot smaller than him. Well he beat Cleveland Williams but that isnt saying much.

Liston's chin isnt as great as you people pretend either. Besides Williams and Ali how many other 205 plus pound modern heavyweights did he face? How many of them were huge punchers? Williams has a nice Ko record but who did he fight and knock out that you would consider top level?

I doubt Liston could even beat a guy like Hasim Rahman

How do you see


SRR vs Jermaine Taylor at 160
PAC vs Napoles
Monzon vs Pavlik
Bob Foster vs the current 175 crop
Ike Williams vs the 135 crop


etc

[anarci]

EXCELLENT POST SUZIE Q:good WHOEVER SAID HIDE AND SELDON WOULDHAVE GIVEN HIM TROUBLE PROBABLY HASNT BEEN A BOXING FAN THAT LONG,LISTON WOULD HAVE DONE WELL IN THE 90S NO DOUBT. ALTHOUGH ID PICK HOLYFIELD OVER HIM EVEN IF THEY FOUGHT 2 OR 3 TIMES ,AGAINST LENNOX ID HAVE TO SAY IF THEY HAD ACOUPLE FIGHTS LISTON WOULD KNOCK HIM OUT IN OF THOSE ID SAY LEWIS 2 TO 1,AN EARLY 90S TYSON WOULD PROBABLY BEAT LISTON,BUT LISTON MIGHT TAKE THE LATE 90S VERSION,AS FOR BOWE I ALSO SEE THEM SPLITTING A COUPLE FIGHTS,LISTON WOULD KNOCK OUT MOORER,MORRISON,BRUNO .HIM AND RUDDOCK WOULD BE A GREAT FIGHT.AS FOR MERCER THAT IS A PRETTY EVEN MATCHUP BUT ILL GO WITH LISTON BETTER JAB.HED PROBABLY BUST TUA UP AND HED KNOCK OUT RAHMAN. I HAVE ALWAYS BELIEVED THAT LISTON WAS THE FIRST HEAVYWEIGHT GREATSOF THE PAST TO DO WELL AGAINST TODAYS HEAVYS HE PUNCHED REAL HARD ON THE SAME LEVEL WITH 90S PUNCHERS LIKE TYSON,LEWIS,BOWE,RUDDOCK ETC ASK GEORGE FOREMAN SOMEONE WHO FOUGHT IN BOTH ERAS TO THIS DAY FOREMAN TALKS OF LISTONS POWER THEY SPARRED ALOT WHEN GEORGE WAS ON HIS WAY UP

[Arka]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]





As a young man,Williams had a powerful physique:

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Unforgiven]

Is this serious? The 80's was as flacid an era as ever existed. Holmes occasionally showing his genius but mostly going through his bums, followed by the not so overwhelming blow-up Mike Spinks and rounded out by admittedly great Tyson feeding on mediocre fighters, fat-asses and drug addicts. Meanwhile, the contenders were, well, mediocre, fat ass drug addicts. But they were American, which should count as something right? The best mediocre fat-ass drug addicts in the world.

If nothing else, the 90's featured much harder hitters in the declining Tyson, Ruddock, Tua, Bowe, Morrison, Moorer, ancient Foreman and of course Lewis.

I'm convinced that the heavyweights didn't improve from the 1980s to the 1990s. And while I dont think being American makes a heavyweight a better fighter I do think that the 1990s was when the depth of numbers of good American heavyweights started to dip dramatically, and promoters attempted to fill the gaps with several who didn't have the talent.

There was just as much obesity in the heavyweights of the 1990s as in the 1980s, so that "fat" criticism isn't relevant. In fact, how many of Tyson's title fights in the 1980s were against FAT men ? I say 1 (out of 10) : Tony Tubbs.
Of the "1990s hard hitters" you list I could call 4 of them fat - Foreman, Bowe, Tua and Moorer - at least they are fatter than 9/10 of the guys Tyson fought.

How many were "drug addicts" ? I dont know. But I do know that drugs are prevalent in our society going back decades and that not everyone who uses drugs or alcohol admits it or discussing the extent and details of their use. Nor can you say for sure who was affected by their use for what particular fights. From what Mike Tyson might say now you could argue that he's one of them who had life-long drug problems, but that wont strengthen your argument.

The 1980s saw such hard hitters as peak Mike Tyson, Mike Weaver, Gerry Cooney, Bonecrusher Smith, Frank Bruno, Gerrie Coetzee and Tim Witherspoon who stacked up well against those you mention. And of course, many of the 80s heavyweights and 90s heavyweights are the same people anyway.

The 1980s gets a bad rap in comparison. People concentrate on two or three "fat guys" at the top when it comes to the 1980s, but rarely talk about the flabby 90s guys like Bowe, Mercer and Moorer.
People talk about the alphabet champs of the 1980s as an uninspiring bunch, but have amnesia about the crappiness of McCall, Seldon, Botha, etc.
Botha, Bruno and Seldon held the three major titles simultaneously in the mid-90s ! While 46 year-old "linear" champ Foreman fought bums, followed by prison release Tyson fighting bums for zillions of dollars, and Bowe-Holyfield fighting each other in a great trilogy - one that probably single-handedly elevates the 1990s into a "good heavyweight era" but one that more or less used them up by mid-decade.

Lennox Lewis fought his fair share of has-beens and drug-addicts too, and of course he fought the great Lionel Butler who was both fat and a druggie and who himself had cracked the ratings with wins over 1980s has-beens Tubbs and Smith. Lewis lost to the CRACK ADDICT Oliver McCall, who was a bit crap to be honest, as evidenced by his defence against the "put-your-shirt-on-grandad" version of Holmes and his fairly one-sided loss to master boxer Frank Bruno. Fat wheezy Ray Mercer almost outboxed Lewis. The Tyson bubble burst about a year after his release from prison when heart-attack Holyfield, a washed-up warrior, beat the crap out of him.

Riddick Bowe never learned to slip Golota's punches and looked shot at 29. Michael Moorer barely deserved the win over a cardiac-arrest version of Holyfield, and followed up with a defense over an undeserving George Foreman (18 months out of the ring, coming off a loss to Tommy Morrison), and got KO'd by him. Morrison was both a druggie and an HIV-carrier.

Lewis-McCall 2 was a farce. As way Tyson-Holyfield 2. As was Lewis-Akinwande. Tyson-McNeeley.
..... and of course Bruce Seldon's gallant brave losing defense of his title against Mike Tyson must stand out as the most moving and spirited performance in the history of boxing !

Etc. etc. etc.

[SuzieQ49]

bump my post

[Mendoza]

How would he do? He would be fighting in the silver era (with the 1970's being considered the golden era) and how do you think he would do against the likes of Lennox Lewis, Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield and Riddick Bowe? Do you think he would come unstuck against a top contender like Tommy Morrison, Donovon Ruddock, Andrew Golota or Ray Mercer?

Liston was a king kong type. He could seize the fair maiden in one hand and beat off the cops with the other. Sonny was arrested 16+ times. I wonder if his connections limited his jail time. I don't think we would see much of Liston in the 1990's in the modern legal system.

But assuming we take the outside the ring stuff out of the equation, Liston vs. Bowe, Lewis, Mercer, Morrer, Foreman, Tyson, Morrison, Golota, Tua, Holyfield, and Ike would have been interesting.

[Mendoza]

I dare say I probably own more Liston footage than damn near anyone on this board. I've seen them all. His era was very, very weak, nowhere near the athletic ability and power of the heavies in the 90's. He was a great heavy for his day; he would be quite good at best in the 90's.

I have most of Liston's fights on film. I agree his era, prior to Ali was rather weak. I tend to disagree somewhat on the athletic comments of the time. Patterson, and Machen were good athletes with speed, balance, and quickness.

[SpanishArcher]

Tyson of 1991 KO's Liston.

[Unforgiven]

I think people view the 1990s through rose-coloured glasses more than they do Liston's era.
Probably due to HBO and Showtime and PPV mega-purse extravanganzas.

Several of Liston's opponents would have landed alphabet titles in the 1990s also.
Guys like Bruce Seldon and Herbie Hide would have been lucky to main event on Gillete's Friday Night fights in the 50s, though Patterson probably would have given them shots at the title.
Tommy Morrison would have been murdered by Liston, let's face it.
McCall would have eaten more jabs than old Foreman's had cheeseburgers.

[fists of fury]

I'm convinced that the heavyweights didn't improve from the 1980s to the 1990s. And while I dont think being American makes a heavyweight a better fighter I do think that the 1990s was when the depth of numbers of good American heavyweights started to dip dramatically, and promoters attempted to fill the gaps with several who didn't have the talent.

There was just as much obesity in the heavyweights of the 1990s as in the 1980s, so that "fat" criticism isn't relevant. In fact, how many of Tyson's title fights in the 1980s were against FAT men ? I say 1 (out of 10) : Tony Tubbs.
Of the "1990s hard hitters" you list I could call 4 of them fat - Foreman, Bowe, Tua and Moorer - at least they are fatter than 9/10 of the guys Tyson fought.

How many were "drug addicts" ? I dont know. But I do know that drugs are prevalent in our society going back decades and that not everyone who uses drugs or alcohol admits it or discussing the extent and details of their use. Nor can you say for sure who was affected by their use for what particular fights. From what Mike Tyson might say now you could argue that he's one of them who had life-long drug problems, but that wont strengthen your argument.

The 1980s saw such hard hitters as peak Mike Tyson, Mike Weaver, Gerry Cooney, Bonecrusher Smith, Frank Bruno, Gerrie Coetzee and Tim Witherspoon who stacked up well against those you mention. And of course, many of the 80s heavyweights and 90s heavyweights are the same people anyway.

The 1980s gets a bad rap in comparison. People concentrate on two or three "fat guys" at the top when it comes to the 1980s, but rarely talk about the flabby 90s guys like Bowe, Mercer and Moorer.
People talk about the alphabet champs of the 1980s as an uninspiring bunch, but have amnesia about the crappiness of McCall, Seldon, Botha, etc.
Botha, Bruno and Seldon held the three major titles simultaneously in the mid-90s ! While 46 year-old "linear" champ Foreman fought bums, followed by prison release Tyson fighting bums for zillions of dollars, and Bowe-Holyfield fighting each other in a great trilogy - one that probably single-handedly elevates the 1990s into a "good heavyweight era" but one that more or less used them up by mid-decade.

Lennox Lewis fought his fair share of has-beens and drug-addicts too, and of course he fought the great Lionel Butler who was both fat and a druggie and who himself had cracked the ratings with wins over 1980s has-beens Tubbs and Smith. Lewis lost to the CRACK ADDICT Oliver McCall, who was a bit crap to be honest, as evidenced by his defence against the "put-your-shirt-on-grandad" version of Holmes and his fairly one-sided loss to master boxer Frank Bruno. Fat wheezy Ray Mercer almost outboxed Lewis. The Tyson bubble burst about a year after his release from prison when heart-attack Holyfield, a washed-up warrior, beat the crap out of him.

Riddick Bowe never learned to slip Golota's punches and looked shot at 29. Michael Moorer barely deserved the win over a cardiac-arrest version of Holyfield, and followed up with a defense over an undeserving George Foreman (18 months out of the ring, coming off a loss to Tommy Morrison), and got KO'd by him. Morrison was both a druggie and an HIV-carrier.

Lewis-McCall 2 was a farce. As way Tyson-Holyfield 2. As was Lewis-Akinwande. Tyson-McNeeley.
..... and of course Bruce Seldon's gallant brave losing defense of his title against Mike Tyson must stand out as the most moving and spirited performance in the history of boxing !

Etc. etc. etc.

Well, it pretty much goes against what I was saying about the 90's earlier, but you make some very good points, I must say. Nice job. :good

[Unforgiven]

Well, it pretty much goes against what I was saying about the 90's earlier, but you make some very good points, I must say. Nice job. :good

Thanks. :good

I feel a bit bad having to jog people's memories a bit about the 1990s but it's too often glorified and over-rated.
Of course, there were great moments like Douglas-Tyson, Lewis-Ruddock, the Bowe-Holyfield trilogy, Holyfield-Tyson 1, and up-and-comers Ibeaubuchi-Tua, but it baffles me when gross underachievers/hype-jobs like Mercer and Morrison get positively compared in the crop against the top heavyweights of the 80s.

[Rock0052]

In a one-fight scenario, Liston probably would've taken out a good number of the top fighters.

In a career scenario, I think he would've had significantly less success for two reasons: the top 10 fighters of that era, in general, weren't as vulnerable to Liston's best assets as his own era was. He'd have still won plenty of fights, but wouldn't have looked the 800 pound gorilla he did.

The second reason is that Liston's best run occurred before he won the title chasing that dangling carrot. Well, there's 4 belts floating around- how long until he picks up one, gets complacent, and loses a fight he normally wouldn't? Seems to me Liston's the type of guy who'd have a hell of a run to the top of the mountain but he wouldn't have the kind of mentality to allow him to rule any era with an iron fist for an extended period of time.

So, I see him as a beltholder who could pick up a strap at his best, maybe get a couple defenses, but that's about it. Which is nothing to be ashamed of.

[Unforgiven]

I agree he's liable to get complacent and lose in an upset, but I reckon he'd be motivated enough to win the undisputed championship or unify the belts if this hypothetical scenario is a period of title fragmentation.
He'd do more than be just another belt-holder anyway.

[Rock0052]

I agree he's liable to get complacent and lose in an upset, but I reckon he'd be motivated enough to win the undisputed championship or unify the belts if this hypothetical scenario is a period of title fragmentation.
He'd do more than be just another belt-holder anyway.

I'm not so certain that'd be the case. If there's anything the top fighters and fringe guys of the 90's could do, it was dish out punishment and the punchers were well above and beyond what Liston dominated. I can't see Liston unifying the hard way (one belt at a time) in that kind of environment. Just another beltholder shouldn't be construed as an insult. Without the carrot dangling in front of him to motivate his destructive focus, I don't hesitate in thinking he'd never have had more than a couple defenses in any era before complacency got to him, which would also mean not enough time to unify.

Now, if he waited until someone else did some of the unifying for him or he waited until the best matchup for him, and then he got the fight? Then I could see him becoming undisputed.

But the truth is when Liston went into the Ali fights, Muhammad was looked at as a lamb going to slaughter and he still should've beaten a green Ali. That he didn't and had a horribly lazy training camp in the process in only his 2nd defense doesn't show me he had the focus or mentality to have prolonged success once he had the belt. I think his best work would've always come on the way up.

[McGrain]

But the truth is when Liston went into the Ali fights, Muhammad was looked at as a lamb going to slaughter and he still should've beaten a green Ali. That he didn't and had a horribly lazy training camp in the process in only his 2nd defense doesn't show me he had the focus or mentality to have prolonged success once he had the belt. I think his best work would've always come on the way up.

I agree with this.

One thing though. When Liston lifted the title he genuinely saw it as a new start, and was looking forwards to addressing the crowd when his plane landed. Of course, nothing was organised and nobody was at the airport to welcome him. Liston was broken.

Maybe as an American title holder in the 1990's he would have got the welcome he wanted and could have remained focused. He certainly talked the talk on the way up about what he wanted to do as champion. Anyway or no, that's a couter-argument to your point that I basically agree with.

[Unforgiven]

I'm not so certain that'd be the case. If there's anything the top fighters and fringe guys of the 90's could do, it was dish out punishment and the punchers were well above and beyond what Liston dominated. I can't see Liston unifying the hard way (one belt at a time) in that kind of environment. Just another beltholder shouldn't be construed as an insult. Without the carrot dangling in front of him to motivate his destructive focus, I don't hesitate in thinking he'd never have had more than a couple defenses in any era before complacency got to him, which would also mean not enough time to unify.

It might not be an insult, but ....

undisputed champs (linear, and holding the three major belts) of the 90s were :

Tyson
Douglas
Holyfield
Bowe
Lewis

with the following holding TWO of the three major belts :
post-prison Tyson
Moorer
Foreman
Holyfield (twice, the second stint due to unifying)
Bowe (when he ditched one)

And those who fall under "just another belt-holder" :

Bruce Seldon
Oliver McCall
Frank Bruno
Francois Botha (stripped for roids)

& the WBO circuit
Francesco Damiani (WBO)
Ray Mercer (WBO)
Tommy Morrison (WBO)
Michael Bentt (WBO)
Herbie Hide (WBO)
Henry Akinwande (WBO)
Herbie Hide (WBO)
Vitali KLitschko (WBO)





Now, if he waited until someone else did some of the unifying for him or he waited until the best matchup for him, and then he got the fight? Then I could see him becoming undisputed.


But the truth is when Liston went into the Ali fights, Muhammad was looked at as a lamb going to slaughter and he still should've beaten a green Ali. That he didn't and had a horribly lazy training camp in the process in only his 2nd defense doesn't show me he had the focus or mentality to have prolonged success once he had the belt. I think his best work would've always come on the way up.


I dont think he would have been satisfied with just winning a belt, because clearly being a one-time belt-holder doesn't mean much. He did well to eliminate every significant available top contender of period 1959-62, including the champ, and that's about equivalent of unifying belts (2 or 3 wins max. over the significant individuals as you find them). I think complacency came after he had "PROVEN" himself top dog, not before.