Liston -vs- Holyfield:

[Holmes' Jab]

Prime for prime, 15 rounds. Who wins this one?

[McGrain]

This is an excellent, excellent match up. This is a belter.

My first though it that Hollyfield is a nightmare for Liston. One of the smartest heavyweight champs I think, and he's going to do what he did with Tyson, tie him, rough him, make him miserable whilst all the time proving that he's not afraid. Offering up Hollyfield via late and draining stopage in a compelling match is my gut reaction.

But Liston is a different prospect, certainly to the version of Mike Evander has faced. His huge reach and great strength mean that he has that nice option of pushing Evander of and boxing him. It's quite possible that the reverse of the above may be true; perhaps Liston becomes Hollyfield's nightmare, keeping him at distance with his great strength and then hammering him with the jab. Power shots to the body when Hollyfield is on his way in. Leaning and pushing when it gets late, the proof that Liston is the big man as well as the boxer.

I think i'll go with my second thought. Liston in a late stoppage in what is car crash viewing as Hollyfield proves he has the heart of a champion going down in the 12th having given his all.


Of all the fights you could make in the history of the heavyweights i'd wand to see Louis-Tyson more; that's it.

[Holmes' Jab]

This is an excellent, excellent match up. This is a belter.

My first though it that Hollyfield is a nightmare for Liston. One of the smartest heavyweight champs I think, and he's going to do what he did with Tyson, tie him, rough him, make him miserable whilst all the time proving that he's not afraid. Offering up Hollyfield via late and draining stopage in a compelling match is my gut reaction.

But Liston is a different prospect, certainly to the version of Mike Evander has faced. His huge reach and great strength mean that he has that nice option of pushing Evander of and boxing him. It's quite possible that the reverse of the above may be true; perhaps Liston becomes Hollyfield's nightmare, keeping him at distance with his great strength and then hammering him with the jab. Power shots to the body when Hollyfield is on his way in. Leaning and pushing when it gets late, the proof that Liston is the big man as well as the boxer.

I think i'll go with my second thought. Liston in a late stoppage in what is car crash viewing as Hollyfield proves he has the heart of a champion going down in the 12th having given his all.


Of all the fights you could make in the history of the heavyweights i'd wand to see Louis-Tyson more; that's it.

Excellent response, echoing my thoughts exactly. You've saved me a heck of alot of typing. Well done.

Despite saying that, I'll go against the grain of your final outcome and say Holyfield- by way of close decision. This fight would most likely resemble a gruelling slugfest of attrition ....:good

[ChrisPontius]

Hard to tell, pretty much a 50/50 fight for me.

As in all fights of Holyfield, a deciding factor will be whether he decides to slug it out or box smartly. If he fights smart, i think he can book a decision.
People don't often mention it but Liston is VERY slow yet smaller than most of Holyfields (HW) opponents.

I give Holyfield, whose legacy may well grow after he's retired, a slight edge.

[Stonehands89]

I am a lifelong Holyfield fan.

But Liston would stop him. Not because of the skill differential or even the strength differential. Liston would stop him because Holyfield at his best couldn't suppress his love of battle. He fought to get respect and was less a strategist and more of an "impose the will" guy.

Against Tyson it worked.
Against Dokes it worked.
He broke both of them.

Against Bowe, it didn't work.
Against Lewis it didn't work.
Both were too strong.

....Liston is stronger than both of them. His physical presence in the ring oozed that heavy, leaden strength.

Do you remember how effective Bowe and Lewis (and Moorer! Hell, even Foreman!) were when they operated behind that jab? Their jabs were not especially fast, but they were solid. Why did the jabs work? Because Holyfield was looking to get in and work and was less aware of avoiding the jab. He became a great counter puncher and one of his defining performance was Bowe II but I really credit Steward for that one. Steward was the maestro. What Holyfield always heard in his head was Lou Duva screaming "get that respect! Get that respect!" during the Dokes fight.

Liston would jab him to death and wear him out like Moorer, Bowe, and Lewis never could and would close the show late after a barrage. Holyfield ain't moving Liston backwards, it's the other way around. And Holyfield would only survive if he fought a defensive fight -which was not in his nature.

[Raggamuffin]

Liton to strong, big and powerfull for Holy
Liston by late tko

[jyuza]

Mc Grain said it all, I agree with him.

Liston long reach won't allow Holy's jab to land which is the main weapon of the Real Deal.

Liston by late stoppage.

[Holmes' Jab]

Intriguing comments. I can sorta see why more people tend to favour Liston in this one, however for me it's still a pick 'em fight.

I suppose one point you could put foward is that the strategy Holyfield employs for this fight would be an essential factor in determining chance of winning it. It's no secret that Holyfield relished the tactic of brawling throughout various fights in his career (especially early on, sometimes to his detriment). I do, though think that (ala Tyson I fight) Evander would show respect for Sonny's sheer power from the get-go and aim to disrupt his rythmn- whether this works is another matter but worth a thought.

I just don't think this one would be as cut n' dry as some think it might be.

[JohnThomas1]

I am a lifelong Holyfield fan.

But Liston would stop him. Not because of the skill differential or even the strength differential. Liston would stop him because Holyfield at his best couldn't suppress his love of battle. He fought to get respect and was less a strategist and more of an "impose the will" guy.

Against Tyson it worked.
Against Dokes it worked.
He broke both of them.

Against Bowe, it didn't work.
Against Lewis it didn't work.
Both were too strong.

....Liston is stronger than both of them. His physical presence in the ring oozed that heavy, leaden strength.

Do you remember how effective Bowe and Lewis (and Moorer! Hell, even Foreman!) were when they operated behind that jab? Their jabs were not especially fast, but they were solid. Why did the jabs work? Because Holyfield was looking to get in and work and was less aware of avoiding the jab. He became a great counter puncher and one of his defining performance was Bowe II but I really credit Steward for that one. Steward was the maestro. What Holyfield always heard in his head was Lou Duva screaming "get that respect! Get that respect!" during the Dokes fight.

Liston would jab him to death and wear him out like Moorer, Bowe, and Lewis never could and would close the show late after a barrage. Holyfield ain't moving Liston backwards, it's the other way around. And Holyfield would only survive if he fought a defensive fight -which was not in his nature.

Man, you've won me over. Great insights.

[McGrain]

Man, you've won me over. Great insights.


Stonehands is becoming one of the preeminent posters around here IMO.

[ChrisPontius]

I am a lifelong Holyfield fan.

But Liston would stop him. Not because of the skill differential or even the strength differential. Liston would stop him because Holyfield at his best couldn't suppress his love of battle. He fought to get respect and was less a strategist and more of an "impose the will" guy.

Against Tyson it worked.
Against Dokes it worked.
He broke both of them.

Against Bowe, it didn't work.
Against Lewis it didn't work.
Both were too strong.

....Liston is stronger than both of them. His physical presence in the ring oozed that heavy, leaden strength.

Do you remember how effective Bowe and Lewis (and Moorer! Hell, even Foreman!) were when they operated behind that jab? Their jabs were not especially fast, but they were solid. Why did the jabs work? Because Holyfield was looking to get in and work and was less aware of avoiding the jab. He became a great counter puncher and one of his defining performance was Bowe II but I really credit Steward for that one. Steward was the maestro. What Holyfield always heard in his head was Lou Duva screaming "get that respect! Get that respect!" during the Dokes fight.

Liston would jab him to death and wear him out like Moorer, Bowe, and Lewis never could and would close the show late after a barrage. Holyfield ain't moving Liston backwards, it's the other way around. And Holyfield would only survive if he fought a defensive fight -which was not in his nature.

I have no problem with your pick, but i disagree somewhat with your comparisons. I strongly doubt that Liston at 6'0 208lb is stronger than either Bowe or Lewis, 6'5 240 lb. Liston looks a lot stronger because most of his opposition were cruiserweights. Outside of his reach, he has nothing on Holyfield if we're talking about size.
Wingspan (reach) is merely one factor of the jab. Another, much more important one is handspeed. Lewis had it. Bowe had it. Liston did not have it. He's slow as fuck compared to others. Holyfield could easily get past slow jabs even if they were longer than his, as you saw in his fights with Thomas, Dokes, Holmes and Foreman. He easily dominated them.
Holyfield easily moved Tyson back all night. Tyson was only one inch shorter than Liston and wider than Liston. Indeed couldn't handle Bowe and Lewis but they are much, much bigger and faster than Liston. And he did beat Bowe one time when he fought smart.

[JohnThomas1]

Stonehands is becoming one of the preeminent posters around here IMO.

Stonehands debates his choices as well as anyone anywhere. He convinced me on this one, i was hanging in the middle as i often do.

[Bad_Intentions]

liston's jab will massacre holyfield.

[C. M. Clay II]

I pick Liston here. Holyfield would be outjabbed adn outfought. It wouldn't matter if Holyfield kept Liston on the outside. Liston could beat him on the outside, the inside, or mid range. Liston could do it all. If Holyfield got inside, Liston would pound the body to the extent that Holy never experienced before. I'll give Holy maybe two rounds, but overall Liston would dominate in almost every way. Holyfield would be stopped mid to late rounds.

Sonny Liston TKO 11 Evander Holyfield:good

[Bad_Intentions]

tko? na.

KO yes ;)

[JimmyShimmy]

As ChrisPontius said, I doubt Liston was out-and-out stronger than Lennox Lewis.

[Stonehands89]

I have no problem with your pick, but i disagree somewhat with your comparisons. I strongly doubt that Liston at 6'0 208lb is stronger than either Bowe or Lewis, 6'5 240 lb. Liston looks a lot stronger because most of his opposition were cruiserweights. Outside of his reach, he has nothing on Holyfield if we're talking about size.
Wingspan (reach) is merely one factor of the jab. Another, much more important one is handspeed. Lewis had it. Bowe had it. Liston did not have it. He's slow as fuck compared to others. Holyfield could easily get past slow jabs even if they were longer than his, as you saw in his fights with Thomas, Dokes, Holmes and Foreman. He easily dominated them.
Holyfield easily moved Tyson back all night. Tyson was only one inch shorter than Liston and wider than Liston. Indeed couldn't handle Bowe and Lewis but they are much, much bigger and faster than Liston. And he did beat Bowe one time when he fought smart.
Let me begin by dismissing any comparison between Tyson and Liston in terms of physical strength. Tyson doesn't compare.
I figured there would be a couple of dissents with the 'strength' statement. You and Jimmyshimmy have stepped forward. This debate was done ad nauseum some months ago, and I wish I could just reference that debate... alas...

I place Liston and Foreman at top of the heap in that order when it comes to physical strength. Lennox is up there to, but behind them. I stand by the assertion that Liston was stronger than Lennox.

In sum, Liston was a juggernaut. His center of gravity was lower and he was thick all over. Lennox was longer and his strength was more dispersed over his frame. Earlier in his career, he could be moved and later as he gained weight, he was stronger, but just not at Liston's level.

If you look at the stats, they are comparable. You would think that Lennox would be bigger all over because of his height and what appears to be a great width on camera, but it's not so. The only big difference are height and weight -and again, Liston's weight was forced into a smaller space. Height is not a great indicator of strength although the layperson assumes exactly that. In fact, it may hurt the strength factor. To wit: Barbadoes Joe Walcott. Long guys can be expected to be weaker than juggernauts.

There is also a big difference of 3 inches in their fists. Liston's fist was 15 inches. Lewis's was 12.

Foreman's testimony has to be taken with a grain of salt, but when he said that the only man that he could not move in the ring was Liston, I believe it. It strikes me as credible.

[McGrain]

Foreman's testimony has to be taken with a grain of salt, but when he said that the only man that he could not move in the ring was Liston, I believe it. It strikes me as credible.

Me too. It was said, as I understand it, after Liston could be considered a credible challenger but before Foreman went mad and started saying lovely things about everyone. ("Joe Louis is the greatest heavyweight of all time! Ali was the greatest man to every hold the heavyweight title. But Lewis would have beaten them both!")

[Stonehands89]

Me too. It was said, as I understand it, after Liston could be considered a credible challenger but before Foreman went mad and started saying lovely things about everyone. ("Joe Louis is the greatest heavyweight of all time! Ali was the greatest man to every hold the heavyweight title. But Lewis would have beaten them both!")

Haha! Yes, Foreman went loopy in his second coming. In Champions Forever, he said that he feared Joe Frazier and was hoping during the pre-fight instructions that Joe didn't look down because his "knees were knocking."

Such bull. After Joe was down for like the umpteenth time, George stands over him posturing and yells something at the prostrate champ. It wasn't anything like "I'm afraid!"

[ChrisPontius]

In sum, Liston was a juggernaut. His center of gravity was lower and he was thick all over. Lennox was longer and his strength was more dispersed over his frame.

In a clinch it's a disadvantage to have a low center of gravity because the taller guy will simply lean on you, which is definitly gonna happen when there's a size disparity as large as 5 inches.

Lewis was longer but also wider framed than Liston. He's roughly 6% longer but 6% heavier than Liston would be around 225lb. He in fact weighed around 244lb.


Earlier in his career, he could be moved and later as he gained weight, he was stronger, but just not at Liston's level.

Watch Lewis-Weaver. This fight happened early in his career. Lewis shoves Weaver back effortlessly. Weaver, who is slightly larger than Liston and known for his incredible physical strength. Weaver was in or near his 40's, but strength is one of those things that increases as you get older. Lewis shoved back a lot of opponents. Notice that for the Weaver fight, Lewis hadn't filled out his 244lb frame yet.



If you look at the stats, they are comparable.

Let's look at the stats:
Liston: 6'0 212 lb
Lewis: 6'5 244 lb

You may bring up some calve measurement or whatever but they don't say shit. Some lightheavyweights only have an inch or so less than superheavyweights. Does that make them "actual superheavyweights"? No, of course not. Weight is the telling figure here provided both are in shape, which they are.


You would think that Lennox would be bigger all over because of his height and what appears to be a great width on camera, but it's not so. The only big difference are height and weight -and again, Liston's weight was forced into a smaller space. Height is not a great indicator of strength although the layperson assumes exactly that. In fact, it may hurt the strength factor. To wit: Barbadoes Joe Walcott. Long guys can be expected to be weaker than juggernauts.


I already pointed out that Lewis would've been around 225 if he had the same frame as Liston, but clearly he doesn't. And in clinches a height advantage of 5 inch will definitly lead to the taller man leaning on the smaller one.


There is also a big difference of 3 inches in their fists. Liston's fist was 15 inches. Lewis's was 12.


I guess Liston must be a lot stronger because of his bigger fists then.


Foreman's testimony has to be taken with a grain of salt, but when he said that the only man that he could not move in the ring was Liston, I believe it. It strikes me as credible.

As you said yourself, Foreman has little to no credibility when it comes to stories and legends. "I was hurt in the Frazier fight", "Audley Harrison will be the next undisputed champion and reign for years, no doubt about it", etc etc.



Regardless of this debate though, i think Holyfields speed is going to be a deciding factor because he easily outspeeds the relatively slow Liston.
Strength won't be THAT much of a factor... i think we can agree that even when you think Liston is stronger than Holyfield, there's not a world of difference between them. Holyfield did tons of weight training which certainly made him very strong.

[ChrisPontius]

Just because Liston was 6 feet tall and weighed in the 208-215 range does not mean he is not physically stronger than Lewis.

By that logic, Valuev who is 7 feet tall and over 300 pounds should hit harder than Tyson who was 5'10" - 5'11" and weighed 214 in his prime.

We were talking about strength, not punching power.

On top of that, Valuev does not have a lot of talent for boxing, he is simply HUGE and has an insane ability to absorb concussive damage which makes it possible for him to compete with top level boxers, but he's no Lewis or Liston.
Lewis and Liston both had great talent for boxing and punching power.

[Stonehands89]

In a clinch it's a disadvantage to have a low center of gravity because the taller guy will simply lean on you, which is definitly gonna happen when there's a size disparity as large as 5 inches.
This is all theoretical but I don't agree with much of what you say, except for the leaning part. Lennox leans on him. Okay. Liston shoves him off. If these two are both coming forward, you'll see Liston as the bull, not Lewis.

You also fail to account for disposition. Lewis did not have that ex-con, fuck the world attitude that Liston had. Lewis was not a menace. Liston was... and he gets the edge between the ears. Attitude is everything.

Lewis was longer but also wider framed than Liston. He's roughly 6% longer but 6% heavier than Liston would be around 225lb. He in fact weighed around 244lb.
Your calculations have a thousands false positives. And the fact remains that Lewis was longer and his strength was dispersed. Liston was the juggernaut. Look at the bench press. Short guys throw up more weight than long guys. Shorter guys are stronger if you apply a ceterus parabis because their strength is more concentrated. You dismiss that too easily.

Watch Lewis-Weaver. This fight happened early in his career. Lewis shoves Weaver back effortlessly. Weaver, who is slightly larger than Liston and known for his incredible physical strength. Weaver was in or near his 40's, but strength is one of those things that increases as you get older. Lewis shoved back a lot of opponents. Notice that for the Weaver fight, Lewis hadn't filled out his 244lb frame yet.
Sure, but so what? Lewis didn't usually fight behind physical strength... he would move backwards, he would step around, he would use strategy. The site of Lewis being lifted and thrown off balance pretty easily was not uncommon. Mercer was stronger than him and demonstrably so -and that was after Lewis had filled out.

Let's look at the stats:
Liston: 6'0 212 lb
Lewis: 6'5 244 lb

You may bring up some calve measurement or whatever but they don't say shit. Some lightheavyweights only have an inch or so less than superheavyweights. Does that make them "actual superheavyweights"? No, of course not. Weight is the telling figure here provided both are in shape, which they are.

Really?

Now look at Michael Grant's stats and watch your theory implode.

Grant: 6'7 250 lb.


I guess Liston must be a lot stronger because of his bigger fists then.
The point is simple. Lewis was a tall man with good size and the expected strength that attends that size. Liston had that freakish, leaden strength that you find every now and then in some guys. His fists were monstrous and his reach was as long as Lewis's. You won't find that very much.

As you said yourself, Foreman has little to no credibility when it comes to stories and legends. "I was hurt in the Frazier fight", "Audley Harrison will be the next undisputed champion and reign for years, no doubt about it", etc etc.
You should read the context of what I said and take a look at McGrain's response above.

Regardless of this debate though, i think Holyfields speed is going to be a deciding factor because he easily outspeeds the relatively slow Liston.
Strength won't be THAT much of a factor... i think we can agree that even when you think Liston is stronger than Holyfield, there's not a world of difference between them. Holyfield did tons of weight training which certainly made him very strong.
Holyfield's weight training strength was artificial. Liston's strength was God-given. The latter should be favored -sans steroids. And I think that this bout would indeed come down to strength first and foremost because Holyfield's "Warrior" label on his trunks would say "worn-out" by about round 9. Liston was too strong for him and would take those shots and put Holyfield squarely on the defensive. Are you going to tell me that Evander was comfortable there?

Holyfield has the speed edge but power goes to Liston and skill goes to Liston in my opinion. Strength would be the deciding factor considering that Holyfield would have to sacrifice his normal strategy and his disposition, or get manhandled. Liston ain't Tyson.

[ChrisPontius]

You also fail to account for disposition. Lewis did not have that ex-con, fuck the world attitude that Liston had. Lewis was not a menace. Liston was... and he gets the edge between the ears. Attitude is everything.

Sorry, i totally forgot that Listons menacing ex-con fuck the world attitude made him quit twice in his biggest fights.

Lewis has never been intimidated nor quit blatantly like that.



Your calculations have a thousands false positives.

Be welcome to point them out.



And the fact remains that Lewis was longer and his strength was dispersed. Liston was the juggernaut. Look at the bench press. Short guys throw up more weight than long guys. Shorter guys are stronger if you apply a ceterus parabis because their strength is more concentrated. You dismiss that too easily.

As i've pointed out before, Lewis is wider than Liston despite the big height advantage. And it's not a bench pressing contest in the ring. During a clinch it's very easy when you can lean on the other guy. This costs a ton of energy and frustation for the other, as he has to fight gravity of the taller man as well.


Sure, but so what? Lewis didn't usually fight behind physical strength... he would move backwards, he would step around, he would use strategy. The site of Lewis being lifted and thrown off balance pretty easily was not uncommon. Mercer was stronger than him and demonstrably so -and that was after Lewis had filled out.

How did Mercer demonstrate that? It was Lewis who leaned on him and who tied him up when he wanted to.

Note that of the last 4 rounds, Lewis lost only 1 round. Mercer was tiring badly from that leaning on him. Lewis threw 40% more punches than Mercer, yet still it was Mercer who tired.


Really?

Now look at Michael Grant's stats and watch your theory implode.

Grant: 6'7 250 lb.


I wouldn't be suprised if Grant was stronger than Lewis. He certainly wasn't weaker, going by the few minutes they shared in the ring.
There's less difference, though. Lewis was 247 lb against 250 lb Grant.
That's 3 pounds difference. Between Lewis and Liston the difference is ten TIMES more than that and 5 inches in height, instead of 2.


The point is simple. Lewis was a tall man with good size and the expected strength that attends that size. Liston had that freakish, leaden strength that you find every now and then in some guys. His fists were monstrous and his reach was as long as Lewis's. You won't find that very much.

His wingspan was as long as Lewis, but because Lewis is taller he will be the one with the longer actual "reach".


You should read the context of what I said and take a look at McGrain's response above.

I did and i still don't find Foremans words credible. It may or may not have been true, but i don't trust his word on it.
Interesting sidenote is that Foreman is roughly to Liston as Liston is to Marciano in size.


Holyfield's weight training strength was artificial. Liston's strength was God-given. The latter should be favored -sans steroids. And I think that this bout would indeed come down to strength first and foremost because Holyfield's "Warrior" label on his trunks would say "worn-out" by about round 9. Liston was too strong for him and would take those shots and put Holyfield squarely on the defensive. Are you going to tell me that Evander was comfortable there?

Holyfield fought tons of guys with God-given strength but he nearly always come out on top with his artificial strength. Steroids or not.
Holyfield will probably be the counter puncher which is a good strategy because Liston is so slow. As i've said before, if he fights stupid as he did often then he loses, maybe by knockout.




Holyfield has the speed edge but power goes to Liston and skill goes to Liston in my opinion. Strength would be the deciding factor considering that Holyfield would have to sacrifice his normal strategy and his disposition, or get manhandled. Liston ain't Tyson.

I don't think Liston has that much of a skill advantage. Holyfield is very skilled; dominated Dokes, Thomas, Douglas, old Foreman & Holmes, squeezed out a win against a much bigger man in Bowe, manhandled Tyson quite easily when past his best even when exchanging punches (counter punching) at close range.
Liston and Tyson don't compare well except for power and height. Holyfield had little trouble blocking Tysons attacks and countering him though, and Tyson is lightyears ahead of Liston in terms of both hand and footspeed.

[Stonehands89]

Sorry, i totally forgot that Listons menacing ex-con fuck the world attitude made him quit twice in his biggest fights.
Lewis has never been intimidated nor quit blatantly like that.
Clay was not considered his biggest fight by any stretch. He didn't train and it showed. He was 5 years past his prime. The second fight was a fix. Liston was mean and he was nasty. Do you deny this? Attitude matters in ping-pong and it matters much more in boxing. Liston fought like the stronger man. Lewis often didn't.

If Blinky Palermo and co. could intimidate Liston, they would have intimidated Lennox Lewis, trust that.

As i've pointed out before, Lewis is wider than Liston despite the big height advantage. And it's not a bench pressing contest in the ring. During a clinch it's very easy when you can lean on the other guy. This costs a ton of energy and frustation for the other, as he has to fight gravity of the taller man as well.
As per the false positive point... change the thousands to millions. Just because a guy have height and weight does not necessarily translate into superior strength in combat or in strength contests. Hell, even in the strong man contests in Europe, the biggest guy usually does not win.

How did Mercer demonstrate that? It was Lewis who leaned on him and who tied him up when he wanted to. Note that of the last 4 rounds, Lewis lost only 1 round. Mercer was tiring badly from that leaning on him. Lewis threw 40% more punches than Mercer, yet still it was Mercer who tired.
Watch the fight again... and ask yourself this question: who is the bull and who is the matador? If you can't see that Mercer is the one forcing Lewis to the ropes and moving him backwards, then I don't know what to tell you. Sure, Lennox would shove him off at times, but who was the boss in there in terms of strength? Mercer. Who was the better boxer? Lewis. (By the way, Mercer got tired during the last rounds in every fight he was ever in.)

Your whole argument about superior strenght revolves around 2 points: the height and weight factor, which is simply inadequate, and the "who's leaning on who" factor -which is not the same as physical strength. To decide who the stronger man, I'd say we determine who is moving who, who is the bull, and who is the matador, or who would be better suited as the matador.

I wouldn't be suprised if Grant was stronger than Lewis. He certainly wasn't weaker, going by the few minutes they shared in the ring.
There's less difference, though. Lewis was 247 lb against 250 lb Grant.
That's 3 pounds difference. Between Lewis and Liston the difference is ten TIMES more than that and 5 inches in height, instead of 2.
Come on! Grant looked like a limp rag doll within a minute in there. He is a lanky man with muscle.

His wingspan was as long as Lewis, but because Lewis is taller he will be the one with the longer actual "reach".

..not if Liston is smashing his chest and sternum which is straight across. Let's not forget that Lewis often fought smaller too when he warred.

I did and i still don't find Foremans words credible. It may or may not have been true, but i don't trust his word on it.
Interesting sidenote is that Foreman is roughly to Liston as Liston is to Marciano in size.
... And Marciano was enormously strong.

Holyfield fought tons of guys with God-given strength but he nearly always come out on top with his artificial strength. Steroids or not.
Holyfield will probably be the counter puncher which is a good strategy because Liston is so slow. As i've said before, if he fights stupid as he did often then he loses, maybe by knockout.
Holyfield came out on top because of his determination, underrated punching power, precision, and chin. Liston is slower but his shots were so heavy it wouldn't matter. Liston would be tearing Holyfield's athletic waistline up and banging his arms. Also, Liston had a good repertoire of shots that you seem to overlook. Holyfield would counter him but he would exchange with him just as much... and he'd be forced on the backfoot at the same time.

Holyfield didn't fight stupid -he based his game on his will and bravery even when it wasn't in his best interests. That is why Liston would win. Too much artillery. Too concussive a jab. Too much strength.

I agree that Holyfield is well-schooled, but we agree that Liston has the edge here, however slight.

[precision]

liston would stop holyfield.

[Stonehands89]

liston would stop holyfield.

Let us into your head. How and why would Liston stop Holyfield? Granted you run the risk of crucifixion if your argument is found wanting, but this isn't the general forum. You are encouraged to share your reasoning, even if you have to defend it.

[Irish Steel]

Well, Liston had that very imposing look about him. I always thought that he would try to scare his opponents to death. Same with tyson, he intimidated his opponents too. But we all know that it didnt work against Holyfield. So i dont think that holyfield would have been scared. He would have tried to avoid listons jab, and use his inside game.

It could go either way i think, but neither by KO. Points the likeliest, then tko.


Liston by points.

[Stonehands89]

Well, Liston had that very imposing look about him. I always thought that he would try to scare his opponents to death. Same with tyson, he intimidated his opponents too. But we all know that it didnt work against Holyfield. So i dont think that holyfield would have been scared. He would have tried to avoid listons jab, and use his inside game.

It could go either way i think, but neither by KO. Points the likeliest, then tko
Liston by points.

Fair enough --Holyfield was described by Duva as having "ice water in his veins." He was fearless.

[ChrisPontius]

Clay was not considered his biggest fight by any stretch. He didn't train and it showed. He was 5 years past his prime. The second fight was a fix. Liston was mean and he was nasty. Do you deny this? Attitude matters in ping-pong and it matters much more in boxing. Liston fought like the stronger man. Lewis often didn't.


5 years past his prime? He just came off his career best wins & performances. If his prime ended in 1959, then when did it start? 1958? That'd be a very short prime, especially for a boxer-puncher.
Liston was mean and nasty against smaller men that he could beat. When he was in against someone who frustrated him and outboxed him, he quit on his stool and didn't look particularly mean and nasty in doing so.



As per the false positive point... change the thousands to millions. Just because a guy have height and weight does not necessarily translate into superior strength in combat or in strength contests. Hell, even in the strong man contests in Europe, the biggest guy usually does not win.

No, but the bigger guys do lift more on average and i think we can agree that both Lewis and Liston score on the higher end of the scale in terms of strength. When that's the case i'd rather go with the bigger guy.



Watch the fight again... and ask yourself this question: who is the bull and who is the matador? If you can't see that Mercer is the one forcing Lewis to the ropes and moving him backwards, then I don't know what to tell you. Sure, Lennox would shove him off at times, but who was the boss in there in terms of strength? Mercer. Who was the better boxer? Lewis. (By the way, Mercer got tired during the last rounds in every fight he was ever in.)


Yes, Mercer has a come-forward style and Lewis tied him up when he wanted to and controlled him there. Of course he didn't do this especially early in the fight which caused him to lose a lot of rounds.
I'd say Lewis was the boss in terms of strength. If we're talking about who can take a better shot yet keep plodding forward, then it's Mercer of course.



Your whole argument about superior strenght revolves around 2 points: the height and weight factor, which is simply inadequate, and the "who's leaning on who" factor -which is not the same as physical strength. To decide who the stronger man, I'd say we determine who is moving who, who is the bull, and who is the matador, or who would be better suited as the matador.


In the end these things are impossible to decide. Sometimes a fighter is wild and wastes a lot of energy on moving the bigger guy around for a few rounds and looks stronger because of that, sometimes a fighter doesn't bother to do anything in the clinches even when he probably can (Tyson for instance).
Who would be moving who? I think Lewis will move Liston around because he is bigger, has proven strength against BIG opponents, not cruiserweights like Liston and he can lean on him whenever he wants.
Liston will probably come forward because he's the smaller man. So Lewis will play the matador.



Come on! Grant looked like a limp rag doll within a minute in there. He is a lanky man with muscle.

Yeah that's because he has a weak chin and after he got nailed once or twice he never got his legs back. But it's not like Lewis threw him around or anything. His punches did that, not his strength in terms of pushing, shoving or anything.


..not if Liston is smashing his chest and sternum which is straight across. Let's not forget that Lewis often fought smaller too when he warred.


Yep he could.. that was Lewis' weakness. Although i think a jab to the nose scores more points than a jab to the sternum.


Holyfield came out on top because of his determination, underrated punching power, precision, and chin. Liston is slower but his shots were so heavy it wouldn't matter. Liston would be tearing Holyfield's athletic waistline up and banging his arms. Also, Liston had a good repertoire of shots that you seem to overlook. Holyfield would counter him but he would exchange with him just as much... and he'd be forced on the backfoot at the same time.

Holyfield didn't fight stupid -he based his game on his will and bravery even when it wasn't in his best interests. That is why Liston would win. Too much artillery. Too concussive a jab. Too much strength.


Fighting on will and bravery when it isn't in your best interest is fighting stupid in my opinion. It's a great, crowd pleasing style but also one that makes you lose fights when you don't have to.
And yes, if he fights stupid than Liston has the edge, no doubt about it.


I agree that Holyfield is well-schooled, but we agree that Liston has the edge here, however slight.

Hmm, i'd say Liston and Holyfield are roughly equal in strength - if there is difference between them then i don't think it will be enough to become a major factor in the fight. A bit like Lewis vs Klitschko, roughly equal strength.

[Stonehands89]

5 years past his prime? He just came off his career best wins & performances. If his prime ended in 1959, then when did it start? 1958? That'd be a very short prime, especially for a boxer-puncher.
I think Duran peaked in 1978. I think Ali peaked in 1967. I surmise that Robinson peaked in the late 40's somewhere. It's tough to call because there is little film of Robinson as a WW and there is not much of Liston either. From what I see, that was the year that Liston was in the midst of a KO streak against contenders. He was hungry and was forcing a title shot by clearing the field.
Liston was mean and nasty against smaller men that he could beat. When he was in against someone who frustrated him and outboxed him, he quit on his stool and didn't look particularly mean and nasty in doing so.
Ahhh, you simplify Liston. I'd bet my car that 1959 Liston ruins 1964 Clay.

No, but the bigger guys do lift more on average and i think we can agree that both Lewis and Liston score on the higher end of the scale in terms of strength. When that's the case i'd rather go with the bigger guy.
I prefer the juggernaut. Powerhouse 'squares' are stronger than Athletic V's.

Yes, Mercer has a come-forward style and Lewis tied him up when he wanted to and controlled him there. Of course he didn't do this especially early in the fight which caused him to lose a lot of rounds.
I'd say Lewis was the boss in terms of strength. If we're talking about who can take a better shot yet keep plodding forward, then it's Mercer of course.
If Mercer is coming forward, and Lewis was coming forward, then the one who moved backward is safely assumed to be less strong. Lewis didn't fight like that and I am not so sure that he should be assumed stronger since he is taller and heavier.

In the end these things are impossible to decide. Sometimes a fighter is wild and wastes a lot of energy on moving the bigger guy around for a few rounds and looks stronger because of that, sometimes a fighter doesn't bother to do anything in the clinches even when he probably can (Tyson for instance).
True... Lewis was smarter for stepping around at angles and stepping backwards to achieve punching room. A while back posters were saying that Tyson was weak because he didn't do much in the clinch. Tyson was explosive and took the clinch as a rest ---which is smart. I always took them as mini-breaks, not 'tests of strength'. Boxing is about punching not wrestling.

Who would be moving who? I think Lewis will move Liston around because he is bigger, has proven strength against BIG opponents, not cruiserweights like Liston and he can lean on him whenever he wants.
Liston will probably come forward because he's the smaller man. So Lewis will play the matador.
Lewis will sacrifice the status of bull. You say it will be strategic, I agree but add to it that he will find Liston too strong to bull around.

Yeah that's because he has a weak chin and after he got nailed once or twice he never got his legs back. But it's not like Lewis threw him around or anything. His punches did that, not his strength in terms of pushing, shoving or anything.
Grant never looked physically powerful in there. He was too long. Now if he were a very large square, then there you go. He was a V and V's are not powerlifters... they are "body builders". Grant was an athlete with the attitude of an athlete (there it is again!). He was no killer. He had no malicious intentions. I think weak chins are often (not always) connected to unsure brains. Think Descartes: "I think [my chin is iron] therefore I am [therefore it is]."

Fighting on will and bravery when it isn't in your best interest is fighting stupid in my opinion. It's a great, crowd pleasing style but also one that makes you lose fights when you don't have to.
And yes, if he fights stupid than Liston has the edge, no doubt about it.
Holyfield has risen far beyond where he would have been expected to rise considering his small frame. He did it "his way" and I would stop short of calling his strategy against Dokes, Tyson, et al. fighting "stupid". So the circle is complete: Holyfield was able to impose his will against those two strong men. He wasn't able to do the same against Bowe and Lewis. Neither would he against Liston. We all have our limits. Styles do too. Liston would beat him because of who Holyfield was and how he virtually always fought -not because of how he 'should' fight.

Put it this way, if you were his trainer, and you were able to do for him what Steward did in Bowe II, I'd give Holyfield a better shot.

Hmm, i'd say Liston and Holyfield are roughly equal in strength - if there is difference between them then i don't think it will be enough to become a major factor in the fight. A bit like Lewis vs Klitschko, roughly equal strength..
Nah, Liston is far stronger than Holyfield. Holyfield was surprisingly strong, but he is not in Liston's league. I take 'natural' over 'artificial' all day.

[McGrain]

Nah, Liston is far stronger than Holyfield. Holyfield was surprisingly strong, but he is not in Liston's league. I take 'natural' over 'artificial' all day.

Liston's strength would be the deciding factor IMO.

I'd be prepared to pick Hollyfield if it could be proved that he was as strong as Liston or stronger.

Seems unlikely though.

[ChrisPontius]

I think Duran peaked in 1978. I think Ali peaked in 1967. I surmise that Robinson peaked in the late 40's somewhere. It's tough to call because there is little film of Robinson as a WW and there is not much of Liston either. From what I see, that was the year that Liston was in the midst of a KO streak against contenders. He was hungry and was forcing a title shot by clearing the field.


Hold on here for a second.
You said Liston was 6 years past his prime in 1964, but now you are saying his peak was in 1959. Agreed with the latter, but saying that he was past his prime right after he peaked is stretching it a bit in my opinion.
Tyson against Douglas was in his prime but not as his peak. Same with Foreman against Young. Same with Liston against Ali.


Ahhh, you simplify Liston. I'd bet my car that 1959 Liston ruins 1964 Clay.

Well that's a different topic/debate on its own, but my point was that someone who quits when he holds the championship of the world doesn't do justice to being "mean and nasty".


If Mercer is coming forward, and Lewis was coming forward, then the one who moved backward is safely assumed to be less strong. Lewis didn't fight like that and I am not so sure that he should be assumed stronger since he is taller and heavier.

Again, this is more a matter of styles than of strength. Lewis can work from the outside with the jab and has by far the longer reach, so it is stylistic to his advantage to stay away from Mercer. Not because he is less strong.


True... Lewis was smarter for stepping around at angles and stepping backwards to achieve punching room. A while back posters were saying that Tyson was weak because he didn't do much in the clinch. Tyson was explosive and took the clinch as a rest ---which is smart. I always took them as mini-breaks, not 'tests of strength'. Boxing is about punching not wrestling.


Couldn't agree more, although i do think Tyson should've done more in the inside during some fights. When he's fighting someone with a long reach who ties him up on the inside/from mid range, he can't do much if he does nothing on the inside.



Grant never looked physically powerful in there. He was too long. Now if he were a very large square, then there you go. He was a V and V's are not powerlifters... they are "body builders". Grant was an athlete with the attitude of an athlete (there it is again!). He was no killer. He had no malicious intentions. I think weak chins are often (not always) connected to unsure brains. Think Descartes: "I think [my chin is iron] therefore I am [therefore it is]."


I think it's the other way around: when a fighter discovers he can't take a punch well, he's likely to fight cautious and protect that weakness. In this case mentality is formed by physical events.



Holyfield has risen far beyond where he would have been expected to rise considering his small frame. He did it "his way" and I would stop short of calling his strategy against Dokes, Tyson, et al. fighting "stupid". So the circle is complete: Holyfield was able to impose his will against those two strong men. He wasn't able to do the same against Bowe and Lewis. Neither would he against Liston. We all have our limits. Styles do too. Liston would beat him because of who Holyfield was and how he virtually always fought -not because of how he 'should' fight.

Put it this way, if you were his trainer, and you were able to do for him what Steward did in Bowe II, I'd give Holyfield a better shot.


This is what i'm trying to say; if Holyfield has the right gameplan and actually sticks to it (which is no given) then he can pull it off.



Nah, Liston is far stronger than Holyfield. Holyfield was surprisingly strong, but he is not in Liston's league. I take 'natural' over 'artificial' all day.

Well, ok. That's purely subjective. We can only disagree here.

[Stonehands89]

Hold on here for a second.
You said Liston was 6 years past his prime in 1964, but now you are saying his peak was in 1959. Agreed with the latter, but saying that he was past his prime right after he peaked is stretching it a bit in my opinion. Tyson against Douglas was in his prime but not as his peak. Same with Foreman against Young. Same with Liston against Ali.
I said 5 years past his prime, meaning his best. Liston was probably older than widely assumed. His "best" seemed to me to be right around 1959. That is the Liston I submit in head-to-heads.

This may be a matter of semantics.

Well that's a different topic/debate on its own, but my point was that someone who quits when he holds the championship of the world doesn't do justice to being "mean and nasty".
It's tough to be mean and nasty when you are not at your best. Duran wasn't mean and nasty against Lang, but he was against Moore.

Again, this is more a matter of styles than of strength. Lewis can work from the outside with the jab and has by far the longer reach, so it is stylistic to his advantage to stay away from Mercer. Not because he is less strong.
Sure, but if we are making deductions based on evidence, when I see Mercer coming forward, Lewis backing off, and Mercer bulling Lewis into the ropes, I deduce that Mercer is probably stronger. You assume that Lewis is stronger based on assumptions. I deduce it based on first-hand observations of the flow of the fight.

Now you can say it is purely strategy and I may even agree... but then we are both making an assumption.

Couldn't agree more, although i do think Tyson should've done more in the inside during some fights. When he's fighting someone with a long reach who ties him up on the inside/from mid range, he can't do much if he does nothing on the inside.
Agreed... but Tyson was looking for angles if he wasn't looking for breathers. I don't think he was stronger than most of his foes.

I think it's the other way around: when a fighter discovers he can't take a punch well, he's likely to fight cautious and protect that weakness. In this case mentality is formed by physical events.
Perhaps we are both right here, depending on the boxer.

This is what i'm trying to say; if Holyfield has the right gameplan and actually sticks to it (which is no given) then he can pull it off.
Possibly... Holyfield is hard to pick against. But I find it easier to pick against him when he is facing superior strength and a long jab.

[mcvey]

Prime for prime, 15 rounds. Who wins this one?
I think Holyfield has a real shot at this one but his warriors mentality would come back to bite him in the arse,when Sonny hurts him he will fire back and get into a brawl not a smart move against the Bear,Liston by ko 9 th rnd.

[robert ungurean]

This is a tough call
The different cenerios are pretty much explained.
My gut feeling is Liston by tight decision.

[tommygun711]

it would depend on how Holyfield would fight Liston, if he brawled with him then I don't think that would be very smart at all.
but if he counter punched and used his footwork like he did against foreman and in the second bowe fight, I think he may be able to make a UD
but I would just have to take Liston in this one.

[djanders]

In my opinion, Liston would have some early moments, but, in the end, Holyfield would win over 15 rounds.

[SuzieQ49]

Liston by mid round stoppage. Liston would trick Holyfield into brawling with him and holy can not match liston in punching power and physical strength. Another key point is Liston's left jab. Holyfield did not like long jabs in his face(Bowe, Foreman, Lewis)..Liston's long 84" hammer would really throw evander off his game plan.

[jaffay]

If the fight goes over 6-7 rounds (I think it will) Holyfield takes it. Holyfield has the heart and courage to continue fighting even if he is decked by Liston early. Holyfield that outboxed ol' Foreman would dance around Liston and rally to get the decision.

[Hookie]

I'm somewhat surprised that 20 out of 39 picked Liston by KO. I'm not saying Liston wasn't great but how many fighters with the chin and ability of Holyfield's did he ever KO?

Patterson was a great fighter but he was down more than any other HW champ ever (20 times). Vs. Johansson (9 times), Liston (4 times), and Quarry (2 times) he was down 15 times! Holyfield was much more durable than Patterson.

Machen and Folley were very good boxers. Machen had the better chin and he did last the distance vs. Liston (W12 Liston). Folley was stopped in 3. Holyfield was much more durable than Folley.

[PetethePrince]

Holyfield would win. The myth of Liston would get crushed again.

Holyfield would be disciplined knowing Liston's aura and will use the right tactics.

I don't buy that Holyfield couldn't suppress his love for brawling. Watch his fights with Bowe II, Foreman, Tyson, etc.

Holyfield is going to finish stronger.

What's interesting is I'm not sure which Holyfield has a better chance. Holyfield of 91-92 or Holyfield of 94-97? A bigger, stocker Holyfield might be more immovable and durable. I also think that this Holyfield is stronger than Liston, physically.

[Hookie]

Holyfield pre-Moorer (1994) was the best version of Holyfield IMO. He took Bowe lightly in late '92 but stuck to a good fight plan in '93 and avenged the loss.

Don't be fooled by the wins over Tyson (1996-97) or even the win over Moorer (1997).

The younger Holyfield was quicker, had better legs, a higher workrate, stuck to his fight plan better, and was more elusive.

IMO, Holyfield would have beat Tyson at any point. They were both past prime when they did fight.

With that said, I'll take Holyfield over Liston.

[SuzieQ49]

I'm somewhat surprised that 20 out of 39 picked Liston by KO. I'm not saying Liston wasn't great but how many fighters with the chin and ability of Holyfield's did he ever KO?

.

Perhaps none. But how did Holyfield compete against men of similiar skill, power, tools of liston?

He fought Bowe and Lennox, who both sport 84" reaches like liston, and have similiar power and strength like liston. Holyfield only went 1-4 against these men.

Holyfield was nearly stopped by substitute journeyman Bert Cooper, taken 10 life or death rounds by Michael Dokes, and struggled tremdously with 44 year old Foremans and Holmes.

Holyfield was not the dominant fighter liston was in his prime. Holy struggled with all different kids of fighters. liston wiped out the top 10 very effectively.



In this matchup, I feel holyfield would be inclined to brawl to be able to get away from liston's jab. This would bring doom for evander. Evander was badly hurt, stopped by much less punchers than liston...even during his prime years.

[SuzieQ49]

With that said, I'll take Holyfield over Liston.

How? Why?


You say pre 1993. Well during that time period Holyfield was very inconsistent. He was nearly kayoed by a late sub journeyman Bert Cooper. He struggled to beat 45 year old versions of Holmes and Foreman. He also was outslugged at times by Michael Dokes. Holyfield simply was never that dominant a fighter at heavyweight. Liston was. Holyfield throuought his heavyweight career had trouble with long jabs, and had the bad tendency to brawl against stronger powerful fighters, allowing himself to be outslugged at times. Both these weaknesses will be capitalized on by liston.

[SuzieQ49]

Watch his fights with Bowe, Foreman, Tyson, etc.

I did

Bowe went 2-1 against him. Bowe was not as good as liston. Liston, like bowe, had a very long left jab, and was a terrific inside fighter. Liston was more powerful than bowe.

Foreman who was 42, slow, fat, and easy to outbox, gave evander a very difficult time. This was a fighter who was shutout by glass jaw tommy morrison. Foreman in the 1990s was not that good. He still landed his jab on evander at will. A prime liston is a different animal than a 45 year old foreman.

Tyson fights are nice, but tyson fought nothing like liston. so I don't see the resemblance. This was also not a prime 1980s mike tyson in there.

[bodhi]

Let me begin by dismissing any comparison between Tyson and Liston in terms of physical strength. Tyson doesn't compare.
I figured there would be a couple of dissents with the 'strength' statement. You and Jimmyshimmy have stepped forward. This debate was done ad nauseum some months ago, and I wish I could just reference that debate... alas...

I place Liston and Foreman at top of the heap in that order when it comes to physical strength. Lennox is up there to, but behind them. I stand by the assertion that Liston was stronger than Lennox.

In sum, Liston was a juggernaut. His center of gravity was lower and he was thick all over. Lennox was longer and his strength was more dispersed over his frame. Earlier in his career, he could be moved and later as he gained weight, he was stronger, but just not at Liston's level.

If you look at the stats, they are comparable. You would think that Lennox would be bigger all over because of his height and what appears to be a great width on camera, but it's not so. The only big difference are height and weight -and again, Liston's weight was forced into a smaller space. Height is not a great indicator of strength although the layperson assumes exactly that. In fact, it may hurt the strength factor. To wit: Barbadoes Joe Walcott. Long guys can be expected to be weaker than juggernauts.

There is also a big difference of 3 inches in their fists. Liston's fist was 15 inches. Lewis's was 12.

Foreman's testimony has to be taken with a grain of salt, but when he said that the only man that he could not move in the ring was Liston, I believe it. It strikes me as credible.

Hm, where do you see Jack Johnson and Jim Jeffries in the strength departement? Personally, I think they are up there with Foreman and Liston.



Regardless of this debate though, i think Holyfields speed is going to be a deciding factor because he easily outspeeds the relatively slow Liston.
Strength won't be THAT much of a factor... i think we can agree that even when you think Liston is stronger than Holyfield, there's not a world of difference between them. Holyfield did tons of weight training which certainly made him very strong.

Depends how Holy fights. If he goes to war strength will be more important than speed and I see Liston winning that one on points. If Holy boxes his speed will be very important. I can see Holyfield winning this fight but speed is beaten by a good timed jab. This is one of Liston´s strength and Liston has the longer reach too. Holy can win it if it becomes a boxing match but I wouldn´t bet on it. Overall I´d favour Liston.

[SuzieQ49]

Jeffries did not know how to apply his strength in the ring. That is why super middleweights whom he outweighed by nearly 40lb were able to go many many rounds with him. How long does Choysnki, Fitzsimmons, Sharkey last with a foreman or liston? I give them each 2 rounds apiece.


Johnson's different. He knew how to manhandle smaller fighters. Ketchell and Burns could be seen getting tossed around on film.


Another name is Rocky Marciano. Charles, Walcott, Louis, Moore none of them said he was the hardest hitter they faced. However, all 4 of them said rocky was "Far and away the STRONGEST fighter i ever fought". Rocky had that short stocky freakish type strength.

Pause at :50 seconds
[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Hookie]

How? Why?


You say pre 1993. Well during that time period Holyfield was very inconsistent. He was nearly kayoed by a late sub journeyman Bert Cooper. He struggled to beat 45 year old versions of Holmes and Foreman. He also was outslugged at times by Michael Dokes. Holyfield simply was never that dominant a fighter at heavyweight. Liston was. Holyfield throuought his heavyweight career had trouble with long jabs, and had the bad tendency to brawl against stronger powerful fighters, allowing himself to be outslugged at times. Both these weaknesses will be capitalized on by liston.

Inconsistent? Really?

Holyfield went undefeated from late 1984 - late 1992. During that time he went 28-0 (22) overall and 10-0 (7) in World Title fights. At that point he was 4-0 (1) vs. Hall of Famers Qawi x2, Foreman, and Holmes.

How in the hell is that inconsistent?

His first loss was to Bowe at the age of 30. He used to make Bowe quit during sparring sessions and took a win over Bowe for granted... he paid for it. He was much better in the rematch even if Bowe wasn't... he rocked Bowe several times and won a decisive decision even though one judge had it even.

After the win over Bowe he should have retired... but we would have never seen him beat Tyson. Both men were past prime in '96 but Holyfield rose to the occasion and beat the man he always knew he could beat.

As for Liston? He was great but he seems to get better and better with each year that passes, I don't get it.

[SuzieQ49]

Inconsistent? Really?

Yes. Believe it or not, nearly losing to journeyman, struggling to beat very old man, and losing to a light-heavyweight constitutes inconsistency.

At that point he was 4-0 (1) vs. Hall of Famers Qawi x2, Foreman, and Holmes.

Are you really bringing up tremendous struggles against 45 year old men and a split decision win over a 5'7 fighter as means to support your arguement?

His first loss was to Bowe at the age of 30. He used to make Bowe quit during sparring sessions and took a win over Bowe for granted..

Don't make excuses. He got his ass kicked by Bowe. Plain and Simple.

he rocked Bowe several times and won a decisive decision even though one judge had it even.

Disagree. Ive seen the fight. It was very close. Close enough that I don't know who won. I scored it 114-114. I am not alone in that opinion.


After the win over Bowe he should have retired... but we would have never seen him beat Tyson. Both men were past prime in '96 but Holyfield rose to the occasion and beat the man he always knew he could beat.


Well,

I think the 88 tyson knocks out Evander. However, that is a completely different thread.


As for Liston? He was great but he seems to get better and better with each year that passes, I don't get it.

Perhaps people are opening their eyes and realizing just how dominant a force this guy was in his era, and in the ring.

[choklab]

people forget how tough and durable holyfeild was. only bowe Ko'd holyfield and evender was experiencing some strange stuff that night, holyfield had something wrong with him an asthma atack or something. remeber he could not folow up when he had bowe helpless. thats the trouble with holyfeild he had some strange nights but he always had heart. when he lost to moorer there was something wrong with his shoulders and a heart defect there are resons why he did not perform.

an in form holyfeild is beter than anyone liston beat. an in form evander is tougher and more durable than anyone liston beat. I always give liston a chance with anyone since he had so many qualitys but evander was just beter than all the guys liston beat. when evander got hurt he always came back with fire and he could realy put his shots together well.

The key to beat liston was landing consecutive shots and breaking his momentum. Not many people were good enough to land consecutive shots on liston since he hurt so many guys before they adjusted to his range. sonny could always reach you. sonny could also shorten his range meaning he was potent at all times but evander knew how to use his angles and was very sharp. buster douglas had a great jab (as long as listons) but faster yet evander would beat buster to the draw and pick him off. a fired up holyfeild was hard to beat. remember liston does not have the giants advantage that bowe and lewis had. without heart or shoulder problems I fancy a fired up evander doing liston in prety good style.

[SuzieQ49]

. remember liston does not have the giants advantage that bowe and lewis had

But he did have their giant reach advantage 84". Evander hated long left jabs.


Liston also had 15" fists, bigger than anyone else in history
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[choklab]

But he did have their giant reach advantage 84". Evander hated long left jabs.


Yes he had their reach as did buster douglas, holmes and valuv. I scored the first lewis fight even (in rounds not punches) and the second fight I had evander winning but they were both close. holyfeild simply fought the wrong fight against bowe first time around but he did lose it. the second one bowe was fortunate there was a fan man in the ring evander was kicking his ass but the 20 min break alowed bowe back into it, fan man made it close not bowes reach. the third one evander should have won by KO. It was more a case of holy losing than bowe winning it.


Liston also had 15" fists, bigger than anyone else in history theres no doubt liston had freakish proportions but apart from some exceptions against guys a pound or so within his own weight or more (he only fought 6 guys heavier) he did not make a monster inmpresion as he did on the likes of intimidated floyd or tiny westphal or outmatched harris all considrably smaller. I think evander gets unaswered 3 punch combos on liston dispite sonnys bigger hands.
[Only registered and activated users can see links]
[Only registered and activated users can see links][/quote]

[jhar26]

Since a second career Foreman still managed to give a prime Holyfield a good fight my money would be on a prime Liston to KO Evander somewhere between, say, the 7th and 10th round. Holyfield might be ahead on the scorecards at the time, but Sonny will get him eventually.

[DocDevil]

I like Evander,what he did to Tyson, you really have to respect his taming of the beast.Sonny is my favorite,and I am no doubt biased,I just think Evander can't resist punching it out and gets busted up.8 or nine round stoppage,with Sonny the winner.

[redrooster]

Prime for prime, 15 rounds. Who wins this one?

I hate to say it, I dont even like Holyfield, but he is more athletic than Liston probably better schooled and would win on points

[tommygun711]

I hate to say it, I dont even like Holyfield, but he is more athletic than Liston probably better schooled and would win on points

considering holy does not do good against big heavyweights I really don't think he would be able to cope with Liston's jab. evander was easy to hit. plus Liston was probably more stronger then bowe and Lewis plus he hits harder. and liston would man handle him on the inside, taking away evanders left hook and other weapons. and I just think he would eat that overhand too easy. the one that knocked Roy Harris the fuck out.
but I personally think evander would go slugging because of that warrior mentality inside him, and that would be his downfall.

[Hookie]

I think the versions of Qawi x2, Foreman, and Holmes that Holyfield fought are being greatly underrated.

In many ways Foreman was better in the very early 90's than he was in the 70's. He was bigger, stronger, smarter, and paced himself well. He had a little less snap on his punches and he was just a little bit slower but he was never fast anyway. I'm talking about the Foreman who fought Holyfield in '91. Not the Foreman who fought Morrison or even Moorer in '94.

The Holmes that Holyfield fought was much better than the Holmes Tyson fought. When Holmes fought Tyson he had not fought in 2 years or won a fight in 3. He took Tyson lightly and even recorded an album while in training... dumb! When Holmes fought Holyfield he had won 6 in a row including a near shut out over a prime Ray Mercer.

Say what you will about Qawi but he was a great fighter. Only Holyfield and Foreman were able to stop him. Holyfield fought him in only his 12th pro fight... W15.

Cooper? Cooper was dropped in the 1st with a body shot. He clearly lost 5 of the first 6 rounds. He was stopped in the 7th. Holyfield was fighting in his home town and took Cooper for granted... do you really think he would have fought like that vs. Tyson? Cooper had nothing to lose and rose to the occasion.

[Hookie]

Liston struggled vs. Johnny Summerlin. We won two 8 round decisions vs. him, the rematch was a split-decision. Summerlin was about 195Lbs. It was only Liston's 6th and 7th pro fights though.

Liston went 2-1 (1) vs. Marty Marshall. Marshall broke Liston's jaw in their first fight (Liston's 8th pro fight). Marshall was about 180Lbs. and far from great.

Wayne Bethea, Frankie Daniels, Mike DeJohn, and Roy Harris weren't much!

Nino Valdes was never much IMO but he was far past prime when he fought Liston.

Cleveland Williams is overrated IMO. He beat Ernie Terrell and drew with Eddie Machen. He also lost to Terrell. Other than that he lost to every decent fighter he faced... badly.

Folley and Machen were very good as I mentioned before.

Patterson is an all-time great but he was down more than any other HW champ ever (20 times). He was down 9 times in 3 fights vs. Johansson.

Holyfield had the right combination of size, strength, durability, speed, power, and boxing ability.

[Hookie]

Holyfield stands 2" taller but his reach is 6" shorter.

I'm sick of hearing about the size of Liston's fist... it doesn't matter.

People used to talk about the size of Liston's neck, Holyfield's neck is bigger! That matters more than the fist.

They were close in weight, 210-215Lbs.

Many assume Liston is stronger, why? A prime Holyfield had insane strength. I give Liston the edge in punching power but that doesn't mean he was stronger.

[Unforgiven]

All this talk about "Liston's superior strength" .....

I'm not even convinced Liston was as strong as Holyfield, nevermind stronger.
And if he was, he wasn't always great at utilizing it.

Holyfield is the better fighter, fought the better fighters, beat the better fighters, showed he could adapt to various styles and he never quit. Holyfield's a bona fide all-time great heavyweight.

[choklab]

Holyfield stands 2" taller but his reach is 6" shorter.

I'm sick of hearing about the size of Liston's fist... it doesn't matter.

People used to talk about the size of Liston's neck, Holyfield's neck is bigger! That matters more than the fist.

They were close in weight, 210-215Lbs.

Many assume Liston is stronger, why? A prime Holyfield had insane strength. I give Liston the edge in punching power but that doesn't mean he was stronger.

:good and liston never beat anyone as good as holyfield. liston beat already exposed guys then did 2 quit jobs. he was hard to beat but theres no geting away from the quitjobs and already exposed guys.

[SuzieQ49]

liston beat already exposed guys

Whats that supposed to mean?


Liston defeated top ranked and dangerous contenders, all of them under 30 years of age, and in there primes.


Was Charles exposed by Harold Johnson, Rex Layne Nino Valdes prior to fighting Marciano?

Was Walcott exposed by Layne and Charles prior to fighting Marciano?

Was Archie Moore exposed by Harold Johnson, Henry Hall, Ezzard Charles prior to fighting Marciano?

Was lastarza exposed by Rocky Jones and Dan Bucceroni prior to fighting Marciano

Was Layne exposed by Dave Whitlock prior to fighting Marciano?

[Unforgiven]

Whats that supposed to mean?


Liston defeated top ranked and dangerous contenders, all of them under 30 years of age, and in there primes.


Holyfield struggled tremendously with a pair of 45 men year old men, was nearly knocked out by a late substitute, was taken life and death by coke a dokes, and lost to a light-heavyweight. He also went a career 1-4 vs Bowe and Lennox.

^ Very biased way of comparing their two careers.

[SuzieQ49]

I was making a point about chokelab's double standards. Feel Free to pick up on that whenever you decide to turn your brain on.

[SuzieQ49]

I'm not even convinced Liston was as strong as Holyfield, nevermind stronger.


Natural Strength beats artificial strength any day in my book.


And if he was, he wasn't always great at utilizing it.


Please provide detailed examples.


Holyfield is the better fighter

Great Logic

fought the better fighters, beat the better fighters

Holyfield fought and beat better fighters than any heavyweight outside of Ali. Does this mean he beats all of them too? You have to take into account holyfield's mediocre performances vs old men, 2nd raters, plus some of his losses.

showed he could adapt to various styles and he never quit.

He certainly showed he could never adapt to men with long 84" left jabs. In fact he went 1-4 against such men.

He also never got out of his terrible habit of falling into the trap of attempting to brawl with stronger harder punching opponents. If he tries to brawl with Liston, he will get knocked out.

Holyfield's a bona fide all-time great heavyweight

Sure. I believe Liston is signifigantly better though.

[Unforgiven]

I was making a point about chokelab's double standards. Feel Free to pick up on that whenever you decide to turn your brain on.

Well, you made the exact same points in a post a few pages ago, NOT in response to anyone's double-standards :


He fought Bowe and Lennox, who both sport 84" reaches like liston, and have similiar power and strength like liston. Holyfield only went 1-4 against these men.

Holyfield was nearly stopped by substitute journeyman Bert Cooper, taken 10 life or death rounds by Michael Dokes, and struggled tremdously with 44 year old Foremans and Holmes.

Holyfield was not the dominant fighter liston was in his prime. Holy struggled with all different kids of fighters. liston wiped out the top 10 very effectively.

[Unforgiven]

Natural Strength beats artificial strength any day in my book.

What do you mean by "natural strength" and "artificial strength" ?

Please provide detailed examples.

Well, Eddie Machen threw Liston around a couple of times. Clay tied Liston up almost every time he needed to.
If Sonny was so strong and good at utilizing his strength he would have done shown it those situations.
Anyway, I dont think he was stronger than Holyfield, so I dont need to go down that road.


Holyfield fought and beat better fighters than any heavyweight outside of Ali. Does this mean he beats all of them too? You have to take into account holyfield's mediocre performances vs old men, 2nd raters, plus some of his losses.


Holyfield's proven against a very high caliber of opposition. So, yes, he is bankable. Of course he'd not invincible.

He certainly showed he could never adapt to men with long 84" left jabs. In fact he went 1-4 against such men.

I dont think he was at his best against Lewis, he was a few years past it already, but he did quite well.
Bowe beat him more on the inside and toe-to-toe than with his reach.


He also never got out of his terrible habit of falling into the trap of attempting to brawl with stronger harder punching opponents. If he tries to brawl with Liston, he will get knocked out.



Or maybe Liston gets knocked out. Or folds up his tent after a few rounds with Holyfield out-gutting him, out-thinking him, and out-lasting him.


Sure. I believe Liston is signifigantly better though.


Based on what ?
Liston beat a few reasonably good contenders over a 3 or 4 year period then punked out against Clay/Ali.
Holyfield was a top-flight operator for 10 years or more, and beat a larger number of ranked contenders, came through more tough fights, beat better fighters and on average faced stronger and harder hitting opponents than Liston did.

[DudeGuyMan]

Holyfield can intimidate Liston.

The one thing I've always heard about Holyfield is that he was picked on as a child and absolutely thrived on beating the hell out of what he perceived to be bullies. Sonny will give him that hollow-eyed death glare, and something in Evander's brain will go ping.

The fight will go from a job, to him really wanting to kick Liston's ass, and I don't think Sonny is going to like it when his patented intimidation routine has the opposite effect. Psychologically, the fight belongs to Holyfield.

[Hookie]

I keep hearing about Liston's 84" reach. I actually read once that the listed "tale of the tape" on Liston was wrong anyway. I read that his reach, his fist, and his neck was actually smaller than listed. It is true that he had several towels on him under his robe to make himself look bigger right before his fights though.

He was just under 6'1". It's different when you have that reach and your 6'5" like Bowe and Lewis. Liston didn't have the leverage that they had. It's different when your 6'3" and taller like Ali, Holmes, and Foreman. Punching down is easier than punching up. When you punch up the power of the shot is decreased.

With that said, I will say this... I honestly feel that Holyfield was the stronger man. Some of you are really underrating him here. Lee Haney (8 time Mr. Olympia) used to lift with Holyfield. He claimed that Holyfield benched 455 Lbs. eight times one day after they had already lifted that day. True? Who knows? Is it really true that a young Foreman couldn't make an old Liston back up... but Leotis Martin could knock the crap out of him?

[choklab]

Whats that supposed to mean?


Liston defeated top ranked and dangerous contenders, all of them under 30 years of age, and in there primes.


Was Charles exposed by Harold Johnson, Rex Layne Nino Valdes prior to fighting Marciano?

Was Walcott exposed by Layne and Charles prior to fighting Marciano?

Was Archie Moore exposed by Harold Johnson, Henry Hall, Ezzard Charles prior to fighting Marciano?

Was lastarza exposed by Rocky Jones and Dan Bucceroni prior to fighting Marciano

Was Layne exposed by Dave Whitlock prior to fighting Marciano?

I accept what you are saying but it dosnt compare IMO. folley was a good scalp but he had lost to the last rated guy he fought and had been knocked out on two other ocasions to guys inferior to harold johnson, hall, charles, moore even bucceroni.

marcianos guys had winning runs against rated guys. who are the run of rated guys williams had beat? charles kod walace and satterfield. lastarza beat laynne and had a disputed history rather like summerlin against Liston who was inferior in every way to lastarza. whitlock did not KO Layne was defeated by rex in a return.

[SuzieQ49]

folley was a good scalp but he had lost to the last rated guy he fought and had been knocked out on two other ocasions to guys inferior to harold johnson, hall, charles, moore even bucceroni.

Folley was not knocked out prior to 1960. He retired in his corner between rounds in both fights. I do not see how folley suffering two stoppage losses very early in his career takes away credit from liston knocking him out while in the prime of his career, and # 1 rated.

inferior to harold johnson, hall, charles, moore even bucceroni.


How would you know?

marcianos guys had winning runs against rated guys

1. Marciano also defeated some of his top opponents who were over the age of 30, while Liston defeated his top opponents who were under the age of 30.

2. Marciano did not clean out his era entirely. Top rated fighters like Clarence Henry, Nino Valdes, and Bob Baker were all qualified to share a ring with Marciano. They were younger than Moore, Louis, Walcott, Charles. Rocky beat the best of his era, but also left a few nice names out. Sonny didn't leave anyone out(except johansson who refused to fight him). Sonny took on the men no one wanted to fight, and demolished them.

Rocky could have fought fighters like Baker and Henry in 1951-1952



Baker Boy

"Combing the entire world, one probably couldn't name more than a dozen young HW's. whose possibilities for future headlines status would be regarded with even a faint dash of enthusiasm.

Generally rated as the best of the "freshmen" who have been attracting varying degrees of attention of late are Roland LaStraza of NY, Rocky Marciano of Brockton; Rex Layne of Jordan; Frankie Buford of Oakland; Calarence Henry of LA, Cesar Brion of the Argentine, Jaack Gardner of England, Connie Rux of Germany - and Bob Baker of Pittsburgh.

Of the lot, Baker shapes up as one of the likliest.

The powerful 23 year old 205lb negro seems to have many of the answers for which the promoters and fans have been so eagerly hunting. He can box, punch, and has proven ability to survive rough going and fight back to win.

Not since Louis came roaring out of the amateurs more than 16 years ago, to blas his way almost overnight into international prominence in the pro ring has any young HW risen to rapidly and in such spectacular fashion as Baker. It is only a year and a half since the Pittsburgher made his adent into the money ranks and his record to date embraces only 17 bouts, but he has already earned a place well up The Ring's rankings." - October 1950 Ring Magazine


who are the run of rated guys williams had beat?

It is hard to get rated contenders in the ring, when they are scared to fight you.

Billy Daniels was rated 6th in the world by Ring Magazine
Alex Miteff was rated 7th in the world by Ring Magazine

He knocked out Ernie Terrell, who would go on to become WBA champion. This was the only time Terrell was knocked until he was long past his prime. He lost a disputed decision in the rematch in which he knocked Terrell down. AP scored it 46-45 for Williams.

He Drew with # 3 rated Eddie Machen. AP scored the fight for Williams.

He broke the nose of a prime sonny liston and staggered him on mutiple occasions.

He also defeated other tough fringe contenders like John Holman, Wayne Bethea, Young Jack Johnson, Alonzo Johnson, Sonny Banks, Dick Richardson, Curley Lee Chapman. Most of them by Brutal Knockout.


lastarza beat laynne and had a disputed history rather like summerlin against Liston who was inferior in every way to lastarza

How would you know? Lastarza was a very coddled fighter. there are some major question marks on his career.



"His reputation was built on the first Rocky fight. Although he had a long winning streak at the beginning of his career, there are no tough names on his record. After the first Marciano fight he could have forced the issue by meeting top fighters. He refused fights with Charles, Clarence Henry, Bob Baker etc. Lost and avenged to overstuffed lt.heavy Dan Bucceroni and to lt. heavy Rocky Jones and looked terrible against Jones in the rematch. The Jones win and a victory over the faded Rex Layne gave him the credentials to meet Rocky for the title. A fight I am told Rocky was more intent on giving Roland a beating for all of the talk that he "was afraid" to meet LaStarza again than KOing him early which I believe he could have done easily. Look at LaStarza's record there are no tough names on it except for Marciano.I have the complete film of the Jones rematch and believe me LaStarza looked terrible. Jones was approached at the morning weigh-in by Jimmy White (Amato) a shadowy figure who was a mob contact man and manager and told Rocky "we don't wan't any of that stuff that happened in Akron."Jones had two good rounds then was told to "cool it." LaStarza NEVER fought a danerous opponent except Marciano and thats a fact if you know any of the fighters from his era. I am not saying that LaStarza was a coward but he (or, excuse me, his management) refused matches with Henry, Charles, Baker, and Archie Moore. In an article in RING magazine after his career LaStarza admitted as much, saying he wouldn't take those matches because he "deserved" a rematch with Marciano and thought he was offered the other matches by the IBC only because they were trying to knock him out of "his rightful shot at Marciano." Boo Hoo Hoo. Real, confident fighters go out and prove they deserve their shot by beating dangerous fighters to force a showdown with a champion. Again, let me reinterate-when Marciano fought LaStarza the first time Rocky was boxing for the first time after the Vingo tragedy. Rocky had threatened to quit boxing. Is it any wonder he was not the usual agressive Marciano but an understandably gunshy, tenitive boxer that night ?"- Chuck Hasson Boxing Historian and Philly Boxing Founder

whitlock did not KO Layne was defeated by rex in a return.


Whitlock was an average lightheavyeight who exposed Layne.




See how I can spin things around on Marciano like your doing to Liston?

[choklab]

Folley was not knocked out prior to 1960. He retired in his corner between rounds in both fights. I do not see how folley suffering two stoppage losses very early in his career takes away credit from liston knocking him out while in the prime of his career, and # 1 rated.?

he was rated below cooper who had beat him by that point. the point I make is he had been stopped before. twice. once by summerlin who liston knew prety well. the othertime was y.j. johnson who was a novice.





1. Marciano also defeated some of his top opponents who were over the age of 30, while Liston defeated his top opponents who were under the age of 30. ?


marcinao beat the guys with thye best credentials at that time. these were huge fights that the public wanted, he never went lower than #2 rated chalenger who beat the younger fighters who were less worthy.

2. Marciano did not clean out his era entirely. Top rated fighters like Clarence Henry, Nino Valdes, and Bob Baker were all qualified to share a ring with Marciano. They were younger than Moore, Louis, Walcott, Charles. Rocky beat the best of his era, but also left a few nice names out. Sonny didn't leave anyone out(except johansson who refused to fight him). Sonny took on the men no one wanted to fight, and demolished them.?

did he leave them out or did he land more significant fights? Louis never fought ray, bivins (for a title) and ali did not fight amos johnson, machen or bobick it does not efect their legacy so why rocky?

Rocky could have fought fighters like Baker and Henry in 1951-1952?


not if joe louis was a bigger fight and a faster route to the title. old joe beat agramonte and brion who were fresh on the scene.



It is hard to get rated contenders in the ring, when they are scared to fight you.?

works both ways. if the money is there and a win ratio favours your kid it hapens. wiliams people took him to newyork but he was exposed on the marciano-lastarza undercard so they content to sell him as a local atraction in texas. and they still slipped up with satterfield.



He knocked out Ernie Terrell, who would go on to become WBA champion. This was the only time Terrell was knocked until he was long past his prime. He lost a disputed decision in the rematch in which he knocked Terrell down. AP scored it 46-45 for Williams.

He Drew with # 3 rated Eddie Machen. AP scored the fight for Williams.

He broke the nose of a prime sonny liston and staggered him on mutiple occasions.

He also defeated other tough fringe contenders like John Holman, Wayne Bethea, Young Jack Johnson, Alonzo Johnson, Sonny Banks, Dick Richardson, Curley Lee Chapman. Most of them by Brutal Knockout. ?



but this was after liston fought him. what was his run at that time?

there was no brutal knock out against richardson. wiliams was a brutal flop. he did not want to fight and behaved alarmingly until richardson headbutted him and got disqualified. in a rematch wiliams refused to fight because he could not find his lucky shorts and was never booked to fight in the uk again.








Whitlock was an average lightheavyeight who exposed Layne.?

not by knock out. wiliams and machen were stretched out prior to fighting liston. thats exposed. folley had been found out at a level also.




See how I can spin things around on Marciano like your doing to Liston?

I can see it but its not the same.

[Hookie]

You muthafuckas is crazy! This thread has gotten out of hand. People are throwing out names of fighters who never amounted to shit... like they were avoided. Gimme a fucking break.

Liston is an all-time great but he's on a level below Holyfield. He beat some good fighters on the way to getting a title shot. Once he lost the title he didn't beat anybody notable, unless you think Wepner was somebody special. 2-2 (2) in HW World Title fights and both wins were against Patterson. Williams x2, Folley, Machen, Patterson x2, and Ali x2. 6-2 (5) vs. these men and stopped twice. These are the only fights Liston had that matter to me.

[Hookie]

Holyfield fought Qawi x2, Ocasio, DeLeon, Thomas, Dokes, Douglas, Foreman, Holmes, Bowe x3, Moorer x2, Mercer, Tyson x2, Lewis x2, Ruiz, Rahman, Byrd, Toney, Oquendo, Valuev, and others. He's 147 years old and still fighting.

[SuzieQ49]

I think the versions of Qawi x2, Foreman, and Holmes that Holyfield fought are being greatly underrated.

In many ways Foreman was better in the very early 90's than he was in the 70's. He was bigger, stronger, smarter, and paced himself well. He had a little less snap on his punches and he was just a little bit slower but he was never fast anyway. I'm talking about the Foreman who fought Holyfield in '91. Not the Foreman who fought Morrison or even Moorer in '94.

The Holmes that Holyfield fought was much better than the Holmes Tyson fought. When Holmes fought Tyson he had not fought in 2 years or won a fight in 3. He took Tyson lightly and even recorded an album while in training... dumb! When Holmes fought Holyfield he had won 6 in a row including a near shut out over a prime Ray Mercer.

Say what you will about Qawi but he was a great fighter. Only Holyfield and Foreman were able to stop him. Holyfield fought him in only his 12th pro fight... W15.

Cooper? Cooper was dropped in the 1st with a body shot. He clearly lost 5 of the first 6 rounds. He was stopped in the 7th. Holyfield was fighting in his home town and took Cooper for granted... do you really think he would have fought like that vs. Tyson? Cooper had nothing to lose and rose to the occasion.

:patsch

[choklab]

How would you know?





how do I know ezzard charles, archie moore, old joe louis, roland lastarza and rex layne were beter than jimmy summerlin and young jack johnson? :shock:

[red cobra]

Holyfield was always there to be hit...that wouldn't work against Sonny..

[Unforgiven]

Nah, Holyfield will do fine is this match.

[SuzieQ49]

how do I know ezzard charles, archie moore, old joe louis, roland lastarza and rex layne were beter than jimmy summerlin and young jack johnson? :shock:

1. That's not what you said.


You said

"inferior to harold johnson, hall, charles, moore even bucceroni."


2. Who is to say Henry Hall and Dan Bucceroni were better than Johnny Summerlin?

[tommygun711]

Actually I'm changing my vote from sonny Liston to evander Holyfield by stoppage. not only did evander have the better resume, opponents, and heart, he has also been known to have a great chin. he took shots from Lewis, Tyson, and foreman, and he was able to stay on his feet. those 3 guys were very hard punchers, so I don't think Liston is going to knock out evander. I think the Holyfield that fought Cooper or bowe the 1st time is likely to stop and break down Liston.
liston and Holyfield are roughly the same height and weight, but I think evander may have the advantage in the strength and height, he worked with weights and there was really some more definition in his muscles, that's why I think he was stronger then Liston.
evander is stronger, faster, smarter, heavier, taller, and he has better footwork and mobility. something that evander could do is box a braweler or slug with them; I think in a fight like this evander would square up and slug with Liston, and Liston would be shocked and maybe even intimidated. I'll say evander Holyfield stopage.

[choklab]

1. That's not what you said.


You said

"inferior to harold johnson, hall, charles, moore even bucceroni."

sorry suzie, that is what I said. I think johnson, moore, charles, hall and bucceroni were beter than summerlin.


2. Who is to say Henry Hall and Dan Bucceroni were better than Johnny Summerlin?


summerlin beat folley thats it. the rest of johnnys career was rather patchy he lost a lot of times. wes bascum knocked out summerlin. dan bucceroni knocked bascum out! that makes bucceroni beter than sumerlin in my book.

henry hall as good as johnny summerlin? Id say so. hall once beat a peak archie moore an ATG. knocking out satterfield and beat burt lytell twice. Hall tangled with almost the entire cast of the murderers row on fairly good terms. he was indeed beter than johnny summerlin.

[Hookie]

sorry suzie, that is what I said. I think johnson, moore, charles, hall and bucceroni were beter than summerlin.




summerlin beat folley thats it. the rest of johnnys career was rather patchy he lost a lot of times. wes bascum knocked out summerlin. dan bucceroni knocked bascum out! that makes bucceroni beter than sumerlin in my book.

henry hall as good as johnny summerlin? Id say so. hall once beat a peak archie moore an ATG. knocking out satterfield and beat burt lytell twice. Hall tangled with almost the entire cast of the murderers row on fairly good terms. he was indeed beter than johnny summerlin.


Seriously, some of the fighters you all keep mentioning weren't shit... so what's the point? Does anybody think beating Bob Baker means anything? Baker was 6'2" and 215-220Lbs but he only scored 20 KOs in 68 fights. Only Archie Moore, Satterfield and Clarence Henry stopped him. He lost 13 decision and had 1 draw. Anybody really think Marciano ducked him?

[choklab]

Seriously, some of the fighters you all keep mentioning weren't shit... so what's the point? Does anybody think beating Bob Baker means anything? Baker was 6'2" and 215-220Lbs but he only scored 20 KOs in 68 fights. Only Archie Moore, Satterfield and Clarence Henry stopped him. He lost 13 decision and had 1 draw. Anybody really think Marciano ducked him?


I agree with you. Liston was a good champion but not the ATG his aura falsly elevates him to. liston did not pay his dues in a way that can be compared with holyfeild who compeated at world title level over a much longer period often comming through when the odds were stacked against him.

neither rocky nor liston ducked fighters. The mentioning of old fighters refers to my argument that more of listons big wins were not SO sensational since each "victim" had been dispatched by lesser fighters previously. regardless of their age none of listons guys were outstanding contenders in the true sence, just the best around -and thats fine. its good enough to be a good champion just not top 10 ATG. Liston was sensational against rated guys who had been sensationaly knocked out before.

[Boxed Ears]

Bump.

[Hookie]

Liston 44, Holyfield 33... I can't fucking believe it! I see Holyfield stopping Liston late.

Liston's reach is not going to be the deciding factor here. Holyfield is used to fighting guys with long reaches. The guys he fought with long reaches were also very tall... Liston was shorter than Holyfield... that takes away from the reach a little, also takes a little something off the punches when you have to punch up.

Holyfield is faster, has better footwork, has a higher workrate, has one of the best chins ever, and is probably stronger than Liston.

Sure, Liston used the jab more and his jab was harder. What else does he bring? He hit a little harder, so what?

[Hookie]

Liston beat on men who were smaller or simply afraid of him in many of his fights. Holyfield slayed dragons and even outboxed Bigfoot when he was 137 years old.

[Bonecrusher]

I would pick Holyfield here, I think he would be able to handle Liston's power and his heavy hands and jab in the early rounds. I see a very close fight going into the late rounds which would be where Holyfield would take over, I see him sweeping the late rounds to post a decision win.. If Sonny goes hard for broke late Holyfield may even stop him... I really like the analogy of crowning holyfield The Bully Destroyer, that's what he was and that is again what he would be here..

[TheGreatA]

Let's be honest though, Tyson was rather mediocre at the time he faced Holyfield and Holyfield was hardly a force himself at that point in his career. Tyson had no other options other than to go straight at Holyfield, which made him a perfect target for Holyfield's counter punching, even more so since Tyson had abandoned most of his defensive moves by then.

Against Liston, Holyfield has to deal with a constant jab and it is no certainty that he's the stronger man inside. Liston looked plenty strong when he went to work on Cleveland Williams in the first fight, pouring on combinations to the body and head. I just wouldn't necessarily bet on Holyfield getting the better of a brawl here.

Holyfield went at big bad Riddick Bowe and got the worst of it for the most part. I guess there's something to be said about his efforts but I don't know if I'd use this series as proof of Holyfield beating Liston either. It does show that he could very well win atleast one out of three with the correct gameplan, but then Holyfield could take 1 out of 3 against almost any heavyweight.

[My2Sense]

Natural Strength beats artificial strength any day in my book.

On what basis?

Holyfield fought and beat better fighters than any heavyweight outside of Ali. Does this mean he beats all of them too?

Maybe, who knows. At the very least, he'd probably have as good a shot with them as anyone.

You have to take into account holyfield's mediocre performances vs old men, 2nd raters, plus some of his losses.

Just as virtually every other fighter that has ever lived has had.

He certainly showed he could never adapt to men with long 84" left jabs. In fact he went 1-4 against such men.

Which actually shows that he could adapt to such men.

Conversely, Liston showed he could never adapt to a great HW, as he showed by going 0-2 in that regard.

If he tries to brawl with Liston, he will get knocked out.

And what KO wins of Liston are you basing that determination on?

I believe Liston is signifigantly better though.

And that would be a belief with little or no factual basis.