Who was the best fighter Sonny Liston beat ?

[Sonny's jab]

Personally I like Cleveland Williams.

He looks fantastic against Sonny in both those fights, but he doesn't take Sonny's shots like Sonny can take his.

Liston impresses me loads in the first fight, when Williams is really putting it on him, Liston can land jarring jabs while he's backing up, that's impressive. He tightens up his defence real well when under attack too, and keeps his composure.

The second fight is very similar, but I can see Williams being more intelligent, looking even more closely for the right openings, determined not to fall into the same trap again. But the 2nd round is similar to the 3rd round of the first fight, and Liston whups him bad.

Williams looks agile, fast, powerful, talented and reasonable smart boxer. I think he could have been champion if he had faced Patterson or Johansson.

[Seamus]

oohhh... the ever-dangerous, much bally-hooed but really not very good Cleveland Willams. He had all numbers, size and weight, but not much fortitude or true ability. Please to be telling me his finest victory before the Liston match? A dq versus Dick Richardson perhaps? That's probably it. Vastly over-rated fighter.

[Sonny's jab]

oohhh... the ever-dangerous, much bally-hooed but really not very good Cleveland Willams. He had all numbers, size and weight, but not much fortitude or true ability. Please to be telling me his finest victory before the Liston match? A dq versus Dick Richardson perhaps? That's probably it. Vastly over-rated fighter.

I'm not talking about his record before he fought Liston. I'm saying how good I think he was.

How do you define "true ability" ?

Like I said, he looks good to me.

[Seamus]

I'm not much of one for the "eye test" which is inevitably jaundiced by various prejudices and pre-dispositions of the beholder. The real source of evaluation is a fighter's record. Williams beat on a bunch of nobodies, got beat when he tried to rise above that fray and gets some sort of consolation prize from the fancy set as a great "could have been." Well, he wasn't.

[Marciano Frazier]

I have to fall more on Seamus' side here. Williams ultimately had a lot of flair, but not much substance. He hardly ever delivered the goods in the big moment. I think Patterson, Machen and Folley were all better fighters- especially Patterson. The Williams who could've been champ or top-dog had he only been given the chance exists more in fantasy than in reality, in my opinion. In real life, he was given a fair few shots at the big time during his heyday, and the main reason he didn't make it was that he just plain consistently fell short.

[Vantage_West]

patterson...easily williams was the grant of the 60's size, power but no solid defence or shin or technically tough

patterson by a country mile

[teeto]

In terms of simply 'who was the best fighter Liston beat' i would say Patterson , but if you mean considering size advantage then that fight was a bit unfair , in that case i say Williams aswell

[Woddy]

I can't see anyone on Sonny's resume being better than Floyd Patterson.

[Sonny's jab]

I'm not much of one for the "eye test" which is inevitably jaundiced by various prejudices and pre-dispositions of the beholder. The real source of evaluation is a fighter's record. Williams beat on a bunch of nobodies, got beat when he tried to rise above that fray and gets some sort of consolation prize from the fancy set as a great "could have been." Well, he wasn't.

If you dont believe we can see things then how do we ever know who are the "nobodies" and who is risen "above that fray" ? At sonme point we must know that one set of guys with impressive numbers are actually world class above another set of guys with impressive numbers.

We can see which guys have certain qualities, such as speed, agility, and to some degree power.

Cleveland Williams stunned Sonny Liston in both fights. Liston, whether you like it or not, WAS the best heavyweight fighter in the world in the period.
Williams drew with a top fighter (Eddie Machen I think) of the period, and scored a stoppage victory over Ernie Terrell, who was another top fighter of the period.
His easy and often chilling victories over the "nobodies" of the era suggests a significant gulf existed between his ability and theirs.

[McGrain]

The great Floyd Patterson is the best fighter Liston beat. He is only one level below guys like Ali and Louis.

[janitor]

I would have to say that it is prety clear cut in favour of Floyd Patterson.

[Sonny's jab]

I have to fall more on Seamus' side here. Williams ultimately had a lot of flair, but not much substance. He hardly ever delivered the goods in the big moment. I think Patterson, Machen and Folley were all better fighters- especially Patterson. The Williams who could've been champ or top-dog had he only been given the chance exists more in fantasy than in reality, in my opinion. In real life, he was given a fair few shots at the big time during his heyday, and the main reason he didn't make it was that he just plain consistently fell short.

In real life, Cleveland's first two shots at the big time were against Sonny Liston, a man Patterson and Johansson were in no hurry to fight.

In real life, Cleveland Williams' two showings against Mr.Liston were a damn sight better than Floyd's when Patterson finally got round to fighting Sonny.

Next time after the Liston fights that Williams stepped in "the big time" he stopped his opponent Ernie Terrell.

His next foray with a contender he DREW with Eddie Machen.

And finally, against his last contender opponent before he got riddled with bullets he held Terrell to a split decision.

So, when given a chance against top fighters of the era he proved on a par at least with those he met except Sonny Liston, who beat EVERYONE of the era clearly except Cassius Clay.

During this time period, Williams also scored wins over some of the better second-tier tests, like Bethea, Miteff, Banks and Daniels.

That's reality, not fantasy.

[Marciano Frazier]

In real life, Cleveland's first two shots at the big time were against Sonny Liston, a man Patterson and Johansson were in no hurry to fight.
I would say his first shot at "the big time," defined as being a chance to beat a major ranked contender and establish yourself as a key player in the title picture, was the Satterfield fight, in which he was brutally knocked out, albeit while perhaps a bit green and coming in on short notice.

In real life, Cleveland Williams' two showings against Mr.Liston were a damn sight better than Floyd's when Patterson finally got round to fighting Sonny.
Yes, but that's not saying much. He was crushingly knocked out within three rounds both times. And although Williams did better than Patterson against Liston, he did considerably worse against Machen.

Next time after the Liston fights that Williams stepped in "the big time" he stopped his opponent Ernie Terrell.
This is the one major win of Williams' near-100-professional-fight career, and even then, going into the Williams fight, Terrell wasn't really a serious contender yet- he was an inexperienced young guy with a bit of a spotty record to date and hadn't beaten any name opponents yet.

His next foray with a contender he DREW with Eddie Machen.

And finally, against his last contender opponent before he got riddled with bullets he held Terrell to a split decision.

So, when given a chance against top fighters of the era he proved on a par at least with those he met except Sonny Liston, who beat EVERYONE of the era clearly except Cassius Clay.
That's more or less the point, except stated in a "glass-is-half-full" manner instead of "glass-is-half-empty." Williams was blown out twice by Liston and went 1-1-1 with Machen and Terrell (and was blown out by Satterfield in an earlier fight). He never went better than 50/50 against a serious contender and was waxed by the only all-time great he fought.

During this time period, Williams also scored wins over some of the better second-tier tests, like Miteff, Banks and Daniels.

That's reality, not fantasy.
Again, none of this indicates he was anything special compared with any other top fighter. He was even-Steven in his fights with Machen and Terrell and was decisively knocked out both times he fought Liston (and Satterfield, though he was arguably a little green and was coming in on short notice). While he looks impressive on film, his consistent results indicate he was no better than any of several other contemporary contenders and clearly not a championship-caliber competitor like a Patterson.

[JohnThomas1]

In real life, Cleveland's first two shots at the big time were against Sonny Liston, a man Patterson and Johansson were in no hurry to fight.

In real life, Cleveland Williams' two showings against Mr.Liston were a damn sight better than Floyd's when Patterson finally got round to fighting Sonny.

Next time after the Liston fights that Williams stepped in "the big time" he stopped his opponent Ernie Terrell.

His next foray with a contender he DREW with Eddie Machen.

And finally, against his last contender opponent before he got riddled with bullets he held Terrell to a split decision.

So, when given a chance against top fighters of the era he proved on a par at least with those he met except Sonny Liston, who beat EVERYONE of the era clearly except Cassius Clay.

During this time period, Williams also scored wins over some of the better second-tier tests, like Bethea, Miteff, Banks and Daniels.

That's reality, not fantasy.

Good post and you've certainly won me over at this point. I'm not sure i can put Williams over Patterson or not, i'd like to see a bit more of him as you have but i do think he was a very good fighter at his finest.

[Asterion]

Floyd Patterson.

[Sonny's jab]

I would say his first shot at "the big time," defined as being a chance to beat a major ranked contender and establish yourself as a key player in the title picture, was the Satterfield fight, in which he was brutally knocked out, albeit while perhaps a bit green and coming in on short notice.


Well, I dont know what his manager was thinking putting him in with Bob Satterfield at last-minute notice.
I guess Cleve had bills to pay, but Satterfield was a known party-wrecker, and you put a young prospect in with the guy at short-notice at own your peril, just a dumb move. The result doesn't mean much against Williams' standing as a fine fighter.


Yes, but that's not saying much. He was crushingly knocked out within three rounds both times. And although Williams did better than Patterson against Liston, he did considerably worse against Machen.


Well, Liston did consideranly worse than Johansson against Machen.
All this proves is that the top fighters have mixed results against each other, something we should take for granted.
I'm not arguing that Williams has a better record than Patterson, I'm arguing AGAINST the idea that he wasn't among the best men of the era.


This is the one major win of Williams' near-100-professional-fight career, and even then, going into the Williams fight, Terrell wasn't really a serious contender yet- he was an inexperienced young guy with a bit of a spotty record to date and hadn't beaten any name opponents yet.


Well, you say the same about Williams.
Terrell was obviously no mug, even at this stage. A year later he scraped past Williams and beat Zora Folley.


That's more or less the point, except stated in a "glass-is-half-full" manner instead of "glass-is-half-empty." Williams was blown out twice by Liston and went 1-1-1 with Machen and Terrell (and was blown out by Satterfield in an earlier fight). He never went better than 50/50 against a serious contender and was waxed by the only all-time great he fought.

Yes, but the only contender who went better than 1-1 or 0-0-1 against him[b] was[b] the all-time great.
I discount the Satterfield loss as foolishness.


Again, none of this indicates he was anything special compared with any other top fighter. He was even-Steven in his fights with Machen and Terrell and was decisively knocked out both times he fought Liston (and Satterfield, though he was arguably a little green and was coming in on short notice). While he looks impressive on film, his consistent results indicate he was no better than any of several other contemporary contenders


Well, I'm not arguing for his resume. Nor am I saying he stands out above other contenders of the era. I'm saying he looks good on film, and nothing in his record among that period shows him to be a lesser fighter than any of them - other than Liston.


and clearly not a championship-caliber competitor like a Patterson


Patterson's reign actually has a lot to answer for in how "championship caliber" is defined.
Some of the guys he was defending against would be dismissed virtually as nobodies if Williams had fought them.

Having said that, of course Patterson has the better resume and accomplishments. I think Williams looks good against Liston, good enough to beat Patterson, IMO, and perhaps good enough to beat Johansson.
Just my opinion.

[Bokaj]

I'm not much of one for the "eye test" which is inevitably jaundiced by various prejudices and pre-dispositions of the beholder. The real source of evaluation is a fighter's record. Williams beat on a bunch of nobodies, got beat when he tried to rise above that fray and gets some sort of consolation prize from the fancy set as a great "could have been." Well, he wasn't.

Well, Patterson's record wasn't the most impressive either. I suppose Machen and Johansson was his biggest scalps, and against Johansson he had one defeat.

[Marciano Frazier]

Well, I dont know what his manager was thinking putting him in with Bob Satterfield at last-minute notice.
I guess Cleve had bills to pay, but Satterfield was a known party-wrecker, and you put a young prospect in with the guy at short-notice at own your peril, just a dumb move. The result doesn't mean much against Williams' standing as a fine fighter.
Yes, not a very significant fight, really.


Well, Liston did consideranly worse than Johansson against Machen.
All this proves is that the top fighters have mixed results against each other, something we should take for granted.
I'm not arguing that Williams has a better record than Patterson, I'm arguing AGAINST the idea that he wasn't among the best men of the era.
And I was more retorting your point that Williams did better than Patterson against Liston than trying to prove anything by a common-opponent result. A better way of expressing a general principle here: Howard King, Albert Westphal, Chuck Wepner and Bert Whitehurst all did much better than Patterson against Liston, as well. The majority of people Liston fought did better than Patterson against him, including ones with losing records.


Well, you say the same about Williams.
Terrell was obviously no mug, even at this stage. A year later he scraped past Williams and beat Zora Folley.
Yes, he was clearly an emerging contender, but my point is that this is the only high-level win Williams ever managed, and even that was when the guy wasn't really on top.


Yes, but the only contender who went better than 1-1 or 0-0-1 against him was[b] the all-time great.
I discount the Satterfield loss as foolishness.
And no contenders went worse than that against him. He never showed himself to be the master of any high-level heavyweight contender in several tries. Other fighters, like Folley and Patterson, bettered numerous high-level heavyweight contenders. If Williams had outstripped either Machen or Terrell, or even managed a win over Satterfield in adverse conditions, then I think there could be at least some argument for considering him the best fighter Liston beat.


Well, I'm not arguing for his resume. [B]Nor am I saying he stands out above other contenders of the era.
You must be if you're saying he was the best fighter Liston ever beat.

I'm saying he looks good on film, and nothing in his record among that period shows him to be a lesser fighter than any of them - other than Liston.
He does look good on film, but I would say his record- even among that period- shows him to be at least an inferior fighter to Patterson.


Patterson's reign actually has a lot to answer for in how "championship caliber" is defined.
Some of the guys he was defending against would be dismissed virtually as nobodies if Williams had fought them.
Oh, yes, absolutely. If Williams had been fighting a pro debuter while himself having 35+ fights, even not for the title and against a Gold Medalist, it would've been seen as a bit ridiculous. That said, though he had subpar defenses, Patterson himself was undeniably a championship caliber fighter. When Williams stepped up against high-level contenders, he broke even at best; when Patterson fought top-level contenders, he consistently established himself as the better man against the majority of them. Jackson, Moore, Johansson (barely), Machen, Chuvalo, Bonavena- Patterson bested all of these guys. If Patterson had gone 1-1-1 against Jackson and Moore in his early big fights, he may have never had his two championship reigns and numerous battles with top contenders, either- not because he was just being ducked/unlucky, but because he came up short competitively in the fights which would have established him as a true championship-caliber fighter.

Having said that, of course Patterson has the better resume and accomplishments. I think Williams looks good against Liston, good enough to beat Patterson, IMO, and perhaps good enough to beat Johansson.
Just my opinion.
I think that, while he looks impressive film-wise, he wasn't actually on a Patterson's level in terms of ability. Just my opinion, also.

[Holmes' Jab]

Skillwise definitely Patterson (although Floyd's prime weakness, his average chin- played right into Liston's hands).

I reckon if Patterson had a stronger chin he'd have given Liston a helluva tough fight stylistically, as it was he had good recuperative powers but there's only so many times you can hit the canvas and rise against Liston before being counted out.

[Holmes' Jab]

Liston's toughest test was definitely Machen.

[Mendoza]

I would have to say that it is prety clear cut in favour of Floyd Patterson.

Same here. Patterson was the best fighter Liston beat. After Patterson, its either Williams, Machen, or Folley for the 2nd best win on Liston’s resume. I'd lean slightly toward Williams’ over Machen and Folley as Liston's 2nd best win.

The Big cat was at his best when he and Liston went to war. Williams actually busted Liston up, and had him bleeding after round one in their first fight. Machen and Folley didn’t come close to doing anything like this, which is why I give Williams the nod for the #2 slot, even though one build a good argument that that Machen accomplished more, and lasted the distance vs Liston.