Holmes vs Liston

[juggernaut666]

The last thing to go is POWER...Holmes also having more weight behind his punch and very fasteven at 52 used Bean as a huge Heavy Bag and the hard truth is would have k.od many if not all the guys he fough in the 80'st with those same punches. He would certainly connect with those same punches on Liston ,my bet is you never actually watched that fight,instead looked at his age and are one of those who think Bean didn't have a chin? I would bet anything Bean takes a better punch than Liston. Im also certain Holmes at 50 puts up a better match against ali than Liston at late 30's. Of course this is hypothetical and im going extreme though I find your gifs amusing and about the only thing really you bring to me in recent times not being able to converse into a legit debate.

[joeandthebums]

The last thing to go is POWER...Holmes also having more weight behind his punch and very fasteven at 52 used Bean as a huge Heavy Bag and the hard truth is would have k.od many if not all the guys he fough in the 80'st with those same punches. He would certainly connect with those same punches on Liston ,my bet is you never actually watched that fight,instead looked at his age and are one of those who think Bean didn't have a chin? I would bet anything Bean takes a better punch than Liston. Im also certain Holmes at 50 puts up a better match against ali than Liston at late 30's. Of course this is hypothetical and im going extreme though I find your gifs amusing and about the only thing really you bring to me in recent times not being able to converse into a legit debate.

Struggle to see this as a legitimate debate, hence gif.

Not prepared to waste time discussing such absurd opinions.

[juggernaut666]

Struggle to see this as a legitimate debate, hence gif.

Not prepared to waste time discussing such absurd opinions.

So explain to what part is absurd? Lison getting his jaw broke and losing to a 175 pounder or Bean getting stopped by a b.s stoppage to a 6'3 250pounder ? Why not go into detail with that one? this was the point to bringing up Bean in the first place to credit Holmes and just how skilled he still was at 52,common sense says if he hits Liston with those same shots he no doubt hurts him if not stops him. Liston fought ONE guy who can punch and that was Williams who did NOT have a strong chin thus not able to hit often.........boxing 101.


I know your an informative poster but if you cant break down what I do then step off.....theres a few posters like Jab who I don't know and disagree with a many things he says but he's an intelligent poster as well ,as is bill he will tell you we are on opposite sides half the time. These guys know boxing and create some arguments for even me to go to a 10th level to get around and present an opposite attack of opinion which I do.

[joeandthebums]

this was the point to bringing up Bean in the first place to credit Holmes and just how skilled he still was at 52

Holmes balance was close to non-existent which forced him to rely almost exclusively on the use of the remnants of a once fine jab.

Yes shadows of his past self were on display, given the right opponent, but is it necessary to actually evaluate his ability at that stage of his career to establish the absurd belief he is superior to "prime" Sonny Liston?

I appreciate you believe past heavyweight do not stand a chance against "modern" equivalents, but I think this opinion is just silly.

common sense says if he hits Liston with those same shots he no doubt hurts him if not stops him.

In a normal match-up there would be far too many variables to consider, but given I would have Liston and Esch a great distance apart when placing them at which level they operate - it's not something I believe is worth time.

The questions spiral out of control.

We could start with;

Where would the fight take place?
Who would be the aggressor?
What ratio of jabs of total punches would be thrown?
How much of a factor would the jab play?

And so on.

[juggernaut666]

Holmes balance was close to non-existent which forced him to rely almost exclusively on the use of the remnants of a once fine jab.

Yes shadows of his past self were on display, given the right opponent, but is it necessary to actually evaluate his ability at that stage of his career to establish the absurd belief he is superior to "prime" Sonny Liston?

I appreciate you believe past heavyweight do not stand a chance against "modern" equivalents, but I think this opinion is just silly.



In a normal match-up there would be far too many variables to consider, but given I would have Liston and Esch a great distance apart when placing them at which level they operate - it's not something I believe is worth time.

The questions spiral out of control.

We could start with;

Where would the fight take place?
Who would be the aggressor?
What ratio of jabs of total punches would be thrown?
How much of a factor would the jab play?

And so on.

Past vs modern is not the topic here..its Holmes who is a past time boxer as well vs another past time boxer who didn't fight the caliber holmes did ...do you want to debate that?


Holmes had very good balance and actually Liston did not..Liston often threw with lunging jabs and over extended rights which would cause a fast boxer to counter him which why Ali won very easily . On the contrary Holmes had excellent balance controlling all his fights with the jab and knowing when and how much weight to put on the leading foot, which is why he had such a great jab because he could sit down on it and extend more power to it which gave it the sting it had.Im not sure you are actually studying the complete fighters here. Why try and break this down if you think there are to many variables? this could go for any possible match up. this is a very easy match to break down looking at holme's abilty and talent, particularly the jab which he nullifies Liston with..Liston is an unproven in all but one fight with Williams, so how do you rate Williams in correlation to Holmes?.This is how break downs are done.

[joeandthebums]

Holmes had very good balance

In the Esch fight you refer to? I disagree.

Liston often threw with lunging jabs and over extended rights which would cause a fast boxer to counter him which why Ali won very easily.

Clay/Ali was extremely fast and I would not attribute Liston's core mannerisms as the root of his defeat.

On the contrary Holmes had excellent balance controlling all his fights with the jab and knowing when and how much weight to put on the leading foot, which is why he had such a great jab because he could sit down on it and extend more power to it which gave it the sting it had.

I disagree again, in the Esch fight he did not have good balance. Hence why he was in the ring against the chosen level of opponent. For example, when he tried to deviate off the straight line he couldn't effectively.

Esch posed no questions of Holmes.

why try and break this down if you think there are to many variables? this could go for any possible match up.

Yes I hold the opinion all fights have too many variables to give precision predictions of what would unfold, the example I always sight is Hearns-Duran.

Unfortunately boxing is a sport where rarely are we surprised with the victor of a contest, so the standard has become "Boxer A will win" and then he does, no need for anything more.

this is a very easy match to break down looking at holme's abilty and talent...liston is an unproven in all but one fight with Williams

You put no worth in the Eddie Machen?

so how do you rate Williams in correlation to holmes...this is how break downs are done.

That's how triangle theories prevail.

I am of the opinion you cannot take a fighter's performance against one opponent and drop it in against another.

It takes a great deal more time and effort to try and accurately discuss any possible match-up.

[juggernaut666]

In the Esch fight you refer to? I disagree.



Clay/Ali was extremely fast and I would not attribute Liston's core mannerisms as the root of his defeat.



I disagree again, in the Esch fight he did not have good balance. Hence why he was in the ring against the chosen level of opponent. For example, when he tried to deviate off the straight line he couldn't effectively.

Esch posed no questions of Holmes.




Yes I hold the opinion all fights have too many variables to give precision predictions of what would unfold, the example I always sight is Hearns-Duran.

Unfortunately boxing is a sport where rarely are we surprised with the victor of a contest, so the standard has become "Boxer A will win" and then he does, no need for anything more.



You put no worth in the Eddie Machen?



That's how triangle theories prevail.

I am of the opinion you cannot take a fighter's performance against one opponent and drop it in against another.

It takes a great deal more time and effort to try and accurately discuss any possible match-up.

ANY fight will show Holmes had balance and much better than anyone prior to the 80's. Clay was fast footed who never set down on his shots,he would be in trouble with a better jabber who had a chin and Jab which Holmes did. Holmes didn't need to run ,he had the stiff jab ,something ali didn't have when he fought liston. where is it exactly he has at FIFTY have bad balance against Bean? How about we use 43 year old Holmes taking Holyfield the distance if you would like to dissect his balance? Eddie Machan was astiff stand still fighter like a Holmes however he is not Holmes just like frazier is not mike Tyson. you stated he was not balnced ,that is incorrect and ignored Listons lack of that skill.

[joeandthebums]

ANY fight will show Holmes had balance and much better than anyone prior to the 80's. Clay was fast footed who never set down on his shots,he would be in trouble with a better jabber who had a chin and Jab which Holmes did. Holmes didn't need to run ,he had the stiff jab ,something ali didn't have when he fought liston. where is it exactly he has at FIFTY have bad balance against Bean? How about we use 43 year old Holmes taking Holyfield the distance if you would like to dissect his balance? Eddie Machan was astiff stand still fighter like a Holmes however he is not Holmes just like frazier is not mike Tyson. you stated he was not balnced ,that is incorrect and ignored Listons lack of that skill.

You may take this however you wish, but I do not wish to spend time examining a fight such as Holmes-Bean.

If I am incorrect and my memory is wildly wrong than I will happily concede the point rather than waste time revisiting it.

It seems both our points are not communicated to one another, as when I read your responses I feel you have not understood my previous post.

I tried to address very specific points and you broaden the point, I was not addressing Holmes balance throughout his career, I believe I repeatedly made that clear.

As I stated prior to engaging, I do not feel this is worthy of spending time on and having done so, I still feel the same.

[juggernaut666]

You may take this however you wish, but I do not wish to spend time examining a fight such as Holmes-Bean.

If I am incorrect and my memory is wildly wrong than I will happily concede the point rather than waste time revisiting it.

It seems both our points are not communicated to one another, as when I read your responses I feel you have not understood my previous post.

I tried to address very specific points and you broaden the point, I was not addressing Holmes balance throughout his career, I believe I repeatedly made that clear.

As I stated prior to engaging, I do not feel this is worthy of spending time on and having done so, I still feel the same.

You are examining the Bean fight and trying to get your way out by default comparing Holmes balance to that of the Bean fight? My comparison is correct on comparing Beans chin to that of Listons since we are using statistical match ups here because liston Never fought a big puncher with a chin. Not sure what you are talking about the enite thread is Holmes vs Liston.,and that would include ALL comparisons to what each has faced there is no BROADEN the discussion it Is the discussion..I haven't even hit you with 30's Holmes vs Liston yet so we will leave it at that.

[joeandthebums]

You are examining the Bean fight and trying to get your way out by default comparing Holmes balance to that of the Bean fight? My comparison is correct on comparing Beans chin to that of Listons since we are using statistical match ups here because liston Never fought a big puncher with a chin. Not sure what you are talking about the enite thread is Holmes vs Liston.,and that would include ALL comparisons to what each has faced there is no BROADEN the discussion it Is the discussion..I haven't even hit you with 30's Holmes vs Liston yet so we will leave it at that.

Please re-read the dialogue between ourselves.

My initial response was to your comment that the Holmes that beat Esch would defeat Liston, so it was that version of Holmes that I was focusing on, not a career Holmes.