I'm sorry but i can't see Liston as a great or even good boxer ?

[QueensburyRules]

Nothing but a bunch of hogwash. It’s bad enough when people claim that the second fight was fixed, but to also claim that, despite the fact that we can see how chopped up Liston was in the first, that the evidence of our own eyes is fake is ridiculous. Not to mention the genuine expressions of shock Sonny made after that fact, he was absolutely taken aback by the number Ali was able to do on him. It’s like when a flat earther tries to get me to ignore the fact that things disappear over the horizon. Also, I’d love for you to cite these “well-researched” books that prove they were faked, just to see how they stacked up to scrutiny after they were published.

- - We can clearly see in the 2nd fight Ali is DQed under any respectable officiating by not only refusing to go to the neutral corner, but by trying to kick Sonny in the noggin while wrestling with Walcott who was more celebrity ref than professional ref.

No matter the FBI report of the 1st fight, we can clearly see Liston coming out for the early KO swinging for the fences trying to deposit Ali in Timbuktu. Ali was such a woeful underdog after pitiable performances vs Cooper and Jones, no fix was needed, but after the early $$$ bonanza failed to materialize, the next obvious strategy is to pull the plug to cash in on overwhelming favorite Liston's, what 30-1 odds, a mighty bonanza greater than the original legal cash grab.

Note-Liston died under poorly investigated circumstances days before he was due to give his 2nd testimony before Congress.

[Willow The Wisp]

Nothing but a bunch of hogwash. It’s bad enough when people claim that the second fight was fixed, but to also claim that, despite the fact that we can see how chopped up Liston was in the first, that the evidence of our own eyes is fake is ridiculous. Not to mention the genuine expressions of shock Sonny made after that fact, he was absolutely taken aback by the number Ali was able to do on him. It’s like when a flat earther tries to get me to ignore the fact that things disappear over the horizon. Also, I’d love for you to cite these “well-researched” books that prove they were faked, just to see how they stacked up to scrutiny after they were published.

I'm with you on this.

[Marchegiano]

It's funny to me, if I searched Eddie Machen on this forum right now how often would praise pop up disconnected from Liston? You know, like how when you talk about Ali you might mention Foreman and Frazier but also plenty of posts just mention Ali without any mention of his contemporaries. Machen has anything like that?

How about say John L? Is John L praised outside of his contemporaries? Sure, plenty.

Fitzsimmon? Hell, usually it's the MW2HW stuff not so much his resume he's tied to.

Is Jack Johnson as known for beating Tommy Burns as he is for being the first black HW champion?

Dempsey? Folks talk about Dempsey without mentioning who he fought all the time.

Joe Louis? Longest reigning champion is more tied to this man than resume.

Charles? ATG LHW

Marciano? Unbeaten HW champion

And we find ourselves back at Ali. Who is just as tied to "The Greatest" as he is his resume.


See greats, real ones, don't actually need their resume for praise. Their resume is **** we use to discuss who among these are greater than others. We do praise them based on resume, but also praise them without it. Not-so-greats do not get this attention. Hence the lack of threads talking about how great Machen was, but, bring up Liston and whap-****-boom, Machen is worth mention.


Dudes like Eddie Machen, you can claim rode the ranking so him good does, so did Pulev. You can claim back den him were raspected doe....So was Pulev. Eddie Machen is remembered exclusively when remembering a great and exclusively for boast that great. Kinda like Billy Miske. ATG on no man's lists, never mentioned for their own talents, and the only real evidence for any of them being "great" is but they were considered among the best of that era though. Yes, they were, in that era. All time, means all time, ain't no greatness in Machen. Pulev been one of the best over a decade. Povetkin was one of the top ten HWs for nearly two. Those names will be used to boast true great Wlad when folks mention Wlad's resume, but, Wlad will be mentioned without his contemporaries for his decade+ reign while Pulev and Povetkin and guys like Sam Peter only ever get brought up in relation to Wlad.


Machen
Miske

I'm making a list. Mother ****ers you didn't know were greats because no one ever says that, but, History Section claims it......when defending a proper great

[mrbig1]

When Clay Fought Liston the first time he was the #1 contender. How did clay become #1? with wins over Jones and Cooper? No the fact is Liston, not Patterson or Clay wiped out the HW division. In the rematch with Ali, Liston was afraid of the Nation of Islam. He thought they would kill him if he won. this is what Randy Gordon told me.

[Willie Pep 229]

It's funny to me, if I searched Eddie Machen on this forum right now how often would praise pop up disconnected from Liston? You know, like how when you talk about Ali you might mention Foreman and Frazier but also plenty of posts just mention Ali without any mention of his contemporaries. Machen has anything like that?

How about say John L? Is John L praised outside of his contemporaries? Sure, plenty.

Fitzsimmon? Hell, usually it's the MW2HW stuff not so much his resume he's tied to.

Is Jack Johnson as known for beating Tommy Burns as he is for being the first black HW champion?

Dempsey? Folks talk about Dempsey without mentioning who he fought all the time.

Joe Louis? Longest reigning champion is more tied to this man than resume.

Charles? ATG LHW

Marciano? Unbeaten HW champion

And we find ourselves back at Ali. Who is just as tied to "The Greatest" as he is his resume.


See greats, real ones, don't actually need their resume for praise. Their resume is **** we use to discuss who among these are greater than others. We do praise them based on resume, but also praise them without it. Not-so-greats do not get this attention. Hence the lack of threads talking about how great Machen was, but, bring up Liston and whap-****-boom, Machen is worth mention.


Dudes like Eddie Machen, you can claim rode the ranking so him good does, so did Pulev. You can claim back den him were raspected doe....So was Pulev. Eddie Machen is remembered exclusively when remembering a great and exclusively for boast that great. Kinda like Billy Miske. ATG on no man's lists, never mentioned for their own talents, and the only real evidence for any of them being "great" is but they were considered among the best of that era though. Yes, they were, in that era. All time, means all time, ain't no greatness in Machen. Pulev been one of the best over a decade. Povetkin was one of the top ten HWs for nearly two. Those names will be used to boast true great Wlad when folks mention Wlad's resume, but, Wlad will be mentioned without his contemporaries for his decade+ reign while Pulev and Povetkin and guys like Sam Peter only ever get brought up in relation to Wlad.


Machen
Miske
Wlad

I'm making a list. Mother ****ers you didn't know were greats because no one ever says that, but, History Section claims it......when defending a proper great

As usual you are a boxing fan; casuals will decide who will be remembered - the average American doesn't know there were two of them, never mind telling them apart.

His 'long' reign was as boring as his style; he and his brother almost killed prize fighting; certainly drove away an entire generation to MMA.

In just a generation no one will be talking about either of them, other than really insightful posters who can also notice the greatness of say a Machen or Miske. You know guys like us.

[GhostofDempsey]

It's funny to me, if I searched Eddie Machen on this forum right now how often would praise pop up disconnected from Liston? You know, like how when you talk about Ali you might mention Foreman and Frazier but also plenty of posts just mention Ali without any mention of his contemporaries. Machen has anything like that?

How about say John L? Is John L praised outside of his contemporaries? Sure, plenty.

Fitzsimmon? Hell, usually it's the MW2HW stuff not so much his resume he's tied to.

Is Jack Johnson as known for beating Tommy Burns as he is for being the first black HW champion?

Dempsey? Folks talk about Dempsey without mentioning who he fought all the time.

Joe Louis? Longest reigning champion is more tied to this man than resume.

Charles? ATG LHW

Marciano? Unbeaten HW champion

And we find ourselves back at Ali. Who is just as tied to "The Greatest" as he is his resume.


See greats, real ones, don't actually need their resume for praise. Their resume is **** we use to discuss who among these are greater than others. We do praise them based on resume, but also praise them without it. Not-so-greats do not get this attention. Hence the lack of threads talking about how great Machen was, but, bring up Liston and whap-****-boom, Machen is worth mention.


Dudes like Eddie Machen, you can claim rode the ranking so him good does, so did Pulev. You can claim back den him were raspected doe....So was Pulev. Eddie Machen is remembered exclusively when remembering a great and exclusively for boast that great. Kinda like Billy Miske. ATG on no man's lists, never mentioned for their own talents, and the only real evidence for any of them being "great" is but they were considered among the best of that era though. Yes, they were, in that era. All time, means all time, ain't no greatness in Machen. Pulev been one of the best over a decade. Povetkin was one of the top ten HWs for nearly two. Those names will be used to boast true great Wlad when folks mention Wlad's resume, but, Wlad will be mentioned without his contemporaries for his decade+ reign while Pulev and Povetkin and guys like Sam Peter only ever get brought up in relation to Wlad.


Machen
Miske

I'm making a list. Mother ****ers you didn't know were greats because no one ever says that, but, History Section claims it......when defending a proper great

Not sure I would compare rankings from the 60's to the 2000's on even ground. Euro-bot Pulev and Povetkin never defeated a HOF fighter, or even came close. Watching their respective fighting styles one can clearly see Machen, overall, was a far more skilled fighter. Inconsistency due to mental health hurt his career more than anything else. He fought a smart fight against Liston.

As far as resumes are concerned, we can pick apart any fighters resume. Scrutinize wins and losses and quality of opposition without consideration of intangibles that are difficult to compare from decades or a century past.

[Marchegiano]

Not sure I would compare rankings from the 60's to the 2000's on even ground. Euro-bot Pulev and Povetkin never defeated a HOF fighter, or even came close. Watching their respective fighting styles one can clearly see Machen, overall, was a far more skilled fighter. Inconsistency due to mental health hurt his career more than anything else. He fought a smart fight against Liston.

As far as resumes are concerned, we can pick apart any fighters resume. Scrutinize wins and losses and quality of opposition without consideration of intangibles that are difficult to compare from decades or a century past.

I'm just saying some guy only ever seem to get praise as vehicles to praise others. I didn't actually mean to dig into Eddie as much as I had. I should have made the point more concise and less ****ish....but I thought it was funny.

[Marchegiano]

As usual you are a boxing fan; casuals will decide who will be remembered - the average American doesn't know there were two of them, never mind telling them apart.

His 'long' reign was as boring as his style; he and his brother almost killed prize fighting; certainly drove away an entire generation to MMA.

In just a generation no one will be talking about either of them, other than really insightful posters who can also notice the greatness of say a Machen or Miske. You know guys like us.

You reckon so? Obviously I was being a **** but you touched on something I find authentically interesting, so, tone change bud.

I honestly believe Wlad's going to be one of the most overrated champions in history come just 20-30 years. I don't disagree with most of what you said, I'm not myself much of a Wlad fan, boring and basic really, but I don't honestly think ATG lists would be so agreed if fans actually watched or read the characters of the lists.

[GhostofDempsey]

You reckon so? Obviously I was being a **** but you touched on something I find authentically interesting, so, tone change bud.

I honestly believe Wlad's going to be one of the most overrated champions in history come just 20-30 years. I don't disagree with most of what you said, I'm not myself much of a Wlad fan, boring and basic really, but I don't honestly think ATG lists would be so agreed if fans actually watched or read the characters of the lists.

Okay, makes sense. I wasn't quite sure where you were going, but we essentially agree here. Wlad is highly overrated. But I also made the same argument with Ali, which went over like a fart in church. But hear me out; I agree that Ali is an ATG HW champion. But I don't rank him as the greatest HW champion of all time and certainly not a P4P great. Partly over some holes in his resume, his fighting style, and some questionable decisions that went in his favor. He also had a lot of help with his legacy from sportswriters and journalists who were enamored by his charisma and rallied behind his causes.

[Willie Pep 229]

Okay, makes sense. I wasn't quite sure where you were going, but we essentially agree here. Wlad is highly overrated. But I also made the same argument with Ali, which went over like a fart in church. But hear me out; I agree that Ali is an ATG HW champion. But I don't rank him as the greatest HW champion of all time and certainly not a P4P great. Partly over some holes in his resume, his fighting style, and some questionable decisions that went in his favor. He also had a lot of help with his legacy from sportswriters and journalists who were enamored by his charisma and rallied behind his causes.

Which always counts. Look at Dempsey, first the villain slacker, then the beloved beaten fighter.

Either way it was lots and lots of ink, and when selling tickets bad ink can be as good as good ink.

Tunney, on the other hand had a far more dominate career (when evaluated by folks like us), but he was by many accounts a boorish man.

When evaluating legacy one can't look to the opinions from guys like us, you've got to step outside the game and evaluate it from the casuals POV.

I am not even sure if it is a wrong or not.

Prize fighting is, must be, an entertainment or it ceases to exist.

In acting, stars can often be 'not very good' actors, but they drive the business, and are the ones remembered.

I suspect like you and Marchegiano that Wald ends up on ATG lists, and maybe is overrated. But that is going to be lists on forums like this one.

I think most Americans (and Yea! I think our opinion ends up counting more when you discuss or measure fame) barely know that man's name now, dispite how long he held the title, they will never remember him later.

I can make a list of things 'I hate about Tyson Fury' but thank the boxing gods for giving him to us, the game sorely needed him.

Paradoxically Ali may been given many gifts in the ring (I agree) but he sure earned the legacy!