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

[billeau2]

Mutiple people here trolling the poster is right he wasnt that great way to slow basic and easy to read nothing impressive

As if on cue here comes the leader of the idiot brigade to way in....

[billeau2]

I got past the original post and the "Tony Galento did 100x better against" math in support of this thread starter's conclusion that an esteemed member of the IBHOF "wasn't a bum but he just wasn't great or even world-class". Then I went to the next post and read through that, as I customarily do; and noted that poster's hypothesis that Sonny Liston "was connected to Al Capone", the Chicago mobster who died in 1947, six years before Sonny Liston turned pro; and then I went on to other things in the course of my day.

The thread starter...like all of us, who put our pants on one leg at a time, while entitled to his opinion was all over the place about Liston and there was not a rational argument to be had. But a hater thread does bring many, like a moth to the light.

I can certainly respect the esteemed posters who weighed in without agreeing, but people make a real oversight when they look at a heavyweight contender's record and frankly its driving me nuts at times lol. Statistically there are a number of reasons why many great heavyweights did not seemingly have fellow great contenders to vie with. It has to do with the statistical odds of being a great fighter, your weight, and the chances of being a great heavyweight. It also has to do with the general level of skills fighters had, more than the amount of great fighters per se. The effect of all of these things is that there are many great heavy weights who never fought fellow great names at prime. But it is consistent... there are also some exceptions, like the seventies where the Gods got bored and decided to throw us Frazier, Ali, Foreman, Young, Norton, Lyle, Shavers... etc.

Thing also is, film shows how talented the general no names Liston fought.

[billeau2]

Yeah, someone didn't do his homework on that one lol (ps Liston was connected to Blinky Palermo and Frankie Carbo) 

whadaya talkin bout? Didn't Lucky Luciano tell Liston to get hit in the kisser er else? Or wait wait... my bad, that was Daniel Day Lewis as the Butcher in Gangs of New York that put the cabbosh on Ole Sunny!

[Noelanthony]

The most overrated HW in history.

Biggest hypejob alongside Adrian Broner

and Wilder

[Flickergrab98]

Liston was highly underrated and his fights with Ali were fixes. Ali fans will deny it and ask for proof, but it’s been written about in several thoroughly researched books. Watch his fights and how he went through a prime Cleveland Williams with ease (not the bullet riddled washed up version Ali fought) as well as other solid HW’s like Patterson 2x, Folley, Machen. He had an excellent jab, new how to cut off the ring, and Forrman himself called him the hardest puncher he ever stepped in the ring with.

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.

[GhostofDempsey]

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.

You’re full of heated opinions but too lazy to research the topic yourself. Several books and interviews to support the claim these fights may have been fixed. An FBI investigation suggests the first fight was fixed.

Through a Freedom of Information Act request, the Times obtained memos (some addressed directly to the FBI's then-director, J. Edgar Hoover) showing the bureau's investigation into Ash Resnick and Barnett Magids — two gamblers who seemed to have insider knowledge before the upset.

Resnick, who had connections to Liston and organized crime, first advised Magids that Liston would knock out Clay in the second round. Then on the day of the fight, documents show Resnick told Magids not to make any bets on the fight but to "just go watch the fight on pay TV and he would know why and that he could not talk further at that time."

"Magids did go see the fight on TV and immediately realized that Resnick knew that Liston was going to lose," a document stated. "A week later, there was an article in Sports Illustrated writing up Resnick as a big loser because of his backing of Liston. Later people 'in the know' in Las Vegas told Magids that Resnick and Liston both reportedly made over $1 million betting against Liston on the fight and that the magazine article was a cover for this."

It's not confirmed that Liston took a dive, but it was enough for the FBI to continue to assert the su****ion internally that Resnick had fixed the fight.

[Flickergrab98]

You’re full of heated opinions but too lazy to research the topic yourself. Several books and interviews to support the claim these fights may have been fixed. An FBI investigation suggests the first fight was fixed.

Through a Freedom of Information Act request, the Times obtained memos (some addressed directly to the FBI's then-director, J. Edgar Hoover) showing the bureau's investigation into Ash Resnick and Barnett Magids — two gamblers who seemed to have insider knowledge before the upset.

Resnick, who had connections to Liston and organized crime, first advised Magids that Liston would knock out Clay in the second round. Then on the day of the fight, documents show Resnick told Magids not to make any bets on the fight but to "just go watch the fight on pay TV and he would know why and that he could not talk further at that time."

"Magids did go see the fight on TV and immediately realized that Resnick knew that Liston was going to lose," a document stated. "A week later, there was an article in Sports Illustrated writing up Resnick as a big loser because of his backing of Liston. Later people 'in the know' in Las Vegas told Magids that Resnick and Liston both reportedly made over $1 million betting against Liston on the fight and that the magazine article was a cover for this."

It's not confirmed that Liston took a dive, but it was enough for the FBI to continue to assert the su****ion internally that Resnick had fixed the fight.

Am I missing something? After all that you just stated, you still had to admit that it’s unconfirmed whether Liston took a dive. If they can’t state confidently that Liston threw the fight, then how can they simultaneously assert that the fight was fixed?

Not to mention, none of this lines up with Liston’s behavior during the round where Ali was suffering from blindness? If he was supposed to be in on the fix, then why does he try so hard to put Ali away when he sensed his moment of weakness?

And again, Liston seemed to take a lot more damage than necessary for what was supposed to be a fixed fight.

Lastly, why has none of the so-called proof been anything conclusive? Even what you’ve just cited was rumors spread by people supposedly “in the know”.

In fact, there’s certain points that have been made which poke a hole in your claim, such as this statement by Arthur Daley of the New York Times: “The prospects of a betting coup can be dismissed because the 8-to-1 odds in Liston's favor never varied more than a point. If there had been a rush of smart money on the underdog, the odds would have plummeted.”

[GhostofDempsey]

Am I missing something? After all that you just stated, you still had to admit that it’s unconfirmed whether Liston took a dive. If they can’t state confidently that Liston threw the fight, then how can they simultaneously assert that the fight was fixed?

Not to mention, none of this lines up with Liston’s behavior during the round where Ali was suffering from blindness? If he was supposed to be in on the fix, then why does he try so hard to put Ali away when he sensed his moment of weakness?

And again, Liston seemed to take a lot more damage than necessary for what was supposed to be a fixed fight.

Lastly, why has none of the so-called proof been anything conclusive? Even what you’ve just cited was rumors spread by people supposedly “in the know”.

In fact, there’s certain points that have been made which poke a hole in your claim, such as this statement by Arthur Daley of the New York Times: “The prospects of a betting coup can be dismissed because the 8-to-1 odds in Liston's favor never varied more than a point. If there had been a rush of smart money on the underdog, the odds would have plummeted.”

I already told you, it is my OPINION that Liston took a dive in both fights. I based my opinion on books, interviews and documentaries to include the FBI investigation that did not definitively prove a fix but highly suspected one.

You seem to be emotionally invested in defending Ali, which is fine. But I’m making a logical argument drawn from various sources. Nothing I have read has poked any holes in my opinion, not Arthur Daley, or the sportswriter hacks who were dyed in the wool Ali flunkies.

[Flickergrab98]

I already told you, it is my OPINION that Liston took a dive in both fights. I based my opinion on books, interviews and documentaries to include the FBI investigation that did not definitively prove a fix but highly suspected one.

You seem to be emotionally invested in defending Ali, which is fine. But I’m making a logical argument drawn from various sources. Nothing I have read has poked any holes in my opinion, not Arthur Daley, or the sportswriter hacks who were dyed in the wool Ali flunkies.

I responded the way I did because in your initial post on this thread you stated it as if it were a matter of simple, undeniable fact. And not simply an opinion. When in reality, as we all know, this has not been definitively proven. And don’t think I haven’t noticed that you didn’t provide counters to any of the points I raised, you just hand-waived them.

[GhostofDempsey]

I responded the way I did because in your initial post on this thread you stated it as if it were a matter of simple, undeniable fact. And not simply an opinion. When in reality, as we all know, this has not been definitively proven. And don’t think I haven’t noticed that you didn’t provide counters to any of the points I raised, you just hand-waived them.

What counters are you looking for, considering you waived off an FBI investigation that suspected a fix upon its conclusion? I can’t answer questions that only the FBI has specific insight. We can speculate the why and what for, but Liston had to make it believable if he was in on the fix. Perhaps he was supposed to dive at a specific round and had to take a few licks and not press to hard. You know how hard that is to do? To carry a fighter halfway through the bout while looking like you want to win?

I can give some titles to read, but you likely won’t read them, you’ll simply read some reviews that support your position and dismiss the rest. You already alluded to that in your previous post. “The Devil and Sonny Liston” is a good place to start. You might also read “Sonny Liston: The Real Story Behind the Ali Liston Fights”. Debates of this sort rarely sway anyone from a position where they are dug in and willing to die on that hill.

The betting odds you mentioned had been considered in the investigation, but something changed at the last hour and the fix was in, too late to change odds without raising su****ions.

In between their two fights the rematch was supposed to take place earlier. Liston trained the hardest he ever had and was in top form, when Ali suddenly pulled out with claims of a hernia. Don’t recall seeing any official medical documentation to that effect. It seemed like a very convenient time to suddenly suffer a hernia, when word got back to Ali’s camp that Liston was in beast mode and nothing was holding him back.

Like I said, you have your mind made up, and you are indulging in semantics because I worded my opinion as though it was documented fact. Obviously my opinion is not historical fact, I don’t know why I have to explain that to certain posters here, but some folks get hung up on the mechanics of a sentence rather than the context.