Mike Tyson Vs Sonny Liston

[Benny Leonard]

Tyson had a solid chin, even Teddy Atlas would agree with you on that.

Liston had much better variety. Against Patterson he seemed to anticipate Patterson's movements before Floyd even made his move. He could hurt people with jabs, right hands, hooks and uppercuts from either hand.


0:45

Notice anything different between Patterson and Tyson (besides size)?

Ruddock vs. Tyson: What "time" do you want me to look at?


Foreman actually thought Tyson was done at this point {Ruddock fight}

[TheGreatA]

Notice anything different between Patterson and Tyson (besides size)?

Ruddock vs. Tyson: What "time" do you want me to look at?


Foreman actually thought Tyson was done at this point {Ruddock fight}

I notice a lot of things different with Patterson and Tyson and I wouldn't compare the two really. Liston beating Patterson doesn't necessarily mean a thing regarding this particular match-up.

I was trying to point out that Liston was a much "better" puncher than Ruddock was, who had fallen in love with his left hand and evidently so had the rest of the boxing world.

I posted the Ruddock fight in case you wanted to take another look at what Ruddock was doing and compare it to Sonny Liston. It's a repetitive fight with Ruddock throwing his big left hand, occasionally connecting, and taking heavy punishment to the body and at times below the belt.

It would be an exaggeration to say Tyson was done but he was very obviously a diminished fighter from the Tyson of 1988.

[Benny Leonard]

I notice a lot of things different with Patterson and Tyson and I wouldn't compare the two really. Liston beating Patterson doesn't necessarily mean a thing regarding this particular match-up.

I was trying to point out that Liston was a much "better" puncher than Ruddock was, who had fallen in love with his left hand and evidently so had the rest of the boxing world.

I posted the Ruddock fight in case you wanted to take another look at what Ruddock was doing and compare it to Sonny Liston. It's a repetitive fight with Ruddock throwing his big left hand, occasionally connecting, and taking heavy punishment to the body and at times below the belt.

It would be an exaggeration to say Tyson was done but he was very obviously a diminished fighter from the Tyson of 1988.

True. Liston was a threat with all punches and fought behind the jab...something that would have helped Ruddock throughout his career.

Patterson was backing up to much allowing Liston to extend his jab and do what he wanted. Tyson would be on him, bobbing and weaving in...even behind his own jab (which I do think he would use and land). Tyson wouldn't be scared/cautious because he knows he can take a punch and give it. As well as some other things.

"Done" as far as him being the same fighter.

Foreman changed as well I thought after he destroyed Frazier.

That's why I like that line Floyd Patterson used when asked what he would advise to Tyson (after he lost to Douglas): "Remember what got you there."




Here is a nice article:



The Foreman quote was in one of the S.I. articles.


I don't know: I still can see Tyson beating Liston. I like Foreman over Tyson because he was taller, more aggressive and pushed people around...and I don't think he was as slow as some people make him out to be...not young George.



Found the quote and article:

On Friday night, Foreman paid $34.95 to watch the Tyson-Ruddock fight on pay-per-view television. "After the seventh round it looked like a lot of holding to me," said Foreman. "One guy would hit the other, and then he'd hope the other guy wouldn't hit him back. I think Tyson is gone. It's like Carl Lewis and some of those other runners: One year they are beating everybody, and the next year you never hear their names. Tyson has become average. And an average fighter can be beaten by anybody on a given night."






Foreman was more of a bad style matchup for Tyson than Liston in my opinion even though some people want to compare them.

[mickey malone]

True. Liston was a threat with all punches and fought behind the jab...something that would have helped Ruddock throughout his career.

Patterson was backing up to much allowing Liston to extend his jab and do what he wanted. Tyson would be on him, bobbing and weaving in...even behind his own jab (which I do think he would use and land). Tyson wouldn't be scared/cautious because he knows he can take a punch and give it. As well as some other things.

"Done" as far as him being the same fighter.

Foreman changed as well I thought after he destroyed Frazier.

That's why I like that line Floyd Patterson used when asked what he would advise to Tyson (after he lost to Douglas): "Remember what got you there."




Here is a nice article:



The Foreman quote was in one of the S.I. articles.


I don't know: I still can see Tyson beating Liston. I like Foreman over Tyson because he was taller, more aggressive and pushed people around...and I don't think he was as slow as some people make him out to be...not young George.



Found the quote and article:

On Friday night, Foreman paid $34.95 to watch the Tyson-Ruddock fight on pay-per-view television. "After the seventh round it looked like a lot of holding to me," said Foreman. "One guy would hit the other, and then he'd hope the other guy wouldn't hit him back. I think Tyson is gone. It's like Carl Lewis and some of those other runners: One year they are beating everybody, and the next year you never hear their names. Tyson has become average. And an average fighter can be beaten by anybody on a given night."






Foreman was more of a bad style matchup for Tyson than Liston in my opinion even though some people want to compare them.

Liston was an intimidating fighter with a very powerful and accurate left jab.. He also possessed a considerable size advantage over most of his opponets, much in the same way the Klitschko's do today..
Liston in fact was quite lucky to have a small guy like Patterson, to bully the title from..
I know you've heard it all before, but it's 100% true.. Anyone who was good enough to put Liston under pressure was able to expose him as a crude slugger with limited accuracy and timing..
Eddie Machen, in my opinion, showed the young Cassius Clay, exactly how to beat him.. I mean, how does a grown up monster like Liston lose inside the distance to a 21 year old kid?? I mean you can see it with Tyson beating someone like Berbick, whose limitations were universally recognized, but the all conquering Liston SHOULD, according to gospel, have done a hell of a lot better than he actually did..
His jab may have been the best of all time, but his attacking arsenal lacked definition & accuracy, with many of his power shots flailing wide off the mark..
With the lone exception of Clay, who did Liston fight who was anywhere near as good as Mike Tyson?? Please don't make me laugh with Patterson, Cleveland Williams or Leotis Martin, because they simply were not..
I hear all the echo's of 'bad style match up' but it doesn't wash.. Tyson was almost as tall as Liston, same power, twice as fast, 10 times more accurate, a bigger heart, and a better chin.. I won't detract, Mike would swarm all over him for a particularly brutal and early KO..

[TheGreatA]

True. Liston was a threat with all punches and fought behind the jab...something that would have helped Ruddock throughout his career.

Patterson was backing up to much allowing Liston to extend his jab and do what he wanted. Tyson would be on him, bobbing and weaving in...even behind his own jab (which I do think he would use and land). Tyson wouldn't be scared/cautious because he knows he can take a punch and give it. As well as some other things.

Look at the first fight between Liston and Patterson though. Patterson was very aggressive but Liston used his underrated footwork to stay away and roughed him up in the clinches. Of course easier to do with Patterson than Tyson.

"Done" as far as him being the same fighter.

Foreman changed as well I thought after he destroyed Frazier.

That's why I like that line Floyd Patterson used when asked what he would advise to Tyson (after he lost to Douglas): "Remember what got you there."

I don't know: I still can see Tyson beating Liston. I like Foreman over Tyson because he was taller, more aggressive and pushed people around...and I don't think he was as slow as some people make him out to be...not young George.

Found the quote and article:

On Friday night, Foreman paid $34.95 to watch the Tyson-Ruddock fight on pay-per-view television. "After the seventh round it looked like a lot of holding to me," said Foreman. "One guy would hit the other, and then he'd hope the other guy wouldn't hit him back. I think Tyson is gone. It's like Carl Lewis and some of those other runners: One year they are beating everybody, and the next year you never hear their names. Tyson has become average. And an average fighter can be beaten by anybody on a given night."

I agree with the quote. Now Tyson wasn't done, he could still beat fighters on the level of Ruddock and Stewart and later after coming back from prison Frank Bruno, Frans Botha, Andrew Golota and Bruce Seldon but he was no longer the fighter D'Amato and Rooney trained, that much was obvious watching his fights against Ruddock.

Foreman was more of a bad style matchup for Tyson than Liston in my opinion even though some people want to compare them.

I agree it's a different match-up.

Liston was an intimidating fighter with a very powerful and accurate left jab.. He also possessed a considerable size advantage over most of his opponets, much in the same way the Klitschko's do today..
Liston in fact was quite lucky to have a small guy like Patterson, to bully the title from..

Liston had already taken Patterson's title by beating all the top contenders around while Patterson was fighting the likes of Brian London and Tom McNeeley. Their fight was just a confirmation that Liston was the better heavyweight of the two.

He fought plenty of people who were as big as him or bigger. Cleveland Williams obviously, Nino Valdes, Mike DeJohn was said to be 6'4 although he is listed at around 6'3, top 10 ranked Henry Clark much later in his career.

I know you've heard it all before, but it's 100% true.. Anyone who was good enough to put Liston under pressure was able to expose him as a crude slugger with limited accuracy and timing..
Eddie Machen, in my opinion, showed the young Cassius Clay, exactly how to beat him.. I mean, how does a grown up monster like Liston lose inside the distance to a 21 year old kid?? I mean you can see it with Tyson beating someone like Berbick, whose limitations were universally recognized, but the all conquering Liston SHOULD, according to gospel, have done a hell of a lot better than he actually did..
His jab may have been the best of all time, but his attacking arsenal lacked definition & accuracy, with many of his power shots flailing wide off the mark..
With the lone exception of Clay, who did Liston fight who was anywhere near as good as Mike Tyson?? Please don't make me laugh with Patterson, Cleveland Williams or Leotis Martin, because they simply were not..
I hear all the echo's of 'bad style match up' but it doesn't wash.. Tyson was almost as tall as Liston, same power, twice as fast, 10 times more accurate, a bigger heart, and a better chin.. I won't detract, Mike would swarm all over him for a particularly brutal and early KO..

Liston lost to a 22 year old, a 22 year old Muhammad Ali perhaps the greatest heavyweight of all time. How does one lose to a fringe contender like Buster Douglas at 23 years of age? That's what Tyson did. I also don't even want to compare how Tyson would have done at 33-35 against a prime Muhammad Ali.

Eddie Machen to me showed that Liston could deal with a tricky opponent who put up the best fight of his life while Liston was expecting a one round knockout. It was Liston who came on in the late rounds to seal the decision win.

Aside from a 38 year old Holmes, the equivalent of Sonny beating up on an old Rocky Marciano, Tyson fought two men on the level of Liston and lost to them both on TKO's. His defining win and performance, a one round knockout of Michael Spinks, is second to Liston's two 1 round KO's over Patterson, a better heavyweight than Spinks.

[blacklodge]

Man, what's up with Leotis Martin? Liston was nearing 50 years old and was winning the fight easily at the point of the KO anyway. The burden here does not exclusively lie at the feet of Liston to take Tyson's punches, navigate Tyson's "impregnable defense" or to show heart, despite what the Ali fights may show you. I wouldn't propose the Tyson of '97 anymore than I would the Liston of '64. Age aside, Liston knows a thing or two about layoffs and jail time as well.
If Liston could take Cleveland Williams's best shot and quite a few of them, he could take Tyson's.
Unlike Tyson, Liston was comfortable moving forwards or backwards.
Unlike Tyson, Liston was capable of making adjustments throughout a fight.
Unlike Tyson, Liston wasn't discouraged, Tyson folded every time he lost a couple of rounds.
While different, Liston's power was equal to Tyson's in dispatching his opponents.
While different, Liston was just as adept at head and lateral movement as young Tyson.

You're not going to catch me saying Tyson doesn't have heart, he does. But really, people. Do you actually think Tyson would finish a fight while losing with a broken jaw?
Tyson is not "almost as tall" as Liston. Liston had about 2 inches on Tyson (who always had an exagerrated height anyway), and in terms of "boxing height" Tyson has a 71" reach versus Liston's 84". How often do you see a 13 inch reach advantage? Liston was the bigger, stronger man.
Regarding Foreman, he has always said that in his initial career Sonny Liston was the template for him, the fighter he aspired to be stylistically. Foreman's jab is Liston's jab.

[mickey malone]

[QUOTE=TheGreatA;6485942]Look at the first fight between Liston and Patterson though. Patterson was very aggressive but Liston used his underrated footwork to stay away and roughed him up in the clinches. Of course easier to do with Patterson than Tyson.





I agree with the quote. Now Tyson wasn't done, he could still beat fighters on the level of Ruddock and Stewart and later after coming back from prison Frank Bruno, Frans Botha, Andrew Golota and Bruce Seldon but he was no longer the fighter D'Amato and Rooney trained, that much was obvious watching his fights against Ruddock.



I agree it's a different match-up.



Liston had already taken Patterson's title by beating all the top contenders around while Patterson was fighting the likes of Brian London and Tom McNeeley. Their fight was just a confirmation that Liston was the better heavyweight of the two.

He fought plenty of people who were as big as him or bigger. Cleveland Williams obviously, Nino Valdes, Mike DeJohn was said to be 6'4 although he is listed at around 6'3, top 10 ranked Henry Clark much later in his career.



Liston lost to a 22 year old, a 22 year old Muhammad Ali perhaps the greatest heavyweight of all time. How does one lose to a fringe contender like Buster Douglas at 23 years of age? That's what Tyson did. I also don't even want to compare how Tyson would have done at 33-35 against a prime Muhammad Ali.

Eddie Machen to me showed that Liston could deal with a tricky opponent who put up the best fight of his life while Liston was expecting a one round knockout. It was Liston who came on in the late rounds to seal the decision win.

Aside from a 38 year old Holmes, the equivalent of Sonny beating up on an old Rocky Marciano, Tyson fought two men on the level of Liston and lost to them both on TKO's. His defining win and performance, a one round knockout of Michael Spinks, is second to Liston's two 1 round KO's over Patterson, a better heavyweight than Spinks.

Sorry, It was Patterson who was 21, but at 22 Ali wasn't really expected to beat Liston, just as Tyson wasn't expected to be making his 9th (I think) title defense, while I'd suggest what should have been his pre-prime years..
Tyson kicks ass on resume, he was almost a veteran world champ at 23!
With ref to 'most' of Liston's opponents being smaller, they were, but yes, he did fight and beat some bigger men to.
With Macken, it's just the alternative view.. Liston at the time, was proposterosly overrated, and was expected to KO everyone he faced, & I believe he was even a slight favorite in the rematch with Ali! All Macken did was show the world that Liston was not invincible, just as James Smith had with Tyson.. Not saying Smith's better than Macken, but much like Leotis Martin or Mac Foster (who Liston ducked) was a danger man to anyone in the division..
Reach could cause an initial problem against Liston, but if he got underneath the jab of Sonny, which with his crouching darting style, I highly suspect he would, it'll be crash, ****, wallop, what a picture! I'm afraid...

Thomas, Tucker, Spinks, Holmes, Bruno, Tubbs, Smith.. All world champions in one way or another.. 2 KO merchants and 5 noted stylists, one being 38 yr old Holmes..
Then you've got Ruddock (who never fought for the title!) who once again would have been a major threat in any era, as would all the above.. Tyson didn't hang around, he fought a lot of good talent there, & KO'd 6 of them..

[mrboxer]

first of all they are not as tough as you make them out to be,if liston was fighting today he would not even be good enough to be a sparring partner,and if tyson were fighting today he would not even be ranked in the top 50,the fight game as changed boxers do not get intimidated,if tyson and liston were to fight liston would not last one round he would get kayoed

[mickey malone]

Man, what's up with Leotis Martin? Liston was nearing 50 years old and was winning the fight easily at the point of the KO anyway. The burden here does not exclusively lie at the feet of Liston to take Tyson's punches, navigate Tyson's "impregnable defense" or to show heart, despite what the Ali fights may show you. I wouldn't propose the Tyson of '97 anymore than I would the Liston of '64. Age aside, Liston knows a thing or two about layoffs and jail time as well.
If Liston could take Cleveland Williams's best shot and quite a few of them, he could take Tyson's.
Unlike Tyson, Liston was comfortable moving forwards or backwards.
Unlike Tyson, Liston was capable of making adjustments throughout a fight.
Unlike Tyson, Liston wasn't discouraged, Tyson folded every time he lost a couple of rounds.
While different, Liston's power was equal to Tyson's in dispatching his opponents.
While different, Liston was just as adept at head and lateral movement as young Tyson.

You're not going to catch me saying Tyson doesn't have heart, he does. But really, people. Do you actually think Tyson would finish a fight while losing with a broken jaw?
Tyson is not "almost as tall" as Liston. Liston had about 2 inches on Tyson (who always had an exagerrated height anyway), and in terms of "boxing height" Tyson has a 71" reach versus Liston's 84". How often do you see a 13 inch reach advantage? Liston was the bigger, stronger man.
Regarding Foreman, he has always said that in his initial career Sonny Liston was the template for him, the fighter he aspired to be stylistically. Foreman's jab is Liston's jab.

I've answered a lot of this in my previous post to GreatA, and I'm still not sold on Liston beating Tyson.. Nothing against Martin whatsoever, just quoted him as a 'dangerman' in the other post, and I'm aware he KO'd an old Liston, but Bruno, Smith & Ruddock would have been 'dangermen' in any era..

And yeh, I'd be very confident that Tyson would finish a fight with a broken jaw as you had to seriously hurt him, but ultimately put him flat on his back to beat him.. Tyson always went out on his shield and was a braver man than Liston.. He'd have definately done the same to Patterson, before putting on a much better display against Ali..

[TheGreatA]

Sorry, It was Patterson who was 21, but at 22 Ali wasn't really expected to beat Liston, just as Tyson wasn't expected to be making his 9th (I think) title defense, while I'd suggest what should have been his pre-prime years..
Tyson kicks ass on resume, he was almost a veteran world champ at 23!
With ref to 'most' of Liston's opponents being smaller, they were, but yes, he did fight and beat some bigger men to.
With Macken, it's just the alternative view.. Liston at the time, was proposterosly overrated, and was expected to KO everyone he faced, & I believe he was even a slight favorite in the rematch with Ali! All Macken did was show the world that Liston was not invincible, just as James Smith had with Tyson.. Not saying Smith's better than Macken, but much like Leotis Martin or Mac Foster (who Liston ducked) was a danger man to anyone in the division..
Reach could cause an initial problem against Liston, but if he got underneath the jab of Sonny, which with his crouching darting style, I highly suspect he would, it'll be crash, ****, wallop, what a picture! I'm afraid...

Thomas, Tucker, Spinks, Holmes, Bruno, Tubbs, Smith.. All world champions in one way or another.. 2 KO merchants and 5 noted stylists, one being 38 yr old Holmes..
Then you've got Ruddock (who never fought for the title!) who once again would have been a major threat in any era, as would all the above.. Tyson didn't hang around, he fought a lot of good talent there, & KO'd 6 of them..

Ali, then Cassius Clay, wasn't expected to beat Liston because he wasn't thought of as much. Ali obviously proved everyone wrong and went onto become possibly the greatest heavyweight of all time. I don't see the point in saying "Liston was favoured", "Ali wasn't highly regarded", it's still Muhammad Ali we are talking about.

Douglas too wasn't expected to beat Tyson (42 to 1 odds), he went onto get knocked out by Holyfield and balloon up to 400 pounds.

The names you listed were good but hardly comparable to Sonny Liston, aside from possibly Ruddock who as I already pointed out was much more one-dimensional.

I'd compare those fighters to Zora Folley, Cleveland Williams, Eddie Machen, Nino Valdes and so on. They would have been world champions as well had there been three or more titles around. Unfortunately there was only one and it belonged to Sonny Liston.