Top 90's heavyweight boxers vs top 70's heavyweight boxers?

walshb

Maravilla33 wrote: »

Bruno could hit but barely threw a punch against Tyson. He hit him in the 1st and stopped him in his tracks but didn't follow up. His whole gameplan was based on survival. I don't think Tyson hits Foreman all too regularly. Foreman's frame, reach and own offensive style make it hard for Tyson to connect. He could be very accurate with his combos but for every lovely conbo there were a few missed wild hooks. Foreman could be sloppy too but I think Tyson is basically walking into his shots. He'll be ducking and rushing in and get hit or pushed back and have to start again.

I don't see this going the distance. Foreman in 6 and if I've read it completely wrong then Tyson would also take him out before halfway.

As I said, Foreman is not Bruno, and Foreman is a far deadlier hitter. Yes, it seems clear to me that the Frazier fight influences you a lot when I read the post above. And, I too at first glance could see Mike coming short with his shots, being tied up and pushed back.

Also, Foreman's deadly right uppercut will need to be looked at by Rooney and Mike. I just happen to think that there is enough positive differences between Tyson and Frazier for a different outcome here.

Joe had no plan B, no second attack method. You really believe that Rooney and Mike won't be able to adapt, change the attacks etc to become real dangerous. Mike was not a brawler and pure power slugger. He could box with the best of his era.

I have said it several times, but Tyson can whack from range. He brings a lot more attacking speed to Forerman. Can Foreman react and adapt, that needs looking at. Can he adapt to a far faster attacker with hands and feet, and an attacker with two fisted power and more varied power shots.

Big difference between Frazier plodding forward the same speed, direction and same punch to Tyson who can attack faster, from odd angles, with more power, more variation and a better defence.

Maravilla33

walshb wrote: »

As I said, Foreman is not Bruno, and Foreman is a far deadlier hitter. Yes, it seems clear to me that the Frazier fight influences you a lot when I read the post above. And, I too at first glance could see Mike coming short with his shots, being tied up and pushed back.

Also, Foreman's deadly right uppercut will need to be looked at by Rooney and Mike. I just happen to think that there is enough positive differences with Mike to Frazier for a similar outcome here.

Joe had no plan B, no second attack method. You really believe that Rooney and Mike won't be able to adapt, change the attacks etc to become real dangerous. Mike was not a brawler and pure power slugger. He could box with the best of his era.

I have said it several times, but Tyson can whack from range. He brings a lot more attacking speed to Forerman. Can Foreman react and adapt, that needs looking at. Can he adapt to a far faster attacker with hands and feet, and an attacker with two fisted power and more varied power shots.

Big difference between Frazier plodding forward the same speed, direction and same punch to Tyson who can attack faster, from odd angles, with more power, more variation and a better defence.

I see Tyson missing wildly if he attacks Foreman from range. He's simply too small to succeed this way.

walshb

Maravilla33 wrote: »

I see Tyson missing wildly if he attacks Foreman from range. He's simply too small to succeed this way.

No chance he could land a right hook/cross like he almost killed Holmes with?

Maravilla33

walshb wrote: »

No chance he could land a right hook/cross like he almost killed Holmes with?

Cant see it personally. I think his attacks from range will be swatted away. His best bet is to avoid some of George's looping shots and get in close and let his hands go. Much harder to see these shots coming.

megadodge

Apologies to Walshb and Maravilla relating to my Eder Jofre comment.

The reason I claimed there was no known tapes of him was because in the pre-Youtube days I went to a number of collectors and none of them had anything. I also checked the then quite knowledgable Boxingtalk Old-Timers mesage board and none of the regulars there had anything of him either and weren't aware that there was anything, so...

Thank God for Youtube I suppose. I'm off now to have a look.

cowzerp

He's so so to be honest!!

sxt

I am going to be brutally honest .I don't think that there will ever be an unanimous undisputed dominant heavyweight champion that weights in at 210ilbs or even 220ilbs . I think Sonny liston was the last fighter that dominated at that weight. I could name a hundred fighters that would beat Sonny Liston . Ali was a similar weight in the 70's but he did not dominate ( I will get stick for this , but his fights with foreman and frazier were pretty much 50/50 fights ). I think Foreman would have beaten Ali second time round. I think That Ali is the best ever heavyweight pound for pound ever. The game has moved on though in my opinion

Riddick Bowe was the template for the Klitschko's

Nowadays the best heavweight champions are 240 ilbs plus , in ten years time the best heavyweights will be 240ilbs plus , in 20 years times the best heavyweights will be 240ilbs plus... There will never be 210ilbs 70's style fighters being undisputed dominant world champion... Is this not a given ?

walshb

You seem fixated on size and weight. Also, technique. Sorry, just not seeing anything special from today's men that separates them form their equivalent ranked opponents from the 1970s.

And no it's not a given that from now on there will not be heavyweight champions weighing 210-220.

If many of the men today shaped up, lost that flab, they would be 210-220, ever think about that?

Maravilla33

sxt wrote: »

I could name a hundred fighters that would beat Sonny Liston . ?

Please do?

sxt

walshb wrote: »

You seem fixated on size and weight. Also, technique. Sorry, just not seeing anything special from today's men that separates them form their equivalent ranked opponents from the 1970s.

And no it's not a given that from now on there will not be heavyweight champions weighing 210-220.

I was referring to there never being an undisputed dominating champion that weighs in at 210ilbs like sonny liston . It will not happen in the modern era .That should be plain to see .You will need to be 240ilbs plus if you hope to dominate . Of course a 210 -220 ilbs could win a world championship , but that fighter will not dominate the division .

sxt

Maravilla33 wrote: »

Please do?

First off , Mike Perez , who isn't even ranked a top 50 fighter today , would annihilate Sonny Liston

Maravilla33

Tyson dominated the division regularly weighing under 220lbs.

Maravilla33

sxt wrote: »

First off , Mike Perez , who isn't even ranked a top 50 fighter today , would annihilate Sonny Liston

Ha ha really? Annihilate him? All the fighters you could have named and Mike Perez is the first that comes up. I love it. Even if he would that would be 1. Long way away from 100.

Pray tell how does Mike annihilate him?

walshb

sxt wrote: »

First off , Mike Perez , who isn't even ranked a top 50 fighter today , would annihilate Sonny Liston

You are takin' the piss now.

walshb

Maravilla33 wrote: »

Tyson dominated the division regularly weighing under 220lbs.

And if around today the best Tyson would probably retire out of boredom from such easy wins. Can you imagine Haye, Solis, Povetkin, Chisora, Adamek in there with a peak Tyson.:eek: Oh, and the beast, Perez?

sxt

Maravilla33 wrote: »

Ha ha really? Annihilate him? All the fighters you could have named and Mike Perez is the first that comes up. I love it. Even if he would that would be 1. Long way away from 100.

Pray tell how does Mike annihilate him?

Mike Perez would blow away a slow lightweight bruiser from the 60's .

walshb

sxt wrote: »

Mike Perez would blow away a slow lightweight bruiser from the 60's .

Yeah, and Matthew Hatton would wipe the floor with SRR! It's almost that bad a comparison.

sxt

walshb wrote: »

Yeah, and Matthew Hatton would wipe the floor with SRR! It's almost that bad a comparison.

and comparing a speed merchant middleweight Sugar Ray to a Slow bruiser heavyweight like liston is not much better !:)

cowzerp

walshb wrote: »

And if around today the best Tyson would probably retire out of boredom from such easy wins. Can you imagine Haye, Solis, Povetkin, Chisora, Adamek in there with a peak Tyson.:eek: Oh, and the beast, Perez?

Better than the jokes that Tyson fought, I actually am unsure you have watched most of the above as you seem to rate them way lower than they are.

sxt

There is a myth that the klitschkos opponents are poor. If the Klitsckos were not around , this myth would not exist. Halve of the Klits opponents would beat Sonny Liston . The reference with which the media push the 60's and 70's fighters is sometimes blinding!

sxt

Maravilla33 wrote: »

Please do?

How about starting with every world champion since Sonny Liston ...

walshb

cowzerp wrote: »

Better than the jokes that Tyson fought, I actually am unsure you have watched most of the above as you seem to rate them way lower than they are.

Yes, I rate them lower than Biggs, Tucker, Berbick, Bruno, Spinks, Smith, Tubbs, Thomas, Tillis, Ruddock, 1988 Holmes.

walshb

sxt wrote: »

There is a myth that the klitschkos opponents are poor. If the Klitsckos were not around , this myth would not exist. Halve of the Klits opponents would beat Sonny Liston . The reference with which the media push the 60's and 70's fighters is sometimes blinding!

So, gone from 100 beating Sonny to half of the Klit's opponents. Ok, which half of the Klits opponents beat the best Liston?

Maravilla33

This argument is getting ridiculous. I don't really know where to start. Leon Spinks would beat Liston? John Ruiz would? Thats just 2 but there are so many more I wouldn't give a hope to.

I can work with the whole Wlad Klitschko beats Sonny Liston debate. I disagree with it but theres a case to be made for Wlad. Hes got great skills, is physically imposing and has been a dominant champion. But statments like "Mike Perez annihilates Liston". "I could name 100 fighters that would beat him". "Every champion since him would beat him etc are just plain lazy"... I've seen no statements or argument to back up your view and cant really take these views seriously..

sxt

walshb wrote: »

So, gone from 100 beating Sonny to half of the Klit's opponents. Ok, which half of the Klits opponents beat the best Liston?

Gone from 100 beating sonny liston ?, I think that well over 100 heavyweight boxers , would beat a slow lightweight bruiser( in comparison) from the 1960's ..

sxt

Maravilla33 wrote: »

This argument is getting ridiculous. I don't really know where to start. Leon Spinks would beat Liston? John Ruiz would? Thats just 2 but there are so many more I wouldn't give a hope to.

I can work with the whole Wlad Klitschko beats Sonny Liston debate. I disagree with it but theres a case to be made for Wlad. Hes got great skills, is physically imposing and has been a dominant champion. But statments like "Mike Perez annihilates Liston". "I could name 100 fighters that would beat him". "Every champion since him would beat him etc are just plain lazy"... I've seen no statements or argument to back up your view and cant really take these views seriously..

You've seen no statements or arguments by me ? , read my very first post . That is my whole argument . Read my post showing video of Sonny Liston being manhandled and bullied by a small cruiserweight In the "Vladamir vs Liston" thread. Times have changed. Sonny Liston was a massive fighter back in the 60's , His peaking fighting weight is 212.5 ilbs. That is the tiny nowadays. Sonny Liston might get away with that somewhat if he was fast of hand and fast of feet? ... But he was anything but that! ,He was slow of hand and slow of feet .

cowzerp

sxt wrote: »

You've seen no statements or arguments by me ? , read my very first post . That is my whole argument . Read my post showing video of Sonny Liston being manhandled and bullied by a small cruiserweight In the "Vladamir vs Liston" thread. Times have changed. Sonny Liston was a massive fighter back in the 60's , His peaking fighting weight is 212.5 ilbs. That is the tiny nowadays. Sonny Liston might get away with that somewhat if he was fast of hand and fast of feet? ... But he was anything but that! ,He was slow of hand and slow of feet .

Have to agree with sxt on how times have progressed since Liston, I don't think I could name 100 who could beat him but certainly a good few in saying that.

Maravilla33

sxt wrote: »

You've seen no statements or arguments by me ? , read my very first post . That is my whole argument . Read my post showing video of Sonny Liston being manhandled and bullied by a small cruiserweight. Times have changed. Sonny Liston was a massive fighter back in the 60's , His peaking fighting weight is 212.5 ilbs. That is the tiny nowadays. Sonny Liston might get away with that somewhat if he was fast of hand and fast of feet? ... But he was anything but that! ,He was slow of hand and slow of feet .

I presume you mean the 10 minute video you posted of him against Eddie Machen? A fight Liston won very comfortably but describe it as you please to make your argument.

Have a read of this article if you get a chance. Describes Liston perfectly and better than I ever could. Enjoy educating yourself... Is he the greatest heavyweight ever? No hes not. But hes a lot better than some folk on here seem to think and not the one dimensional plodder you seem to think he is.

Enjoy.

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/liston_cf.html

Maravilla33

I might add that I don't give too much creedence to the bit of that article relating to the Ali fights. I think that an old Liston lost to a fighter he would have lost to at any stage of his career. No excuses there.

I prefer to read about Liston before those fights. A real fighting machine.

cowzerp

Maravilla33 wrote: »

I prefer to read about Liston before those fights. A real fighting machine.

Yeah against lads who would make adamek look like the best boxer ever!