Originally Posted by Bill1234
Muhammad Ali knocked out better fighters than Shavers. Does that make him a harder puncher?
Shavers lacked the "body" of other hard punchers because he also lacked the skills. There are so many more factors to a knockout than just pure power. Shavers is rightfully never mentioned among punchers, he's mentioned among the hardest punchers.
There's a huge difference between a good puncher and a hard one. History shows that good punchers get more knockouts over top competition than purely hard punchers.
There's also a difference between being a genuine knockout puncher and being perceived as one. Shavers falls into the latter camp.
Shavers lacks the body of brutal knockouts because he didn't punch as hard as advertised. It's not like he didn't have plenty of opportunity to prove that with some of the stiffs he fought. Where's his equivalent of Tua Moorer, or Ruddock Dokes? If you have the power to put someone's lights out or hurt them so badly that they're unable to defend themselves then you don't need good finishing skills.
I'm not criticising him for not having knocked out Holmes or Ali, nor am I criticising him for his losses or his lack of success at the upper level of the sport. But he doesn't belong in discussions like this, unless it's to expose just how thin the actual in-ring evidence
is for legitimately justifying his place among the hardest punchers in the sport.