Punching power: Earnie Shavers or Wladimir Klitschko

Its much more important is opponent fit even if he doesn't outweigh you, by your stupid logic Arreola should be harder opponent than mike Tyson just cause he would probably outweigh fit fighter.
You could see that Haye was harder for Wlad than many other fighters that outweighed him, Wlad outweighed Sanders but was KTFO. Its much more immportant how good some fighter opposition was then a weight of opposition!

 

You're saying that the heavier a boxer is, the better he is :rofl

 

But he is too dumb to understand what he is saying

 

Valuev is bigger and heavier than Wlad. Why does he not hit harder then?

Not directed at you, but this forum is basically worthless, sorry to say. Guys like PetethePrince and Jack are wasting thier time on such idiocy.

 

Valuev is just a big boxer, he doesn't have the same athletism Wlad has.. Size is only good if you combine it with skills, coordination and athletic ability..

 

Let Wlad fight all those 180-200 pounders and watch how he knocks out every one of them.

 

atsch He is providing facts . Thats what you consider DUMB ?

 

Exactly. This is about pure punching power, not who is the more effective puncher. Do people actually read thread titles?

There have been loads of fighters as big as Wlad, yet are not as effective as a hitter. There have been smaller fighters who have been more effective and hit harder.
It's not purely about size/strength. I've seen scrawny boxers hit like mules, and big, musclebound guys who couldn't crack an egg.

 

Wlad is certainly in another dimension in terms of speed, timing, accuracy, technique... however i'm unsure as to who has more raw power. One thing's for sure, Wlad is a vastly greater skilled puncher & KO'd bigger, tougher opponents.

 

Perhaps you should reexamine boxrec.

1. Earnie Shavers didn't have 90+ wins as you inaccurately stated. He had 75 wins and 69 KOs. He had a total of 90 fights. I find it strange that there was absolutely no mention of Ken Norton anywhere in your post; I would assume that Norton being his best scalp would get an automatic mention.

2. Many on this thread voting for Wlad simply don't know Earnie Shavers. So they are picking Wlad because they assume that Wlad's punching must be better than Shavers otherwise Shavers would have been dominant. The trouble with that is you're all conflating punching power with overall talent.

Wlad is a better fighter and has a better delivery system than Earnie. However when it comes to pure punching power Earnie has been in the ring with tested chins and each one of his opponents who faced George Foreman or Mike Tyson two well respected punchers have given the distinction to Earnie Shavers being the bigger puncher.

 

its a generally accepted fact that Shavers was the hardest puncher ever. You'd only compare Wlad to Earnies power if you wank too much over Wlad pics in your bedroom and are an unreasonable fanatic.


Unfortunately theres no option for 'This poll is beyond ****' or that would have won the poll by 99.9%. Theresno sense, you see, in trying to prove that black is white. Just ask Bhop after Calzaghe fight lol.

 

Facts??? what is fact that when looking at KO the most important is how much does you opponents weight?? Wrong again Chuvalo, Ali etc weighted less than Wlad but had 100x better chin.
Just look at fighters Wlad did not stop its fighters than weighted less, Haye 210½, Ibragimov 219, Byrd 213½ , think about it!!!

 

Earnie hit harder.

Everyone who was hit by him (except Jerry Quarr) said he hit them the hardest.
Ali fought: Lamar Clark, Bonavena, Mac Foster, Liston, Foreman, Frazier etc said Shavers hit the hardest, so did Ron Lyle, so did Larry Holmes, so did Tex Cobb, so did James Tilis etc. etc.

 

Not really. Power is a combination of strength and speed, and even if you go by the idea that bigger is stronger, it certainly doesn't mean that bigger is faster.

There are many superheavyweights in the history of boxing who lacked a punch. The only two fighters who I'd say belong near the top of a 'biggest punching' list would be Lewis and Wlad. Given the many fighters above 6'5" that there have been, I think that says a lot.

None of these fighters before Lewis had ever dominated. When Willard became champion, everyone was predicting he'd be unstoppable and saying this it was a new era for heavyweights. An under 200lbs Dempsey proved that wrong. The myth of the superheavyweights has continuously been disproven since then.

Every aspect of size has it's disadvantages. A boxer cannot have incredibly long arms whilst still being able to work on the inside. A boxer can't be overly tall and still be nimble. All these positives have a downside too and whilst Wlad may be one of the best superheavyweights of all-time, he is the exception, not the rule.

 

for someone with such savage power you would think he would have more KO's over top or even above average opposition. He doesn't. He has Norton who was very Chinny and Ellis. Bugner was a joke not even going to include him. I would put the Young stoppage over Norton.

You can make excuses all you want but if he had such great power he would have been able to get lucky at least once with a huge punch. He KOed a bunch of Glass Jawed fighters and sub par Journeyman. The fact that he couldn't KO Ali or Holmes was do to the Fact that they had very good Chins.

Do some of you see the issue here? Shavers never KOed anyone of note in his whole career. He had multiple chances but couldn't do it. If he was such a huge puncher he would have at least done it once.