He was poor technically. Power is no use without technique and that's the reason why Shavers didn't stop a higher calibre of opposition. What you're saying is nothing to do with his power.
And you are also not taking in account that the men who knocked Wladimir down and stopped him were also much bigger than the men who were fighting Chuvalo, Ali, ect. Big men of the 70's like Ron Lyle, Foreman, ect, were only about the size of Ibragimov, Byrd and Haye today...
Yeah, and all of them were hit flush by Wlad's Steelhammer too, so we can confirm without a shadow of doubt that Shavers hits harder, right? :nut Who cares what a bunch of mostly undersized men that would be cruisers today and would probably **** their pants by merely being in the same ring as a creature like Wlad, unseen in their days and im not talking just about size...says? (Foreman was considered a monster back then remember?) This content is protected Wlad is much bigger and athletic than Shavers, has KO'd much bigger guys (REAL heavies) than Shavers did on a much regular basis, has better one punch KO power, better KO ratio against previously unKOed opponents, equally successful at KOing bums and non-bums while Shavers could never KO anyone noteworthy aside from jelly jawed Norton Yet we are supposed to believe Shavers hits harder, with no other evidence but rose tinted glasses and the word of a few boxing legends who weren't even KOed by this so called KO master :dead Nostalgia dickriding is like being on cheap crack no doubt, totally asinine, irrational garbage passing as legit arguments even when faced against overwhelming facts. The fact that a lot of people are just dickriding because of their urge to follow the herd doesn't help the side of rationality either :-(
just to clarify, are you asking who hits harder, because you appear to be asking who is bigger, who is more athletic, who has KOed more guys, better ratio of KOs, who makes better eggs benedict etc in your paragraph below - you either need to stick to your original post or start a new thread. Also, not sure about your alternative universe, but in this on hmm never heard Norton being called jellyjawed.
Jack there is this thing called results. That is what I am looking at. I have no doubt Shavers could punch hard. But, he was not a savage power puncher. If he was out of all his fights he would have been able to spark some of the upper tier fighters he fought at least once. He couldn't. Do you see where the Chin is coming into play here? You know the thing that people on here say doesn't mean much? Ali and Holmes had excellent Chins for the most part and both also had great recuperative powers also. It is why they were All Time Greats and why Shavers was pretty much a Journeyman/Contender his whole career. In Boxing we can judge fighters on results not woulda, coulda, shoulda like you and Pete are trying to do. I enjoyed watching Shavers fight on free Network TV back in the day. But he like a few other fighters of that era specifically Jimmy Young are glossed over on here way to much based on speculative results not what actually happened in their career(s)
They were real and natural heavyweights,not like todays heavyweights with full body of steroids and HGH.But today heavyweights can't increase three things by taking steroids:chin,punch,and heart.
Norton got KTFO every time he faced someone with good power, and no, Ali wasn't one of them. And dont be dumb, more athleticism means more speed to deliver your punches, being bigger and heavier and more muscular means more power to add to your punch, force - mass + acceleration. The HW has never seen the combination of size and speed that Wlad is.
Mike Tyson had much better combination of size and speed than Wladimir Klitschko but he was not harder hitter than Shavers.
..wut? :huh Of course Tyson was a harder hitter than Shavers! Shavers is one of the most overrated mfers in history.