Punching power: Earnie Shavers or Wladimir Klitschko

and take a look at this degenerated spaz.


There's allot of boxing analysts and trainers who call Wlad one of the most poweful punchers the HW divison ever saw, Steward said that Wlad punch harder then Lennox, another huge puncher.
Are they also Klitschko dicksuckers?

What makes you so sure that Shavers punches harder then Wlad since there's absolutely no way to prove it?
Because Ali, Lyle or Norton said so??...how many times they got their watermelon punched by Wlad's right straight or left hook?

i'm not saying Wlad hits harder, im saying that there's absolutely no way to prove which one of them punched harder.

 

Typical dumbass comment by ESB's favorite ******ed poster.

 

You have me curious...can you provide a source for this? I know Steward has said so, but who else?

 

I'm not the one who said Shavers hit harder, it was Ali himself who fought both Foreman and Shavers and maintains that Shavers hit harder. He's said it interviews many times. Ali had a stellar chin and Shavers was a poor finisher that's why he couldn't KO him. Even the film shows that he's a great a puncher.

I agree that sometimes a fighter's words regarding their opponents can be misleading or agenda driven, but It's not exactly clear to me why several fighters who fought both Foreman & Shavers or Tyson & Shavers would all come to the same conclusion that Shavers hit the hardest. I don't see how it's beneficial for Ken Norton to give Shavers the credit for being the hardest hitter. He was stopped in 2 by Foreman and stopped in 1 by Shavers.

If we are going by common consensus then let's just agree that Shavers is universally regarded as the biggest puncher.

On isolated incidents I'm more inclined to agree; but Ali, Norton, Lyle and Young fought both Foreman and Shavers. Ali beat them both and Ken Norton lost to them both.

Tillis and Holmes fought both Tyson and Shavers but both maintain that Shavers hits harder. I don't think anyone questions Tyson's punching power- so why question Shavers?

That's a very good point. In fact Jerry Quarry wasn't impressed by Shaver's power for that reason alone; he didn't taste his full power. Ali on the other hand went 8 rounds and by his own admission was out on his feet a few times. There is no doubt in my mind that he tasted his power.

You're alright locard. :smoke

Look there are freak's of nature that defy conventional wisdom and boxing is full of them. How is that Tommy Hearns had a shotgun for a right hand at 147 but Paul Williams doesn't? Why can't Michael Grant hit has hard as Lennox Lewis?

Weight isn't the end all of everything regarding punching power. Professional football players (NFL) can't hit as hard as Light Heavyweights.

So Vitaly carried him and you are taking at his word? Is there a possibility that maybe what he's saying is agenda driven? I saw the fight too. Is it not possible that Vitaly is getting older and injury prone and therefore couldn't get him out of there sooner. We know Arreola hits hard and he tried to get Adamek out of there but he couldn't. Tomasz persevered. Fighters from yesteryear could hang in there with anybody.

First of all. If someone is going to question "Who did Shavers KO that was good" then I'm going to use Ken Norton (A top 25 ATG fighter) because he is a great fighter. Secondly, if Thompson were to KO Wlad then you would all make him into this super human fighter.

 

Since his prime around mid 70's he weighed around 215 pounds, how the **** is that cruserweight size, is mike tyson also cruierweight size?

 

I Think Shavers is overrated... I notice people like to repeat what they here e.g. the popular opinion. "Oh man... yeah, Ernie hit like a truck" Even Ali was not immune to this.


Yes he had power but I don't think he was the hardest puncher in history. No. :yikes

 

Wlad for me.

Better quality of KOs over generally more durable opponents.

Don't really care what Ali, Holmes etc said about Shavers. They never fought Wlad so are irrelevant to the discussion.

 

Actually his best weight (the weight he fought Ali, Holmes, Norton, Ellis etc at) was around 210, which is more or less what a modern cruiser weighs come fight night.

 

There seems to be a lot of confusion between harder puncher and better able to land knockout punches on better or more durable fighters, here. We don't have exact numbers. This is a nuanced guessing game and bringing up kayo resume won't tell the full story.

 

Shavers did not punch like Foreman. He routinely got good leverage into his shots, and carried a bit of speed and explosiveness to go along with it. When he dropped guys, it was almost always with a flush shot that he got his whole body behind, not a glancing, off balance arm punch. Simply put, the power he was generating came from a different source.

Foreman clearly demonstrated great raw strength (physical strength) which is why he was able to hurt guys with poorly thrown shots. That's also why it's so fun speculating on just how hard he could have punched had he the skill and technique (and speed) of, say, someone like Tyson. With Shavers there aren't that many questions. He punched hard because he launched his body into shots, the same way fighters like David Haye and Travis Walker do today (not comparing power, just the method in which they primarily generate it). I don't see the same sort of evidence of great raw power that someone like Foreman demonstrates.

 

IMO power doesn't come from any one place, rather it's the end result of a number of contributing factors.

From watching Dempsey on film I'd say his power came from the manner in which he got his body behind his shots, the way many smaller HWs generated power, as well the way he routinely punched through a target (see the Gene Tunney knockdown). He also had a very strong back, from his fanatical pullup regime, and I've noticed that a lot of historically great punchers like Julian Jackson tended to have large lats, though why (or even if)that helps in increasing punching power I don't know.

Generally, I think, a smaller fighter can punch with more of his power than a larger fighter, due to the fact that they can widen their stance and set their feet more, whilst a taller fighter often has to be in a position to move away from their opponent, and therefore can't really put his weight into a punch as much as he might like. Shorter fighters are also able to generate more power from the legs and core, whilst a taller fighter tends to punch down using his shoulders and the twist of his upper body. All very general of course, but those are my observations.

 

The only people who tell Earnie Shavers was the hardest hitter ever, were also the guys who never got knocked out by him.

He also threw his swings much too wild, anybody can hit hard with some wild swings (The overhand from Butterbean for example)

 

How is David "slick and black" haye not getting knocked out by Wlad proof that Wlad isn't the strongest?
They barely hit each other.

 

Yeah...Ernie Shavers was so great and he hit so hard that he never won a title. What a ****ing bum.