Who is more powerful- David Tua or George Foreman

Possibly, though I think you're reaching a bit to try to justify your opinion. Tua just looks like a more explosive puncher than Foreman full stop. Doesn't mean Foreman didn't punch hard or wouldn't have beaten Tua H2H.

 

Trust me. I've been hit by George full stop. Full. Stop. Ouch.

It's Tua I'm unsure of. All I know is, that little Samoan tree trunk hit hard.

Honestly, they all do at that level. If you guys are dick measuring for pure impact, look at physics. It'll give you the answers.

It doesn't tell all of the story, though, because boxing isn't a simple sport. Not every punch is thrown full power. Some fighters look to do different sorts of damage. George Foreman blasted with both hands, moving forward, looking to run you over. He very rarely stopped a guy in one shot, but he had plenty of early KO's because he kept bulldozing. His fight with Frazier is a devastating display of power, and yet he couldn't even remotely flip Fraziers switch. Norton took some 20 punches to dispact.

Tua did you in with one shot. He flipped the switch. If he didn't, you were often out of trouble, as his follow up was on one side and predictable. If George hit you, he'd hit you again, and again, and again, till you fell over.

Old George was completely in love with his slow, dull form of impact and painful punching. He cowed fighters with it, but was clearly methodical, not a destroyer.

One punch sniper vs. Two fisted carpet bomber. DIFFERENT POWER.

 

Read the book Facing Tyson. All the fighters in it agreed that it wasn't his power than was the problem; He didn't, in fact, hit as hard as they thought he would.

His speed was killer, though, and he'd overwhelm them with that. Tyson couldn't HURT you like Foreman could, but he'd knock the starch out of your legs and foggy up that mind because of his immaculate form and blinding. You don't have TIME to go "Ow, that hurt."

 

Tyson was more of a "lights out" kind of guy ... recovering from his punches was more difficult ... Foreman was just club you into submission ...

I'd say that Tyson was more powerful while Foreman was more damaging ... Tyson was superior as a KO puncher, which is what really matter ... he was better at everything than Foreman besides that too

 

I don't think he was as dangerous in as many situations as Foreman, because he wasn't as hard a fighter as Foreman was, and he was utterly complacent on the inside.

But, in his element, yes, Tyson was more dangerous. And he had a more varied bag of tricks. His footwork and his punching form were also much better.

Amazing fighter for a short time.

 

Fighters like Foreman or Vitali look like they inflict a bludgeoning type of force consistently over your entire body, whilst the Tysons and Tuas go straight for the brainstem. I can imagine it must be very demoralising to face the first, and shocking to face the second. Not really a pleasant prospect either way, though if I were a professional I wouldn't like to face too many of the Foreman type of puncher. I can imagine the mental aftereffects would be much more lingering, whilst against a Tyson you'd hardly have time to register what happened.

 

YES. Yes. You get it. You understand.

Pure blunt force trauma vs. Sharp, quick attacks to biology designed to flip the switch. It's different.

 

Tyson is better than Foreman in speed, skill, defense, stamina and talent

His chin is probably better too (Tyson would never be floored by Jimmy Young) and his power was on Foreman's level or beyond. I mean are you really going to tell me that a 6'4" 218-230 lb guy who uses mostly looping arm punches is significantly more powerful than a 5'10" 215-220 lb guy who has faster hands and puts his entire body into his punches??

Tyson is a better inside fighter than Foreman ... Foreman would push off whenever someone came close to him. Tyson, although not as devastating as he was at mid-range, would still fire away (if he wasn't clinched) and was deadly on the inside.

Also show me any one shot from Foreman as powerful as these:

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jK7AVHft4U&t=3m20s[/url]

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHK9iBthh7U[/url]

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13O57lV2jws&t=3m25s[/url]

[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFQJ63d-Y0Y&t=48s[/url]

Foreman made people stumble around in agony ... Tyson would put them away in a flash

 

With raw power, Tyson is not near the likes of a Foreman or Shavers. As an overall puncher, he is superior.

There is a very, very big difference between a fighter who's punches are sharp and a fighter who's puches are just flatout hard.

Tyson was an extremely sharp puncher, his speed, angles, and timing enabled him to drop guys and make them think "where did that come from?"

With Foreman, the oponents saw the punches coming, but they were still knocked down due to the raw power of the punches.

Several fighters have said Tyson didn't punch as hard as they thought he would and that others hit them harder. Holmes, Tillis, and Holyfield were all pretty clear about who hit them the hardest.

Holmes stated that Tyson was the sharpest puncher he faced, but Shavers was the hardest. He said Cooney also had more raw power than Tyson did, which is very possible.

Tillis stated that Shavers was by far the hardest puncher he faced.

Holyfield stated Foreman was the hardest puncher he faced, but Bowe hit him with some shots that were as hard as he'd ever been hit before.

 

Some day, the average boxing fan will discover the difference between sharp and hard. Between the QUALITY of a shot and the force behind it, like you, Bill.

I yearn for that day. Boxing fans lately sound like they are talking about a freaking video game. "So and so has a power stat of 99!" "Nuh uh, 92!"

 

How stupid are you people?

The "power" we're discussing here is force = mass x acceleration. How can Foreman generate more "power" if his fist doesn't accelerate nearly as fast as Tyson's and if he doesn't put as much "mass" behind his punches as Tyson? Foreman was an arm puncher, yeah he got some leverage into his shots but Tyson put his whole body behind his blows and the biomechanics of his technique allowed him to generate enormous amounts of power. His punches were also short so they connected at the peak of acceleration.

Foreman's punches may have felt harder and seemed to wobble his opponents more but Tyson would just put people away. He has more 1 punch KOs than Foreman who would just chop away at his opponent. Using you're logic of "sharp" punches, Ali should've been a puncher of Tyson's caliber. His punches were literally sharp and would cut the opponent.

And where are these quotes from Holmes and Tillis? I can bring quotes from these people where they claim the exact opposite. ****ing Holmes was butthurt about Tyson destroying him like a joke so of course he'd say Shavers hit harder. Holmes at one point said that butterbean hit harder than Shavers ... are you really going to believe a butthurt fool like Holmes, for whom you didn't even produce the alleged quote for. Holmes is not credible and Tillis actually claimed the exact opposite of what you say

Here's Tillis saying that Tyson hit HARDER than Shavers

[url]http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1064811/index.htm[/url]

Now where's your source of Tillis claiming the opposite?

You must be the same "bill1234" from this forum

[url]http://www.****************/[/url]

which explains how incredibly stupid you are.

Foreman and Shavers may have been able to produce the same amount of mass behind their shots as Tyson, but they didn't come close to duplicating the acceleration behind Tyson's punches.

 

For what its worth ,Tillis told me himself that Shavers was the hardest puncher he faced.

just saying.


I'll take the word of a guy thats been there, over a guy using physics.

just my two cents

 

Cheers for this Magna, I'm a big fan of the Duke I think he doesn't really get his dues around here.

I've seen the Ruddock fight, Morrison had an incredible amount of snap in his shots, even his jab would snap people's head right back. I love the Williams fight the left he landed right before he went on to stop him looked like it could've put down a horse. Shame what happened to him.

 

Yeah wasnt Tillis the one who said Shavers could turn July into June and sent him over the motherucking moon?

 

was this post or pre brain damaged Tillis? Or before or after he said that Tyson hit harder than Shavers?

only credible if he's cognitively impaired or delirious