Foreman or Shavers? Who was the...

Pre-Prime Foreman (1968-1972) and Big George (1988-1992) were the hardest-hitting versions of George Foreman, and those two versions hit harder than Shavers. My ranking:

1- Rocky Marciano (1949-1953)
2- George Foreman
3- Max Baer
4- Earnie Shavers
5- Joe Louis
6- Jack Dempsey
7- Sonny Liston
8- Cleveland Williams and Vitali Klitschko
9- Wladimir Klitschko
10- Bob Satterfield and Mike Tyson

 

Foreman and many others hit much harder than Shavers. Shavers power is vastly overrated. Against genuine heavyweights of 215lb and over he only scored 11 kos in 23 fights! Most of his kos came against opponents under 200 pounds. None of the name fighters who have quoted the power of Shavers like Ali, Tillis, Holmes and Ron Lyle actually lost to Shavers, they all beat him. So when they call him the most powerful puncher they praise their own wins since they survived "Shavers the biggest puncher of all time".

 

So what? That doesn't prove punching power. Young beat Lyle. Did Young hit harder than Lyle? Young stated Shavers hit harder than Foreman. Young beat Foreman and lost to shavers. He would have everything to gain by talking up Foreman but he didn't. What's his initiative to lie? Ali knocked Foreman and got taken the distance with Shavers. What's his initiative to lie?

 

Earnie could crack, he had that snap on his right hand and could follow up with a left hook, what he did not have was stamina and he could be caught and hurt but he had heart.

Foreman had that amateur experience and a good early offensive attack, he was very strong and physically intimidating and usually finished early but he also could be hit with right hands and hurt and ran out of gas

The best puncher Foreman fought in career 1 was Lyle and Shavers was a better puncher than Lyle....I pick Foreman in a fight with Shavers but don't count Earnie out

 

I also pick foreman in a fight but shavers was the harder puncher.

 

Not based on objective evidence and common sense, he wasn't.

 

I don't understand.

 

Agreed. Other than a few people who beat him (Shavers) saying that he was the hardest puncher, there isn't much objective evidence to prove that. Look at the Holmes knockdown. Shavers landed about as good a punch as he could hope to and yet Holmes got up and went on to win the fight. Does anyone really think that the "the biggest puncher of all time" could hit Holmes so cleanly with his best punch and not knock him out? What would that mean, that Holmes had the best chin of all time? Not buying it, we all know that's not true. Look at the difference when Mike Tyson hit Holmes flush. You can say Holmes was past prime, but his chin didn't magically turn into garbage.

 

Fighters who fought both said Shavers, I'll trust them over boxing fans on here.

 

I think that is very thin evidence Rusak, & has some flaws.

Even if Holmes was just as punch resistant then-though he had along layoff, took the fight on very short notice, & was better when warmed up a few years later in his 40's-Tyson hit with more speed & combinations. Thus not only could he not brace for them, but the effect of several or even 2 big shots in proximity, well placed, can be much more than one harder shot! Very few would have risen from Shaver's bomb.

Swag you are absolutely right here:


"So what? That doesn't prove punching power. Young beat Lyle. Did Young hit harder than Lyle? Young stated Shavers hit harder than Foreman. Young beat Foreman and lost to shavers. He would have everything to gain by talking up Foreman but he didn't. What's his initiative to lie? Ali knocked Foreman and got taken the distance with Shavers. What's his initiative to lie?"

Also I am surprised by the simpllistic & false reasoning where people equate KOs with power. Whaaaa? Power is ONE factor involved. There is even an infamous web site calling Shavers "feather fisted" based on his KO% with heavier men.

You kidding' me? Volume, accuracy, punch selections, combinations, finishing ability, endurance to grind a man down & a myriad of boxing skills play into KOs.
Shavers was known to have a mediocre chin, faulty endurance, limited boxing skills-we should admire how far he got with them during The Golden Age of HWs & say geez, he must have hit like a tank.

And so many guys with nothing to gain said he did, those listed above & others.
Don't know why a prime George is listed as not hitting as hard as pre-prime & an old version, but while he hit extremely hard....

I think Shavers was a special case.

Folks sometimes are reactionary to conventional wisdom, folks get restless with it. But unless it is impossible a guy only 6' & ~ 210 could hit harder than any SHW, I do think he hit the hardest ever.

A sometimes boxer whose family runs a pizza shop across the street from me (Midtown manhattan) used to train at Gleason's gym He said that he heard from guys who saw fighters back to the '30's & the consensus was that Shavers hit the hardest.

His combination of leverage, proportionately long arms & huge hands snap & natural ability, developed through wood chopping & other techniques, made hi a monster. he was somewhat like Liston in build-slightly less extreme, but with similar naturally long & thick levers, but he was faster & slung everything into the shots.

 

Tyson was a better finisher than shavers. Holmes got up 3 times against shavers. You also forgot to mention a very similar thing happened to foreman. He hit Frazier with his best punches and Frazier got up every time. Just stfu biased hypocrite.

 

Swag you see above I completely agreed with yu, & even quoted you as part of my case.

But why do you need to be mean & denigrating to Rusak?
he was not attacking youpersonally. When you do this you erode the credibility of your case, imspire irrational resistance & strife.

Why not be devent & respectful instead? Even apologize to him & maintain mutual respect.

 

:blood

 

Damn right.