Explain to me that why Tyson hit harder than Shavers ?

I think Norton's performance against Shavers and Cooney strongly suggest Foreman was a horrible matchup for him stylistically.

 

I'd say Baer comes close as well.

 

Well, those two fights happened nearly six years plus after the Foreman fight. Ken was most certainly in his prime against George.

 

Tillis' saying Shavers hit him hardest is also significant considering he got caught flush a few times against Weaver, who was probably at least as powerful a puncher as Iron Mike.

 

That wasn't apparent at the time tho. Norton was anything but a cherry pick and a top 4 HW. Kamikaze suggested that Foreman's team just cherry picked everyone.

Norton was also old as hell against Shavers and Cooney

 

Against Shavers...Ken had just fought the what amounted to the fight of his life against a prime time Larry Holmes, and lost both a somewhat disputed decision...and the title. He was never anywhere near as good a fighter after Holmes imo, he'd shot his load and it was downhill from there imo.

 

Precisely right.

Tyson hit very hard, but no more than a 9 out of 10 max-for professional HWs.
Everyone who knows a lot about boxing should see not only what folks said, but it is apparent that his skill,s speed/unseen punches & combinations rendered him a more effective puncher than most everyone who had a legitimate "10" in power.

That includes men he fought-Ruddock & Bruno X2, & Bonecrusher.

 

Nobody claimed Tyson is the hardest puncher, but he still hits harder than the overrated Shavers, who is nowhere near the top 5

 

Shavers took a better punch, Tyson was on his back more than Madonna!

 

For starters no one hit harder than Ernie

 

you have to say he hit harder even though its been mutiple boxers who hit harder then earn dude is overrated bad