Any basis for George Foreman's power being overrated?

All of this is 100% valid and it's crazy how people don't understand nuance. Holmes may be telling the truth and the fact he was older and out of shape against Tyson can't be dismissed. Not being in your best condition absolutely affects your punch resistance and recovery, I've experienced it myself. Shavers could be a notoriously bad finisher and Tyson was a great finisher with better handspeed and technique than Shavers. It's as you said, some people think that if a guy is a good puncher then it makes no sense for them to fail to KO an opponent.

Wilder has many parallels with Shavers in that sense. His technique, ring IQ, etc are nothing to take note of but his raw power and leverage are undoubtedly superb and world class. His failing to KO Fury in 3 attempts had nothing to do with a lack of power and anyone disagreeing is utterly clueless.

RockyJim isn't going to bother actually addressing this. He's a Rocky fanboy who always attempts to take other big punchers down a notch out of insecurity. If it's a Shavers thread, he mentions his lack of endurance. If it's Tyson or Liston, he questions their heart, etc.

 

I always chuckle at people who takes a fighters word as gospel, even though they change their minds from interview to interview. Are you really that gullible?

It's called 'ego'. Nothing wrong with that. They won't accept the time they were sparked was the real them. I once went to an Alan Minter talk and what he said about the 'best', the 'hardest', the 'toughest was completely different to his 'Best I Faced' a few years later. But I didn't care, I don't take this stuff seriously, and don't take it as gospel, like you obviously do- as within a few years I know most of it will change *e.g. Tillis saying Shavers years later" and Minter as I've said. The list is numerous. Maybe in some examples there is a common denominator- like Shavers or Sosa, but Jones was never going to say Tarver was he? And Holmes was never going to say Tyson.

 

Yes, and this is why the Tyson punches may have hurt more- he's a lot older, in far worse shape but just can't bring himself to give Tyson any credit. He also said Shavers would bomb Tyson out in no time...so he knows right? Only does he? Or, if you'd read as much about Holmes as I have (which you may have) you'd know that this man seldom- if ever- gave credit to anyone that beat him.

 

My facts are usually hard copy mate. I've mentioned it many times on here. If someone could say, ballpark the issue that featured Henry chatting to The Ring...or Boxing News...or KO...or World Boxing....or Boxing Illustrated....or Boxing International or Boxing Monthly or Boxing Scene... between, say, 1976 and 1999 then I could root it out. Clark said Eddie Machen hit him hardest...and he fought Shavers and Liston (and sparred with Foreman). I won't even tell you the result of the Machen fight, but if you don't know, I think you can probably guess..........maybe he's telling the truth, after all, he's the one taking the shots...or maybe his ego is at work again...depends on how gullible one is, I suppose.

I definitely agree with this. If, say, Roy Jones thinks Sosa hit him harder than, say, Tarver is probably because he didn't feel the Tarver KO...well, when you're sparked, you don't. I've been decked with a huge shot, and I have to say I didn't feel it at all. Just remember trying to get to my feet thinking "what the **** happened there". So, there's always that...but not many fighters add that caveat.

 

Him predicting Shavers beating Tyson and him saying Shavers hit harder are two different things. One can be objectively true with other fighters/trainers coming to the same conclusion. The other is something we never would've known because Shavers was completely shot/retired by the time Tyson was up in the rankings so even if they fought it wouldn't have told us anything.

I know Tillis is another mutual opponent, but are there any other boxers who fought both Tyson and Shavers? If 3 or more men pick Shavers that would be pretty interesting, it's not like Holmes tracked down anyone who fought Tyson putting a gun to their heads telling them what answer to give.

 

It’s almost as if people who get hit in the head for a living (and repeatedly so, year over year, through training and the amateurs and pro fights) might not have consistent memory?

Yet you attribute that to ego.

If a fighter who actually got hit by someone says he hit harder than another fighter he got hit by, forgive me if I take his word over yours … given that you never got hit by either of them.

Seems like it’s your ego that’s at issue here … because how could you possibly be wrong?

BTW, you ever been in the ring? Ever been hit? If so, you surely know that the placement of the punch has as much to do with the effect as anything. And whether the one hit saw it coming. And if he was moving forward or leaning away or otherwise maybe took a bit of the impact off of it.

You seem to account for none of this. If a fighter says that Opponent A hit harder than Opponent B, he may not be saying that A hit him with more impact than B, but the punches A hit him with that didn’t land flush were harder/heavier than the ones B did land flush with. Thus A is the harder puncher in his experience.

There’s also blunt-force trauma (i.e. Foreman) vs. sharpshooting precision (i.e. Holmes). It’s not at all inconsistent if someone hit by both, had they been knocked out by a sizzling Holmes straight right, to say Foreman hit harder even if Foreman didn’t knock them out cold and merely bashed them into a TKO defeat while Larry put them to sleep.

But, nope, they must by lying due to ego if they don’t agree with you (and your ego).

TL/DR: You DKSAB.

 

Well, yes, but it's more of a case that the subject matter often gets the credit..."Hey did Henry Cooper hit you really hard"...Yes, the "hardest i've been hit". I don't take this stuff that seriously.

No, I didn't attribute that particular example to ego, that was entertainment. Just in general.

Why would I care about this? I've barely read anything you've ever posted to be honest. You seemed to have been around here for years and years, yet I've barely ever interacted with you, even back in the day, so there must be a reason for that.

Is it? I think it's you that taking some throwaway quotes by fighters too seriously, I certainly don't.

Yes, of course, but obviously not to their standard. Have you? This subject matter has come up before and I've said much of the same above. Funny enough I've just mentioned being floored anyway in a previous post before this one.

But i do though, I've said this many a time- i''m sure on here when this subject has come up before.

I've no idea what this mean as I don't speak like a 5 year old.

 

If you haven’t seen YDKSAB on this forum and you’ve been around as much as you have, maybe your gray matter is scrambled.

You Don’t Know (anything, but a four-letter word for excrement) About Boxing.

You clearly do not grasp much. You said boxers lie about who hit them hardest because of ego and make it clear that you think you know more about who hit them harder than they do.

That’s all ego on your part.

 

They are, I agree, I was just making the point about how little credit Larry gives out to some people- i.e. fighters from the 1990s mostly. He also said Bonavana, Mac Foster and Jean Terrell's brother would beat Tyson...that's quite a bitter man that is. And I'm actually a fan of his.

Tillis did say Tyson, so that's 1-1. I'll take the contemporary view ahead of the revisionist view years later. Also, I bet Tyson punches a lot harder when he dies.

 

Foreman dishing it out from both hands whenever he wanted and still being accurate is a better display of power than having to set up a right and gamble on it landing clean

 

Yes, I knew, i just expect that kind of chat from someone who's 15 years old at best. I've actually not been around here for nearly 10 years either, but had no idea who you were, so was pretty surprised when I seen the date under your name a few weeks ago.

Ha ha, as if I did that. Of course i don't know, but i've read way too many interviews to take this stuff as gospel. Of course when a fighter says Fighter X hits really hard, I take note, but that doesn't mean i think they're revealing their true hand.

And, as you're not a fighter yourself you're taking this stuff too seriously. Unlike my mate- who fought for the world title in the 1990s, who when I said the same to him, just laughed about it.

 

I mean Holmes could've said no when Don King tried to get him to fight a devastating, undefeated puncher in his prime. The money was too enticing, that's his own fault lol. Even if he was in perfect shape and younger it would still be a very difficult fight. Idk why he's so bitter when he got paid handsomely. Nobody would've said an old retired boxer coming off a loss "ducked" Tyson.

Yeah if Tillis changed his mind his credibility is open to question. Having watched both fights, I did find it interesting the knockdown is essentially what got Tyson the win, otherwise it might've been a draw or a loss. The knockdown itself was actually quite brilliant. Tyson saw Tillis was off balanced in a bad position and threw a very graceful, almost gentle shot knowing it wouldn't KO Tillis but would ensure a down. Very good presence of mind and professionalism from a young fighter focused on "winning" and not simply trying to blast his opponent out. If he threw that shot aggressively full force, Tillis might've been able to swiftly dodge or block it.

 

I’m trying to wrap my mind around why it’s supposed to be an indictment on me that we’ve both been around this forum quite a while and haven’t often interacted. Wouldn’t that be equally true of you?

I don’t know what ‘I don’t know who you are’ means, as I don’t know who anyone on this forum is. But I’m sure I’ve interacted with many people on this forum and didn’t take note of ‘who they are.’

Perhaps your memory isn’t any better than some of the boxers you seem to be saying are liars. Hmmm.

As for what they remember from time to time, I doubt any of them carry a list around to make sure they’re consistent with what they consider the best in this or that category. It’s all off the cuff. If you ask me today who my favorite fighters are, the list will certainly look different than if you asked me just a year ago. And I guess you can dismiss me if my answers weren’t consistent. Same as if you ask me the best concert I’ve attended: I might tell you Black Flag one time, The Rolling Stones another and U2 or the Ramones some other time. Does that make my suspect, lol?

 

Tbh, without agenda or bias in address, a number of the testimonials in favour of Shavers are open to fair question - including for their apparent lack of consistency in some cases.

For one, Norton was 35 1/2 and 5 years removed from the Foreman fight when he engaged Earnie, Ken’s resilience was likely not what it once was.

Shavers landed quite a bit of leather before putting Ken out - certainly not less than Foreman did when he landed the definitive punches for the final KD of Ken.

Shavers technique was also very much on point, short, tight, powerful and accurate punches - arguably displaying that much better technique than Foreman did in Caracas.

Now Norton apparently said the difference was that when Earnie hit him he stayed down.

Not true.

Ken, all be he no longer viable to fight on, was in fact arising when the ref stopped the fight - it was TKO win, not a KO as listed on BoxRec. If a count had continued, Ken would’ve been deemed on his feet by “5” or “6”.

Basically, Ken was in as bad a shape as when Foreman finished an appreciably younger version of himself.

There is possible relevance in highlighting that near every fellow boxer, if not all of them, liked Earnie as a person, aside from his boxing achievements.

Both Holmes and Norton, in particular, made no bones about their affection for Shavers as a man - I doubt they held Tyson and Foreman respectively in the same regard.

Same goes for Tillis being far less enamoured of Mike than he was of Earnie

Oh, and Larry also claimed that he could’ve arisen after the final KD against Tyson but saw no point as it would only mean taking more punishment. Hmmm.

If Larry wasn’t actually snoozing on the deck, he was as close as you can be to it. I like Larry but he was poleaxed - the awkward bending of his leg beneath him just one proof of a total short circuit.

Just as well for Mike that Larry’s Weaveresque, fight ending uppercut got caught in the ropes - otherwise it would’ve been night nights for Mikey.

 

Les add this one from ALi:
"Earnie hit me so hard, it shook my kinfolk back in Africa". Muhammad Ali on Earnie Shavers

And this one coming from Big George:
"I never fought Earnie Shavers...thank goodness!"

I am too lazy to check if those quotes are true (but certainly Ali's is spot on his talking style), but here is the link;
"Earnie hit me so hard, it shook my kinfolk back in Africa". Muhammad Ali on Earnie Shavers : r/Boxing (reddit.com)