03' RingMag Top 100 Punchers

The list has always confused me. Is it top 100 greatest punchers or top 100 hardest punchers?

 

hardest. otherwise there would be a LOT of others on that list (like holmes)

 

Maybe it's a little high, but the guy was regarded as a legitimate one punch kayo threat by the time he was regarded as a contender. There aren't too many other heavyweights who were capable of sparking out Liston (ancient as he was), in the fashion that Martin did when they fought.

His inclusion on the list may well be warranted (although I might drop him down to the 80's or 90's)

 

I don't know...I think it is greatest punchers, because Salvador Sanchez, while not feather fisted, wasn't necessarily the hardest puncher as a featherweight. There are a few other instances of fighters who weren't necessarily one punch kayo threats, either, being included on this list.

 

true but there are better technical and combination punchers, more varied punchers that aren't on the list. at the end it seems about power. sanchez is a good point...but he did score spectacular and effective knockouts in his biggest wins

 

I think it is a truly rubbish list.

 

It's clearly not a list based on power. Nobody believes Carlos Monzon hit harder than Cyclone Hart.

 

i have the magazine and they have a write up for each fighter including best knockout, opponent they couldn't knock out, when the punch wasn't enough, best punch, etc. they definitely intended it to be based on knockout power. how accurate it is however...

 

No they didn't. I have the magazine, too, and at several points it will say something to the effect of 'he could hit like a truck, but couldn't always land it.' And he'll be rated lower than a lighter hitting, more accurate contemporary.

 

i don't know...the fact that shavers and foreman, who had **** technique were in the top ten makes me disagree. the more accurate, pinpoint punchers like sanchez and lopez were placed at the bottom. the bombers, like jackson, lopez, baer, and saddler were at the top. like at the top 20 or so...all bombers and knockout punchers for the most part.

 

Frazier, Trinidad and Tua should be higher.

Spinks and Jones should be off the list.

 

totally agree with those 3 being higher

spinks and jones both earned their place on the list to me. jones is well placed at 88 (i believe) and spinks should be in the top 100, but not top 50

 

But at the same time, everybody would rate Shavers and Foreman above Louis in terms of power.

The list is based on myriad factors. It's why Archie Moore's so high (rightly so) and Joe Louis is #1. Carlos Monzon is lucky to be rated as high as he is, but the writers obviously thought much of his dextrous right hand.

 

good point about louis. his raw power was certainly less than foreman and shavers (sorry classic...) but his technique and precision made up for it.

i think you're right: myriad factors. power is pre-eminent but accuracy, ability to effectively use your punch and consistency also factors in

 

I'm wondering why Monzon would be ahead of Spinks & Hamed to name but two then, but if it's greatest, than why would Foreman be so high? That's what I mean, there are a lot of contradictions. It's like they got a bunch of anmesia-sufferers to complete the list because they have clearly forgotten half way through whether it's meant to be a list of the greatest punchers of all-time or hardest punchers.