There's obviously an obsession with these type of threads. But basically the differences are marginal, vary according to which punch and the factors which make one or the other the more destructive affect have little to do with power.
Liston. Chuck Wepner said that Liston hit harder than Foreman. And Tyson's power can't compare to Big George. So...
Liston probably the heavier puncher with more brute force and Tyson the sharper puncher. Overall effectiveness???? Ill take Tyson.
Liston had the heavier hands, Tyson was more explosive. I'm sure both hit plenty hard, enough to knock a man out with one punch.
Liston prolly had a better "One Shot" type of punch if nailing a stationary target, but Tyson had much better hand speed along with better combination punching... Both dude's could KO a horse with a well timed shot.... But, all in all, due to Tyson's speed, I fear his power more so.... MR.BILL:bbb
Note: Tyson's speed and his combination punching was horrid at age 39 in 2005 when he was stopped by Kevin McBride... Tyson looked so old, slow, tired and threw one shot at a time against McBride.... UGH!! MR.BILL:tired:dead
liston was stronger and heavier-handed, but tyson was the better puncher (power+speed+technique), so his punches would have been more effective i.e. 'harder'.
We can never know. I would be tempted to say Liston, because less of what he did can be chalked up to speed, hence it must be kinetic energy.
Tyson was obviously quicker, mainly because of shorter arms. Quick like a jack-hammer. Sonny, his arms were too long for the quick impact-power, more of thudding power, like a battering-ram. I'd rather fight Miguel Canto.
was mostly Tyson's speed, angles, and combinations that annihilated competition. of course he had power but it was a result of numerous factors. for me, any difference in their raw power after a certain point is verging on insignificant as it can be lights out on any given connect.