Who gives a ****, it's not a question who just hits hardest it's a question of who can take it. I'd have put money on Foreman to wipe Tyson out in a brawl and he'd have done the same with Shavers...
Id choose Big George to knock out Tyson as well . I can see a scenario where Tyson can pull the upset off as well , usually when this matchup comes up . People quickly dismisses Tyson chances and basically say he has no chance at all . But despite that I say Tyson gets TKOed in the 7th . Shavers had a point when he said Foreman never wanted anything to do with him . I think George knew deep down that this was a brutal fight where he would go threw hell and back and might have pick himself off the canvas a few times . I believe He did want to ever experience again a "Ron Lyle life and death" matchup and probably felt thats exactly what Shavers would have presented him with . To quote Foreman in the 90s " Ive never fought Earnie Shavers....................... THANK GOD ! " Although Foreman wasnt too confident in his abilities , I would still have picked Foreman to decapitate Shavers as well .
Sorry you feel that way. I recommend learning how to consider ones opinion with feeling forced to accept it.
We talking about boxers' statements regarding their opponents' power. And Foreman is hardly the only one who says such things. Totally relevant, tho not especially flattering to your argument. Again, comparing boxer's punching power, especially at heavyweight, is a fairly useless enterprise that most rightly roll their eyes at. When you get athletes at this size, almost all gave enough heat to take out their opponent given the right opportunity or circumstance. Focussing on the "raw power" in a vacuum is tedious and a bit distracting. It is more important to note who could apply power in a boxing context against top level opponents and attain top level results... That's my 2 cent.
The threads actually about who hit the hardest tho, not a who would have won and who do you despise. It's been a mostly good and entertaining one.
It's no likelier to be the hardest punch in the fight than any other punch. So what exactly is the evidence that Tyson hit harder? Shavers knocked more people out so that is already in his favor...
I just don't have the time to keep abreast of these threads anymore, so I usually try to follow up where I last commented. As I stated, I am merely playing Devil's Advocate. If you want to say the Shavers had more this magical stuff called One Punch Power, I am not going to disagree. The issue becomes knotty when you actually try to nail down what the magic potion actually consists of.
Well Shavers fought more scrubs than Tyson did, so he's gonna get more KO's. How did Acorn do at the top level? Did his power overwhelm world level fighters consistently like Tyson did?
Knocked out Norton in the first round. Knocked down Holmes, Lyle, Cobb. Knocked out Bugner. Had Ali hurt. Shavers had plenty a good punch at the top level. You can't say that Shavers only was a perceived hard hitter at the lower level. He just didn't have the finishing capabilities. But we aren't talking who is the better fighter or who would win. We are talking about who has a harder punch. That is it. Tyson wasn't 100% dominant at the lower level. Look at the Mike Jameson fight. Tyson was beating on him for 5 rounds before Jameson quit.
Nope. Never knocked Cobb down. I counted 1 KO. Only 1. Sorry, Tyson has a far better percentage against top level competition. I fact, like a few have posted earlier in this thread, Tyson has a higher number of single punch KO's against top level competition. I never said that. I said Shavers has more KO's than Tyson because he fought more scrubs than Tyson did. In fact I was responding to your post where you stated... Shavers fought more times than Tyson did, plain and simple. Don't misconstrue what I typed. It was fairly easy to understand why I responded to you. Are we clear? Right It's a forum. We can talk about whatever the f*ck we want to talk about. Anyways, you stated Shavers was the harder puncher because he had more KO's than Tyson. Shavers had more fights than Tyson AND had more fights against lower competition - most likely the reason why Shavers has more KO's than Tyson. I will keep repeating myself until it sinks in for ya. In one sentence you're claiming, "We are talking about who has a harder punch. That is it," and in the next you post the above statement. You're asking posters to do something you yourself can't even follow. Please stay on track.
Took 1 punch of shavers to knockdown Larry took many flush shots from Tyson, sure Tyson got the KO and shavers didnt but Tyson took loads of flush shot punches to put him down, shavers only needed one and it was to the side of the head not the chin and it made him go unconscious abiet for about 4 seconds only Had Larry not been the middleman most people would have wrongly concluded the modern heavier HW as the better puncher, but theyd have been wrong, Shavers is GOAT puncher still. Also shavers and most HW are stronger than Tyson, Tyson was poor in the clinch even against small heavyweighst like Holyfield, Shavers was very strong he did alot of farm work etc as well as boxing training
Mmm, no. Tyson landed a single right to drop Holmes. And when Tyson started landing flush bombs Holmes would go down and stay down. Larry was in serious trouble after getting dropped by both guys. He was able to fight back against Shavers but it proved to be disastrous trying to fight back against Tyson.
mmm no, rewatch it, he hit him many times flush the final shot was right on the chin, he needed the chin to get him out, Shavers only needed the side of the head, and sure he made the 10 count but he was still unconscious for a few seconds, which is something Tyson couldnt do, and he hit larry on the side of the head flush many times, rewatch it. Just imagine if shavers caught him sweetly on the button like Tyson did.