Bigger one punch power? Shavers vs Tyson

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by escudo, Sep 2, 2016.


  1. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,636
    Mar 17, 2010
    My top 10 HW punchers:

    1. Joe Louis
    2. Jack Dempsey
    3. Rocky Marciano
    4. Sonny Liston
    5. George Foreman
    6. Mike Tyson
    7. Ernie Shavers
    8. Max Baer
    9. Jim Jeffries
    10. Lennox Lewis


    How about you?
     
  2. MUFA$A

    MUFA$A FEAR * THE * TANK Full Member

    1,478
    954
    Aug 17, 2016
    Joe Louis is one of the most brutal HW punchers of all time . Absolutely.

    Did you hear Marciano and Louis share the same sparring partners and all of the sparring partners confessed Marciano possessed more punching power compared to Louis .

    AMAZING .

    Goes to show you , the weight does not mean much when it comes to HWs.

    Marciano was only 188 pounds .
     
  3. Eddie Ezzard

    Eddie Ezzard Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,493
    5,252
    Jan 19, 2016
    Although there are a few posters here who could probably give him a run for his money.
     
  4. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,636
    Mar 17, 2010
    There are numerous attributes to that lead to punching power. Size is but one.

    There is also the shoulder snap, balance, form, punching technique, and other subtleties.

    Golovkin needing bigger guys to spar with is a testament to this.
     
  5. Absolutely!

    Absolutely! Fabulous, darling! Full Member

    8,707
    1,660
    Jul 8, 2010
    Almost every quote we have on Shavers comes from a fighter whose bout with Shavers we have on film. All of his high profile fights are on film. In other words, everything that we need to judge him is already available. What he did to some no name scrub on an undercard in Shittsville, USA has very little bearing on his overall rating as a puncher, just as Tyson's less high profile knockouts have any bearing on his (Ricardo Spain anyone?).

    Shavers simply doesn't cut it at any level.
     
    Last edited: Sep 6, 2016
  6. Absolutely!

    Absolutely! Fabulous, darling! Full Member

    8,707
    1,660
    Jul 8, 2010
    Shavers's reputation as some sort of one punch killer is one of the more irritating bits of BS in the sport, not least because whenever his name is mentioned you know some schmuck is going to repeat one of those tedious quotes from Holmes or Tillis like it's some charming anecdote we're all dying to hear for the hundredth time.

    Shavers used combinations to set up his knockdowns/knockouts as well.

    He rarely just winged one out of leftfield like in the Holmes fight.
     
    Last edited: Sep 6, 2016
  7. reznick

    reznick In the 7.2% Full Member

    15,903
    7,636
    Mar 17, 2010
    What are you on about? Of course his 50+ knockouts matter. Not having most of Tysons knockouts on film would definitely take a hit on his legacy as a puncher. Mike Tysons early career knockouts are some of the most iconographic moments of him as a person. And theres a very good reason for that. You just want to shrug those off because it doesn't fit your little argument? Nope.

    You seem to have this idea that because people like Holmes said Shavers hit hard, that Shavers should have knocked everyone out. But do you realize that punching power can't win you the fight alone? Tyson was a more complete fighter than Shavers.
     
    Last edited: Sep 6, 2016
  8. Absolutely!

    Absolutely! Fabulous, darling! Full Member

    8,707
    1,660
    Jul 8, 2010
    Shannon Briggs has a load of meaningless stoppages over Z-list opponents. Does anyone seriously rate him as a puncher because of it? Do you?

    Tyson fought his first name opponents within two years of turning pro. Shavers didn't fight his first name opponent (Young) until four years after he first stepped in the ring. Even so, you could take only Tyson's nineties performances and still come up with a more impressive highlight reel than Shavers's entire career on film. He was simply a more consistently devastating puncher, both technically and in terms of raw power.

    I don't expect miracles, but I do expect that for such a supposedly devastating puncher Shavers actually show me some in-ring footage to prove it. What we have leaves a hell of a lot to be desired.
     
  9. Mr.DagoWop

    Mr.DagoWop Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    8,129
    1,762
    Jul 1, 2015
    Shavers was nowhere near the level of the combination puncher that Tyson was.
     
  10. Absolutely!

    Absolutely! Fabulous, darling! Full Member

    8,707
    1,660
    Jul 8, 2010
    Most of his stoppages came from combinations.
     
  11. Mr.DagoWop

    Mr.DagoWop Boxing Junkie banned Full Member

    8,129
    1,762
    Jul 1, 2015
    Have you seen the Norton stoppage? Just because a fighter uses combinations doesn't mean they are a combination puncher. There is a CLEAR difference between the skill level of Shavers combinations and Tyson's.
     
  12. Absolutely!

    Absolutely! Fabulous, darling! Full Member

    8,707
    1,660
    Jul 8, 2010
    I didn't say he was a combination puncher. I said he used combinations in his knockouts.

    Of course there's a clear divide in quality between Shavers's combinations and Tyson's, but there's a clear divide in everything, including raw power.
     
  13. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    52,835
    44,533
    Apr 27, 2005
    So Tyson clearly has more raw power than Shavers?

    Despite being slower and far less skilled at applying his power Shavers came in at 10 in the Ring's 100 Greatest Punchers of all Time. Tyson came in at 16.
     
  14. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    52,835
    44,533
    Apr 27, 2005


    Did Shavers kick you out of a nightclub or something? You've sure got it bad.
     
  15. Absolutely!

    Absolutely! Fabulous, darling! Full Member

    8,707
    1,660
    Jul 8, 2010
    Like that's supposed to mean something?