I find young Foreman to be a surprisingly accurate puncher. I personally think he just timed well. It a took a while for them to get there, but he was usually pretty spot-on, especially if he could manhandle. Shavers, judging by the amount of times he got his man in trouble and couldn't finish, simply has less coordination in my view.
i agree but georges advantages were having by far more dominating than shavers an iron jaw (which helped on getting inside and really letting loose) long reach to corner men with is jab and his size he wa s agiant ali was a big man to. but george stood tall infornt of hism an and just dropped bombs like nobodies business. migh thave impressive power but both are a differene type of puncher
This pretty much tells it all about Shavers. He hit hard - very hard - and probably the hardest of all time. But that's basically all he did. Each one of the guys mentioned is a better "all around" puncher even if they didn't hit as hard with one shot, because each one of them had some other element to their game.
Foreman's chin also allowed him to stay in shootouts when Earnie would have already been stopped. Foreman was a better fighter period.
I think he did, Shavers power in the raw sense of the term was chilling. In terms of concussive power I'd rate him amongst the Top 3 hard-hitting HW's, for sure. What I will say is that likes of Louis, Tyson, Liston and Lewis possessed very good raw power certainly not way behind what Shavers had. It's just these guys, could excute a punch better, were superior techicians and combined all the elements of punching (speed, body movement, leverage) together far more completely. :good
That's it? (I was expecting a firestorm of indignation, and this is all my inflammatory rhetoric can instigate? Bummer.:huh) If you think this is my worst post ever, you ought to check the archives. I've produced some real stinkers during my brief tawdry foray into ESB.
Shavers hurt Ali probably more than anyone else. He had to be carried back to his dressing room after the fight, according to report by Eddie Cool of Boxing News.
Ali took a lot of hard rights from Shavers in that fight. Signs of age - To slow to react or get out of the way. He nearly had Shavers at the end of the 15th. Remarkable considering the bad shape he was in at the start of that round. He gave everything so i'm not surprised he was carried back to the dressing room.
Point is, that's the only time Ali didn't leave the ring on his own two feet as far as I know. Ali was tough. So that's saying a lot.
Is it me, or when Shavers knocked the **** out of Ellis wasn't he holding his head with his left while punching with his right?
I wouldn't say that Moorer was significantly more durable than Ken Norton. I'd say he was more chinny than Norton, but his superior skill made up for that. I wouldn't overestimate the chin of Ron Lyle: an old Ali had him short-circuited with one punch. Lyle highlights another point: Foreman managed to club Lyle down over a lot of rounds, but Shavers had Lyle nearly out cold with a single left hook. I think that, while Foreman was a much better finisher than Shavers, Shavers had much more proven one-punch power, which is really my point. Anyway, I don't think world class opposition is that suitable a way to judge raw power. After all, being a world class boxer (ie. top 5) is all about overcoming raw power, not enduring it. That's why there has never been a long-reigning heavyweight champion who had power but relatively little skill. When such boxers have become champions (Baer, Foreman, Briggs) they've not been champions for long.
