Earnie Shavers' Power Quotes- An Explanation

Foreman's right uppercut was as nasty as his wild swings. Maybe more nasty.

 

but we still couldnt say that if the said boxer didnt fight in other era's unless we are staying in old era's

 

I would say his uppercut was stronger sense he did focus on it to land it good thats where the tech came in

 

Might be.

The point I'm making to @moneytheman is that this thread isn't about "Who had the best left hook?" or "Who had the hardest right straight?" but about who hit harder with whatever their best punch was.

 

Ok, so that's the second option I mentioned in the post you originally replied to.

You don't believe it's possible to figure out who the hardest puncher of all time was, period.

That's actually a reasonable position. But if it was possible to determine who hit hardest, then testimony by opponents would be good evidence.

 

well I say dave the destroyer tua Dave hook was so strong that if his hook connected grazed the person could only take 1 more they was hurt for the rest of the round and just damaged the next rounds If connected clean they went down or made sure that same punch didnt hit clean agian

never seen anything like it before sense people will say deontay but he never fought anybody who was tough really fury went down but he has a tough heart his toughness for taking shots is real weak

 

Shavers could hit...but he had stamina issues...didn't carry his power into the later rounds...and I don't think he had a KO past round 7. He had Ali & Holmes hurt...but Shavers didn't have the knack of coming up with the BIG punch when he needed to...

 

I told you before we cant go off of words cause they all outdated none of those dudes fought in other era's why would we say earnie or George hit harder then anybody

really dont know If we could say he hit harder then mike what about the other boxers mike fought we never got their opinion of mike vs earn power it's all words

 

Ok, so you do think that you can tell who the hardest hitter/punch ever probably was.

Other people also look at film and think it's Tyson, or Foreman, or Cooney...or Shavers. And Shavers's common opponents with all of those dudes picked Shavers.

So if it's possible to pick the hardest hitter of all time in the first place, Shavers is near the top of the list.

 

This is a great answer by Holyfield and sums it up perfectly.

 

I don't see why you're saying the words are "outdated."

So let's take your example, David Tua. You believe Tua might be the hardest puncher ever because you see his destructive power on film.

Other people look at Tyson, see his destructive power on film, and decide Tyson hit the hardest. Just like you say it's Tua.

Other people look at Foreman's destructive power on film and say Foreman looks like the hardest puncher ever. A small minority of others see Cooney and say it's Cooney.

Well, Shavers shared opponents with Tyson, Foreman, and Cooney. Those opponents say that Shavers hit them the hardest. That isn't "outdated" testimony if you've already decided that Tyson, Foreman, or Cooney are harder punchers than Tua/Ruddock/Lennox.

 

I can put it another way. Imagine this scenario:

Imagine eight different guys fought Tua (your pick for hardest hitter ever), Wilder, and Lennox Lewis. Imagine that ALL of them said that Tua hit them hardest. Wouldn't that be good evidence that Tua actually was the hardest hitter?

 

I think it’s certainly possible for men to hit harder then some of the best (like Shavers over Foreman for example). Shavers didn’t have Foremans chin, jab, skills, exc. same could be said of men like Satterfield, Williams, Sheppard, exc.

 

no cause I dont think they all would say it if they fought another hard hitter I would think it would be some say he hit harder but the other man hit harder some would say he hit the hardest

 

So you think that if they all agree on one guy hitting hardest, you think that's fishy and makes you suspicious they're all lying?