Earnie Shavers vs. Oliver McCall

Kind of like the Roy Williams fight .. could go either way ..

 

Agreed - and McCall collected quite a few losses in roughly the same period as Shavers with less fights. Shavers gets castigated more for the manner of his losses, but he had long runs without losing and he did eventually learn to pace himself and marshal his energies.

He probably left that a bit too late. As Shavers' game matured, he was heading down on the other side of his physical peak, in my opinion.

McCall never really changed. He was the same fighter throughout; was easily deterred and could have the pace set for him by his opponent, if he felt a bit of power. On the other hand, he was very difficult to knock over and had a good right-hand. Even so, he was relatively easy to outbox, for someone with a bit of a dig; basic movement, a basic armory and a solid enough workrate over 12 rounds.

Shavers had and/or acquired those things. At his best, he's got as much chance as Bruno had of beating McCall.

 

Good post .. McCall's chin is all time with Chuvalo, Tua, Mercer .. they don't get better .. he is known for taking bombs from Tyson in sparring, from Lewis in the rematch, from Bruno, these are monster punchers. Whitaker, Gomez, Williamson, Akinwande, Maskaev, Tucker, Damiani, Seldom, Douglas .. all very big guys and big punchers .. there is no realistic case for anything other than not only did McCall have an all time great chin but perhaps the most tested vs big time punching big men ..

 

Would be a fun fight. Similar to iron chinned Tex Cobb vs Shavers.
McCall absorb's Shavers bombs before stopping a tiring Shavers in 8rds.

 

I do not think so, I you still have not addressed my detailed challenge to you about McCall's chin.
Anyway saying a man who was never off his feet in a long career, fighting modern sized HWs, in the amateurs, Tyson over 300 rounds...Has only a "good" chin reflects much bias.

You can make an argument for Tua. But he fought much less rounds, & most were not punchers-some WERE, but someone like Lewis did not go to all out for the KO due to caution & fear of Tua's own punch.
Tua hated body shots, ironic for someone of his tank-like build.

Anyway it would be insane to say either of them only had a decent chin.

Thank you he grant.

 

This content is protected

 

You right you right.. Happy?

 

If you are sincere, sure.
It is not ego making me ask about posts ignored-especially in something unavoidably subjective like boxing, it is crucial to be as accurate & factual as possible.

For example-& not saying you are guilty of this-guys making a point about how small a HW was, & using an atypical, starting career, or below any of that weight.
When they shade the truth, it erodes credibility.

Anyway for my part it is *possible* that it is just circumstances that allowed say Mercer to be put down thrice, & he has as good a chin as McCall.
But when McCall did so many rounds, with Tyson too, & until 49, I favor him.
Either way, the guys we are discussing are A +, gratite chinned figures.

In the hypothetical match up, I favor Ollie. Why?
Maybe Shavers has as great power as The Atomic Bull punch resistance.
That alone would not tell you who would be likely to win the battle of the Irresistable Force vs. the Immovable Object.

But Shavers sometimes could not deliver it, due to relative deficts of boxing & stamina.
He could only win by KO, & McCall could decision or KO an exhausted Shavers.

So Shavers was sometimes not irresistable, but McCall was always Immovable.

 

If you are sincere, sure.
But do not stigmatize it as a matter of Ego.
Especially in something as subjective as these opinions, it is important for fairness, credibility, & mutually exploring these issues to be accurate.

For example-& this is not something I accuse you of doing-ever notice how when someone is trying to say fighter "A" is over-matched due to size...They use the lowest, atypical, starting, or even below reality weight!
Nah, they should never try to shade the facts to bolster an opinion.

It is certainly *possible* Mercer's chin is as good as McCall's-though I doubt better-& circumstances had him down 3X.
But when The Atomic Bull fights so many rounds, including against Tyson, until 49 with periodic drug & emotional problems...I think he had the best punch resistance of all.

Either way, these guys we are discussing are all A +, reinforced concrete/granite chinned figures.

In the hypothetical bout, I definitely favor McCall.
See Shavers may have had as big a punch as what Oliver could take.
But he sometimes failed in delivering it due to boxing & stamina deficits.
And that is the only way Shavers has any decent chance to win.
While Oliver could KO a tired Shavers, or decision him.

 

Real trend on this forum for pitting those who downed all time great recent heavies (McCall, Ruddock, Rahman, etc) against others, these days. Not a criticism, I quite enjoy it. Just saying.