Fighters who successfully carried their power as they moved up?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by dmt, Dec 22, 2020.


  1. NoNeck

    NoNeck Pugilist Specialist

    26,638
    17,706
    Apr 3, 2012
    Canelo Alvarez
     
  2. Saintpat

    Saintpat Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    23,359
    26,583
    Jun 26, 2009
    That one-shot KO of Virgil Hill — to the body — is devastatingly beautiful.
     
    AwardedSteak863 likes this.
  3. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    52,827
    44,508
    Apr 27, 2005
    EMM was a big hitter very early career at or around middleweight. He carried it up to 175 as well.
     
  4. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    52,827
    44,508
    Apr 27, 2005
    Azumah Nelson's power was good not great but i thought he carried it up a division to 130 quite well.
     
    mark ant and AwardedSteak863 like this.
  5. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    52,827
    44,508
    Apr 27, 2005
    Julian Jackson was a one punch banger at 154 and 160.
     
    HolDat, mark ant, ETM and 1 other person like this.
  6. BoxxyMcBoxface

    BoxxyMcBoxface Member Full Member

    104
    174
    Apr 13, 2020
    James Toney. He was never the biggest puncher at any weight but his power was consistent as he went up.
     
  7. ETM

    ETM I thought I did enough to win. Full Member

    13,317
    11,711
    Mar 19, 2012
    True..don't forget he stopped Hassine Cherifi @ 160 in 3 or 4 rounds. Cherifi was a belt holder for a minute. Not saying he was a great fighter but he was a solid middleweight.
     
    ChrisJS likes this.
  8. ETM

    ETM I thought I did enough to win. Full Member

    13,317
    11,711
    Mar 19, 2012
    He was heavyhanded @40. Guys quit on their stools because he wrecked their body. Julio was a punishing and accurate puncher. I rate it a 9.
     
    Bujia likes this.
  9. PernellSweetPea

    PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,116
    5,732
    Feb 26, 2009
    I never saw Leonard as a hard punch when he moved up. He got all high on his power after Lalonde, yet with Hearns he landed everything on him and Tommy didn't go down at all and Ray was the one who went down, even though Ray said before the fight he would be stronger than Tommy on the inside. He wasn't.
     
    ETM likes this.
  10. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,562
    May 4, 2017
    Canelo improved his punching technique after his first fight with GGG and landed far more power shots in his rematch v GGG and didn`t have to back away like he did in their first clash.
     
  11. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,562
    May 4, 2017
    I don`t think Ray`s power was a problem v Hearns because he had him in trouble in the final round it`s just that Hearns wa better than Ray at that point, there`s no waty Ray could have beaten Hill in `91 and Tommy`s power ws the main problem in their `89 clash, he simply hit harder than Ray.
     
  12. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,562
    May 4, 2017
    Maybe.
     
  13. PernellSweetPea

    PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,116
    5,732
    Feb 26, 2009
    That was Tommy's fault more for coming out hard at the beginning of the round. Some of Tommy's decisions like fighting Marvin so recklessly always bothered me, and that is another one. He could have come out using his jab and holding when Ray got close and winning that round and the decision.
     
    Richard M Murrieta likes this.
  14. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,562
    May 4, 2017
    Maybe but it still proved Ray had good power at 168.
     
  15. PernellSweetPea

    PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,116
    5,732
    Feb 26, 2009
    I don't think so. I thought he hit rather light at 168.. Most of the punches he got Lalonde out with were on the break, and even with Hearns he hit him on the break.
     
    Richard M Murrieta likes this.