Freddie Roach believes Wlad hits harder than Tyson

CAUSE MERCER WAS 41 YRS OLD THATS WHY..............:good

WHEN WLAD IS 41........... WE SHALL SEE HOW WELL HE CAN TAKE A SINGLE LEFT HOOK.......

 

Tyson's power is not overrated in the slightest. Many of tyson KO punches/combos, were extremely short punches, how they did so much damage I have no idea. His KO of botha was crazy, such a short punch. His uppercut vs Buster, very short too and almost KO'd him, and he didn't land much before that.

 

You mean he hits the floor harder than Tyson right?

 

Mercer said morisson was the hardest puncher not wlad and who are these long lists of opponents who said wlad hit harder than lewis ?. And corrie t rex sanders has taken punches from both tyson and wlad unlike roach and he says tyson hits much harder . Name a common sparring partner who says wlad hit harder than tyson?. Sam Peter was floored by jammel mcline and he laughed at wladmir punches . Why dont you ask hasihm rahman who hit harder between lewis and wlad . Lewis put rahman in la la land with one punch . wlad had to hit him all night to knock him . As i said botha said lewis and tyson hit much harder than wlad . Where was wlads power when he was hitting botha with every punch he had and couldnt knock him . i suppose you think wlad beats prime tyson. if you ask me wlad isnt even the hardest hitting klitschko. His brother vitali is.

 

I would like to see a comment from someone who fought both and took the punch from both. Lennox never took a clean Mike punch since had he, he would not have won the fight. I think Mike had greater speed. For size I think Mike was more devastating. Yeah Vlad and Vitali are huge guys, so they should punch harder than a guy they outweigh by 40 pounds.

 

by that logic valeuv should punch harder than wlad because he is bigger and weighs more . earnie shavers was only 210 pounds but he harder than wladimir.

 

Well freddie roach never got hit on the face by either guy so who cares what he says......,,.....

 

I dont think the opinion of common opponents would be of much use either.There seems to be a reluctance among fighters to give credit to the guy who laid him out but have no problem giving props to someone he beat as the hardest hitter.I guess a lot of that would be hard feelings still lingering.

 

I'd give the edge to Tyson.

 

I think Either of the Klits actually are strike for strike harder punchers than Tyson, considering they are not only big guys, but also lanky and have good technique.

Its like comparing a catapult to a trebuchet. Those long, straight punches, when thrown correctly with all the weight behind them are just going to produce more raw energy.

It doesn't mean they are better knockout punchers though. I tend to believe that getting caught with something you don't see coming makes the punch seem like its hitting twice as hard. Tyson was able to move about and catch opponents at odd angles with shots they just didn't see coming, and more odd angles than simply throwing punches over the guard and setting opponents up with the jab to land the mega cross.

Tyson's most effective punches were his left uppercuts and hooks. His in fighting, was slick, and he was quick enough to consistently put a lot of what he had, if not all of what he had into body shots.

Tyson was the more dynamic fighter. Both Klits are intelligent fighters who have honed their style of fighting to their superior size. If a huge fighter knows how to fight in their body as effectively as the brothers, it really is hard to beat.

Have to remember, Tyson was a compact fighter who packed more than enough power, who worked complex angles and had to actively react and search for shots. To be effective, and to constantly beat guys with this style requires a TON of skill, because you always give the opponent opportunities.

The Klit fighting style is to keep the opponent off, and punish with the jab, constantly retreat until the damage is done, and finish up with the big cross, unless of course they can catch an opponent trying to basically jump in for a counter. It is HARD to counter somebody with a huge height, reach advantage who are constantly backing up and basically using a probing style. Nothing dynamic about it, it is just a very safe, smart and effective way to win a fight without much risk, because there are very few opportunities and tactics to utilize unless you have considerable quickness, a great chin, and are willing to take huge gambles.

 

I suppose you think the klitschkos are harder hitters than shavers and foreman aswell seeing as they are taller and heavier . Look its as simple as this sam peter walked through wladmirs punches do you think he would walk through prime tysons punches. the klitschkos are completely over hyped . We even have people saying they would beat prime ali and now they hit harder than tyson . Give me a break. Any boxing fan worth his salt knows that the klitschkos are average fighters dominating the weakest era in heavyweight boxing . If the klitschkos were fighting in any other era they wouldnt being champion . They pull straight back from punches which you will get away with fighting a limited slugger like sam peter but not if your fighting lewis or tyson . They have no head movement and no footwork . They are not skilled and are just big and awkward.

 

Sure, young Klitschko throws a harder straight right on a pure punch for punch basis than Tyson. However, Tyson had the greatest delivery system in history for getting his punches to the target.

 

Charlie Zelenoff hits harder than both Klitschko and Tyson, look it up on Youtube

 

For one punch wlad probably does hit harder than Tyson,but Mike threw punch combinations and was a lot faster,Wlad tends to throw single shots.I doubt there is much in it but Wlad probably does hit harder.