Harder hitter Deontay Wilder vs Earnie Shavers?

SHHHH! don't say that! you will bring the wrath of miniq down on you!

 

wilder has more power. shavers has a bit more skill and knew how to land the punch.
and @ dubblechin, not knocking out tex cobb is not a shame. that man had a frickin diamond hard head and chin!

 

This guy did an excellent data driven breakdown of every heavy hitting heavyweight in history up to 2010. His figures wouldn't include the current crop of heavyweights but it's worth perusing for his many insights.
http://www.heavyweightblog.com/1267/ko-statistics-of-ko-kings-tyson-klitschko-shavers

 

That's funny. I hope that isn't you?

That guy was a nut.

My favorite blog from that guy was when he compared Wlad-Mormeck to Ali-Foreman and said, according to his STATS, Mormeck would've been the greatest opponent Ali ever defeated. That Mormeck was the equivalent of a SIX-TIME Heavyweight Champion.

Yet Mormeck had won 6 cruiserweight championships, which during the era of Muhammad Ali would be considered "6 world heavyweight titles". It would mean that Ali would have fought one of the best opponents he has ever faced. In fact Muhammad Ali never won against someone at real heavyweight 200×2 who had been a 6x championship winner and a unified champion.

https://www.heavyweightblog.com/408...n-and-wladimir-klitschko-vs-jean-marc-mormeck

 

Shavers

 

He does have a point. According to him the median weight of Ali's opponents was 197 lbs. It's probably worth comparing him to say Bob Foster. I'd also be willing to entertain a comparison to Ellis, Quarry, or Spinks but those are hardly Ali's greatest opponents. Frazier, Foreman, and Norton were his most formidable foes.

Let's not through the baby out with the bathwater. The fellow has amassed a great deal of useful data, which is worthwhile to contemplate. He's made a number of interesting points which I don't think most people take into consideration in these matters, and he's gone to the substantial trouble of backing his point up with verifiable statistics. He's done a lot more than most people do generating evidence for his opinions. Just because you and I have made some magnificent blunders over the years does not invalidate everything else which we have ever said.

As recently as two weeks ago, I was sure that Joshua would beat Usyk. I thought that Martinez would beat Cotto, that Donaire would beat Rigondeaux, and that Klitschko would beat Brewster. Life has a way of humbling the proud, proving how little we really do know.

It's probably a good thing to look at old heavyweights records and remove all of the opponents which wouldn't make heavyweight today when comparing them to modern heavyweights. I also approve of his method of separating total KOs from noteworthy KOs against highly ranked opponents. I like to do the same thing. You can usually just chuck out the first twenty apprenticeship fights while they are learning the game and moving up. What really matters is how boxers do in title fights against their equals or non-title fights against top ten ranked opponents. I think that kind of analysis allows us to view fighters in a more accurate light than just the raw record.

His contribution that the median weight of Shaver's KO victims was 200 pounds is enlightening for purposes of this particular conversation. We ought to be able to agree that depending how hard a person hits there is likely a limit to how big a man they can knock out. The likelihood of a KO would therefore decrease along a predictable slope as the weight increased.

I really liked how the fellow included the stats of other great sluggers such as Buddy and Max Baer. The more points of comparison, the more meaningful the comparisons become. I was looking at guys who had KO percentages in the 70s and 80s over 200 lbs as the ones to beat. This made me go look up Tye Fields, who I'd never heard of before. Yeah, I'd bet that guy would hit harder than George Foreman. He's nowhere near Foreman's ability since he can't take a punch, he's slow, and has no technique. But yeah, a guy built like that, 6-9, I'd believe he could punch harder than 6-4 Foreman or 6-0 Shavers.

 

Shavers had a greater variety of power punches at his disposal. Hooks, uppercuts, overhand right. All Wilder has in his arsenal is the straight right he loads up on 200%.

 

I give edge to Wilder just although Shavers might have had more variety he's still a pretty limited boxer that never held a strap. Tough era mind you.