More powerful puncher p4p: FOSTER or HEARNS?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by DINAMITA, Feb 24, 2009.


Page 3 of 3
  1. Russell

    Russell Loyal Member Full Member

    43,715
    13,098
    Apr 1, 2007
    :rofl:rofl:rofl
     
    Russell, Feb 26, 2009
    Russell, Feb 26, 2009
    #31
  2. My dinner with Conteh

    My dinner with Conteh Tending Bepi Ros' grave again Full Member

    12,059
    3,564
    Dec 18, 2004


    Great bull**** more like. :good
     
    My dinner with Conteh, Feb 26, 2009
    My dinner with Conteh, Feb 26, 2009
    #32
  3. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    53,280
    45,423
    Apr 27, 2005
    Have i missed something? Were you talking thru your arse? I'm still waiting :hey

    Here's your chance to shine, or sink, fukking fast :lol:
     
    JohnThomas1, Feb 26, 2009
    JohnThomas1, Feb 26, 2009
    #33
  4. red cobra

    red cobra Loyal Member Full Member

    38,042
    7,561
    Jul 28, 2004
    As great a puncher that Hearns was, Foster was even better, with even greater one punch ko power. Foster was like a big praying mantis who was a nightmare, a really scary guy against his unfortunate opposition. He gets my vote.
     
    red cobra, Feb 27, 2009
    red cobra, Feb 27, 2009
    #34
  5. leverage

    leverage Active Member Full Member

    1,372
    15
    Dec 27, 2006
    I would have to say hearns because he carried a good portion of power up to light heavyweight. Foster, while a great puncher at lightheavy, lost much of his power when going up in weight.
     
    leverage, Feb 27, 2009
    leverage, Feb 27, 2009
    #35
  6. Bummy Davis

    Bummy Davis Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    23,674
    2,172
    Aug 26, 2004
    I would go with Hearns at 147 vs Foster at 175 but Foster if both men weighed in at 175
     
    Bummy Davis, Feb 27, 2009
    Bummy Davis, Feb 27, 2009
    #36
Page 3 of 3