Not so sure personaly. The thing that comes across about Choynski is that you only had to blink and you were on ***** street even if you did outweigh him by 30 lbs. I think that he might well have been the hardest puncher of his weight ever.
Choynski is a maybe. I think he hit hard, but if he hit that hard, he should have more knockouts. I don't think Charels belongs on all time puncher's list. Charels has a lowly 43.96%, and many of his stoppages were below heavyweight.
No doubt about hardest puncher for his weight but his weight was 165. Charles and Moore were eventually much bigger.
The instant I see Sullivan at the top of any list involving gloves I'm onto something That is, unless he's being listed as the first lineal gloves HW champion!
In which fights was Choynski handcuffed in? Are you suggesting Choynski fought not to win? They way I see it, he did not deleiver the KO blow in too many fights where he lost, won the decsion, or drew. In most cases the heavies who are the best punchers have both a high KO% and have knocked out previsouly ranked guys. In most cases the heavies who can't punch have lower KO% and don't knock out many prevsiouly ranked guys.
If you look at the period between Sullivan and Dempsey most of the greatest heavyweight finishers were small fighters. Joe Choynski, Bob Fitzsimmons, Sam Langford were blowing away the big heavyweights better than any big man. Perhaps in some cases better than any big man since. What was going on with these guys?
I don't see the point with Choynski compared to Charles and Moore: According to the Boxing Register Choynski----------25 ko's in 79 fights 32% Charles-----------51 ko's in 115 fights 44% Moore------------130 ko's in 219 fights 59% Charles and Moore did fight below heavyweight but both continued to score knockouts at heavyweight and Choynski also fought often below heavyweight.
Um, I said the list is in chronological order, not ascending, alphabetical, my ranking, or descending order. Do you understand the difference? I will try to resist the urge to at those attempting to sabotage what was intended to be a classical boxing discussion. If you understand what chronological order means than you will know why I listed Sullivan first. I have seen enough testimonials on Sullivan to conclude he was a good puncher. Not a top 10 or top 20 all time puncher in my order, but good enough to rate on this list for sure.
Choynski always fought at heavyweight. There was no light heavy weight divison for him when he was in his prime. I am iffy on Choynski. As for Charles and Moore, what are their KO% in heavyweight only fights.