Overrated Punching Power

Marciano has more one punch KO's, doesn't he.

 

Michael Dokes
Marvin Hagler
Roberto Duran
Julio Caesar Chavez
Eddie Mustafa Muhammad.

 

My definitive list:

Foreman
Dempsey

Foreman slightly
Dempsey astronomically

 

I think Shavers is incredibly overrated overall and in terms of punching power. He was a typical Dean Chance special totally overhyped and overpromoted. When you look at his record and compare his biggest stoppages with what point those fighters were in their career and you see his record isnt very impressive. His first fight against a world class fighter was against a fat old Rondon and he was taken the distance. People will talk about him stopping Jimmy Young but Young had 10 (3 of which he had lost) fights to Shavers 44. Shavers stopped Ellis but Ellis was shot, was never the sturdiest HW, and never won another important fight. He was also taken the distance by Henry Clark, taken ten by Roy Williams. Those are his best wins and from there his record drops off dramatically. When a shot Ellis, a very green Jimmy Young, and Roy Williams are what you hang your hat on for proof that you are the hardest puncher in history it seems a pretty weak argument.

 

Razor Ruddock.

Anyone that loads up on one punch like that is gonna have some power but over all the guy never really KOd a top fighter in their prime.

 

Hello gentleman. I have read many threads here, this is my 1st post. Though have ~ 700 over at this boxing web site you may like: [url]http://www.ajdugger.com/forum.html#nabble-f3829183[/url]
Just a fan, never boxed, weightlifter. Anyhow, I believe there is a definitional confusion here. Some are using RESULT of punches as a good measure of punching power. But to elaborate upon what has been noted, that is essentially EFFECTIVE punching power or punching ability.

Of course speed, skill, timing, accuracy, work rate, finishing ability combinations & other factors including your opponents skills factor heavily into KOs. Words have specific meanings, & if you use "power" you are describing what you think was the literal force of blows, not their effectiveness, since soooo many factors go into effect, looking scien-terrifically (sic) one must isolate all variables.

Regarding Shavers, I do think the conventional & his opponent's opinions are correct. Who overrates him as a boxer? He was not great, but good ernough to be a top contender in The Golden Age of HWs. With limited skill, chin, endurance, etc...If he & Foreman could land more clean blows which were not seen coming (braced for in part), they would have exponentially more 1 punch KOs. They had top power though, & Foreman some skills like his jab & ring cutting abilities.

By the way, others who said Shavers hit the hardest of all they faced-James "Quick" Tilllis, the horse **** turn into gasoline comment, & Randall "Tex" Cobb.

I think brute striking power is like throwing the fastest. Things like strength & speed go into it, but there are still unknown factors that allow the leverage to produce the most extreme results, you cannot merely measure through computing speed, technique, lifting strength...Things like big hands & arms add to being "heavy handed", but this is mostly natural, & who has how much power often defies reason.

Some with short arms produce great power. Rocky had great power, close to the top guys (boxing results, reports & phsyical damage) with no discernible HW advantages: short, small especially in reach, strong legs but not great muscle mass, not quick, small hands...

Some things will remain a mystery.

 

Your over rated list is off the charts nuts … :nut other than Ray Mercer … the rest I'd delete all together and start over ...

 

I have seen the discussion here before & numerous other threads Merchant's Ghost, & respect your knowledge of boxing. But as many others here feel, I respectfully believe that you have a basic misapprehension.

I agree that on avergae being bigger & heavier adds punch resistance (not counting being fat), & have read much about how Shavers & others did not knock out the bigger guys nearly as much. Which is absolutely true. Though again, pure FORCE of a punch is only one of many things that allows KOs. Does Foreman not hit very hard, despite numerous testimony & seing the dent he can make in the heaviest possibly heavy bag?

Tyson was exponentially more accurate & intelligent with his punches & combinations. Not to mention much faster. Tyson & most all relaize that while he hit very hard, it is adding the effect of a few shots in a very short span delivered in the right place & not being blocked AND you cannot see all the punches coming to roll with or brace for them that had him such a particularly devastating puncher, like Joe Louis was. Also, someone like Shavers also does not have the attrition effect of someone who hits you heavy & cleanly into the later rounds, weakening legs & senses so you just cannot take the same punch.

Think of it as simpole mathematics. No athlete can have a MUCH harder, like even anywhere near 1/3 more, speed/power/height than other elite athletes. At a certain point, just a little more is dramatically noticeable-like if instead of 7' 7" being the tallest you can find a physically competent person to play in the NBA, If the guy was "only" 6" taller, a quite small percentage of greater height by any reckoning, it would be a large advantage. Same for power, Shavers may have been a proportionate outliar.

But without much technical skills, endurance, or schin, he could never approach an ATG status, though it was enough to make him a top contender in a great era. Tyson & others are more like Michael Jordan> great punching power/leaping ability, but not the measurably very best ever in just concussive force or a vertical leap.

About the punch Holmes got up from: I have a theory that Holmes died that night. Upon impact. But he was hit SO hard that hitting the canvas acted like the paddles of life, & is heart was reset/jarred back to beating, & Larry 2 was born. Still cranky though!

 

LOL, very predictable. You seem to have an affinity for picking on large white heavies

Vitali hits even with Tyson according to Danny Williams, and according to Briggs hits harder then Foreman. Universum who managed both said Vitali hits harder than Wlad pre his injures. His KO% is among the highest in history.

Jeffries floored every man in all of his matches save his come back match. Tex Rickard who saw Jeffries said he hit harder than Jack Dempsey.

Over rated punchers imply they could hit but might be over rated? Maybe Cleveland Williams as he really did not stop many contenders.

 

But I never claimed there was any divine intervention involved, just a brute biological reaction. To extrapolate further: think of it like a scale that goes to 1000. Now obviously the greatest effect depends upon a few different things, so maybe the hardest punchers in the early 900's have less of an impact than, say, an average HW contender aor outliar middleweight at 800, due to who is hit, how, how often, how often in what time span, where they are struck, amongst other factors.

Clearly Shavers achieved an unprecedented level of force, & against a HW with excellent punch resistance. Thus it effectively was breaking "1000", or a scale spinning around pass zero since there are no more numbers left. Heartbeat & respiration immediately ceased, but his brain, still alive, was so activated by bouncing around his noggin that hitting the canvas essentially was like shocking his heart back to life. :bbb

Now Tyson hit really hard, but few think the very hardest ever. But speed & explosiveness, the punches coming in very tight bunches & in the right places, & many not being SEEN means that they will have more impact than the occasional guy who hits harder.

If all those things add to the destructiveness of his attack, he needs hit very hard, but not the hardest, to be devastating. There is little question if we just had him, Butterbean, Shavers, Foreman, Liston, likley Baer, Tua & a few others just haul off all day & get the single highest reading of punching force, Tyson would be amongst the lowest or lowest. Others would be at least about even, like Lewis, Klitchko, Galenta, Bruno, Morrison, Ruddock, Bonecrusher, & some others.

Still, Tyson would hit very hard even amongst top HWs, & harder than all but a miniscule proportion of the adult male population. Roughly like being a 7' 1" center. But there are some 7' 6" or more around, though they may box with the skill & results of how good Shawn Bradley, Manute Bol, & George Muresan did, not like Wilt & Shaq (analogous in B-ball talent to peak Tyson).

 

I agree with a lot of this M. G.

Though I would be surpsied if any HW could have the hardest punch per lb. as a lighter weight class, since they did not need to get very lean, & just being taller you will weigh more. Though possible, I think very unlikely-like even if you eliminate the very top weightlifting categories-where they can have much body fat & the small advantage it garners-no other big man, however lean, can match the greatest per lb. strength of, say "pocket Hercules" of the '80's, 5' flat, lifting more than 3 X his weight over his head from the ground.

Shorter guys having more torque on their hooks? That could very well be. And the bigger guys harder long punches/straight rights (& jabs). My only question is IF a man 6' 210 like Shavers could produce more force than a relative giant. I think the specific relative size (more natural than body building maxed out or PEDs) & length of arm, size of hand, other aspects of bio-mechanics could well make it true.

For example I have felt Lewis & Klitchko I think could hit as hard as, not necessarily harder, than Tyson & Tua. Tyson delivered more force via spoed, Tua had great natural muscle, & the others very long levers. Different degrees of advantages in various area. Shavers though not huge had big levers & tremendous biomechanics & Marciano-like commitment to his blows.

I would be surprised if Tyson could produce more PSI force than Foreman, but it is an intelligent thought that maybe his "transfer of energy" point was longer instead. One would then need to consider IF psi alone was an adequate measure of punch force! This accords with his ability to move folks, punching or shoving. Foreman later was listed as 6' 3", & in his early career he weighed 217-232, just from memory. Yet Saddler had him coming in dehydrated often-which seems idiotic-he naturally was 230, & that is without being bulked up by weightlifting. Natural muscle & bone structure often means more-me & many folks in the gym have a HW amount of muscle (at least for our height). Does not mean that the added strength can let us punch worth a damn.

I am unsure if Foreman really had mainly arm punches. Maybe...But he also was just a unique ability & special phsyiology. He did twist his hips if not his fist, must have used legs even in somewhat upright as sluggers tend to be. Could anyone hit that hard only with arm punches? I wonder IF he could have hit harder with more conventional training, or this worked well for him.

We have a question if Frazier & Lyle getting up from Foreman (most of the time) is more about them & his speed & method & area of delivery. He was rusty & inactive for a while vs. Lyle (& a round ended accidentally at 2 minutes, saving Lyle), so he was slower. Unlike Mike, you would normally see his punches coming.

What would be the impact & effect of the SAME # of punches, in the same place, delivered with the opponent equally aware of it? So Tyson, Lewis, Ali (though not a very hard puncher) got more bang for their bucks than a Shavers or Foreman.

Anyway they all hit extremely hard by any normal standards!

 

I love Tyson and appreciate Morrison. However, the best pound for pound puncher is more likely Bob Fitzsimmons. He was an undersized guy who set traps for a one punch finale and succeeded on an inordinate, in fact ridiculous, amount of occasions. On record, on anecdote, and definitely given the size disparity he, or possibly Sam Langford, is the king of the bigger guys. Morrison, one hell of a puncher, is not really in this discussion. In fact, Tua has a much better reason to be mentioned.

Murderous punchers who follow a pacifists' script. Rightly so, as taller fighters invariably offer more openings both for leads and counters, especially near the ropes.

Shavers had more than a fair whack. If you want to deconstruct him you can say that he over-commited to his punches and didn't pace himself, both of which led to him being stopped. If he fought a more controlled style he would have won more fights but gained fewer fans. In the end, he still hit like a mule kicks. His contemporaries, the best judges of his power, were unanimous in him being the hardest puncher of the era. in disputable.

I've talked to quite a few guys who have sparred with or fought Foreman. They all attest to his power as "gravity changing"... his jab was especially influential, both in his early and late career. His late career fight with Moorer was especially telling... not in much ballyhooed "one KO punch" finish but in the punishment he dealt in rounds 8-9-10.

 

Thank you very much M.G. My Ego is too identified with being intellectually rigorous & balanced to just go by...the more obvious style of Egoism! :cheers

So I think the time under pressure you identified is similar to being "heavy handed", & is what just was referred to as Foreman's "Gravity changing" effect. A boxer "Evolution" who sparred with many greats posting on Dugger's Ranch refers oi his blows in much the same way, as moving you & disorienting. So Tyson & maybe nobody could dent a 300 lbs. heavy bad as thoroughly with the same # of punches, even though Shavers likely hit even harder-force being produced through several means, speed, length, leverage, technique, with some not completely known alchemical elements of natural strength & abilities also.

 

I always felt that Billy Costello's power was a bit overrated.