Who had the most powerful right hand among light-heavyweights?

Calm down. It was a perfectly reasonable question I asked.

I love how you insult everyone from your keyboard and yet call anybody out who has a go back as a keyboard warrior.

You are the definition of a pathetic internet troll. You have no interest in boxing beyond lusting after George Foreman's body and yet have spent ten years - TEN YEARS!! - coming on this forum in various guises, insulting people who do not share your narrow and, frankly, poorly-informed opinions on boxing from the sanctity of your computer.

I just don't get it. Why would you go on a forum about a subject you have little interest in or knowledge about, where the participants write in a language which - and I get it's your second language - you haven't really mastered and insult everyone? And when you return from your numerous suspensions, you just do it again. I mean, it might be fun to do that for one night if you're drunk - though I doubt it - but TEN YEARS?? You're more boring than lockdown.

I note another reference to men's genitalia in your post. Your last post I replied to mentioned how Carlos Monzon's testicles would do whatever you wanted. Given how you feel about Foreman, and your regular homo-erotic posts and avatar, do you think it might be time to try another forum?

 

Foster gets my vote

 

Absolutely. Foster was pretty scary with the right as well. A great pair of two handed punchers.

 

Massive right hand. He and Spinks took a turn for biggest puncher honors at 175 for a couple of years. Saad, another murderous hitter was always in the honorable mentions.

 

No-one hit "much" harder than Spinks at 175.

 

Artur Beterbiev, Bob Fitzsimmons, Bob Foster, Sergey Kovalev

 

What is this based on? What is the best example of this on film? What round did this occur? I mean, if it was as early as round 1 or 2 or perhaps even 3 you might have a point but in the later rounds? Do you have experience in the ring yourself?

 

He's definitely been in someone's!

 

Can't agree. Foster's left was one of the greatest punches of all time, and it to nominate it #1 would be no sin. Spinks had a great right hand, but not quite on the level of Foster's left imo.

 

Unfortunately, Foster and Spinks had no common opponents (notably), so the only way to determine who was stronger would be to find out if they did any punch tests on the force machines or if they had common sparring partners to find out if one hit harder than the other. You must keep in mind though, Foster was a small (in terms of weight) light heavy, whereas Spinks was pushing heavyweight, so it might seem like Spinks harder. However, they both faced the same number of top opponents imo, and Foster has more fast knockouts, more true, one-punch knockouts, and seems to have a much more lasting effect on the guys he knocks out. Not to take any thing from Spinks. Still a great puncher.

 

Ray Actis

 

I agree, but I think both Mustafa and Saad Muhammad weren't particularly far from Michael's punching level. Perhaps Marvin Johnson as well. Certainly Foster from an overall level.

 

Unfortunately, William, I don't think the tests you mention would definitively determine who hit harder. Hitting a force machine, or a sparring partner with 16oz gloves on, would still leave too big a margin of error to be sure who hit harder in real fight circumstances.

I'm surprised Charlie is so disparaging about Spinks' power given what Michael did to Cooney. That compares very favourably with Bob's forays into heavyweight. Of course, Charlie would come back saying Cooney was finished when Spinks fought him but then in another post will cite Foreman's destruction of Cooney, after Gerry had spent a further three years out of the ring and on the booze, as another example of Foreman's extraordinary power. He wants to have it both ways.

Stop it @George Crowcroft. That was an unintentional pun.

The only surefire way of Charlie knowing that Foster hit MUCH harder than Spinks would be for both of them to have hit him with their Sunday punch so he could compare. That would give his opinion some substance.

We can but dream.

 

Johnson was below them. Yes they weren't far from Michael at all. This however is light and day from punching "much harder" than Spinks. It's not the same conversation.

Foster is probably the king daddy and it's hard to argue against that. He wouldn't punch all that much harder than Spinks i would imagine and most certainly not much harder.