Who hit harder Marciano or Tyson?

I believe Tyson to be the harder puncher

 

I like Rocky, i think he hit very hard.

Gotta go with Tyson.

You are confused about something, you say punching power comes from technique and leverage, however, you then claim size and mass doesn't matter. Well that is untrue swag, if the technique and leverage are comparable then the guy that is bigger is going to have more force in his punches.

Tyson's technique and leverage were awesome.

This isn't to say that Rocky isn't even in the ball park, simply stating that if they were hooked up to machines in their respective primes i would bet Tyson would hit a little harder.

You seem to have a bone to pick about Tyson swag?

now your claiming you have ring experience correct?

what gym did you fight out of? How many fights did you have? How much sparring did you do for those fights? How many guys did you knock out? Were you ever knocked out? Put it this way, if you aren't prepared to answer those questions don't go around this forum claiming you have real ring experience. If you are not prepared to answer these questions then please stop posting about your ring experience.

i have a fair bit of sparring experience (4 years) and in that 4 years i sparred big guys, smaller guys and medium sized guys. Yes i would agree with you on technique and leverage, however, without doubt on average the bigger guys did hit with more power providing they had some skills. You get all that MASS moving with technigue and leverage and when it crashes into something the force of that mass simply carries into whatever it hits. You have created a argument whereby due to technique and leverage mass does not apply to force and that simply is not true.

 

Tyson
Give him gloves from Marcianos time and a few guys would have ended up in comas or dead

 

Tyson with either hand punches harder than rockys Suzie Q

 

i don't believe you and why?

a couple of weeks worth of sparring for 40 fights? That is highly unlikely and if you really had 40 fights i have no doubt you would agree with me. That is just bizarre for so many real reasons i could list them.

the gym is responsible for setting up your fights correct?

you must of had a trainer, did he not agree with sparring or did you just refuse to spar because you were so good?

Let me guess your next potential REPLY so as i can cut you off if that's the case.

You are going to say, "oh sorry, i meant to say that i only had a couple of weeks sparring BEFORE i had my 40 fights, of course i had more sparring in between those 40 fights" ,,, because that answer would of made sense, however, you didn't come up with that answer even when you supposedly went back in your memory and eye witnessed all the sparring you used to do. you only eye witnessed a couple of weeks of sparring for 40 or so fights. Sounds like a guy that felt put on the spot and came up with a shaky answer having never answered before to me.

Listen, if you painted yourself into a corner and tried to deceive this forum not to loose face in this thread please come clean and beg forgiveness from the forum and i will support you. I cant help you if you keep trying to pull the wool over the forums eyes, we get good at spotting stuff from years of experience. Not just me, lots of us here.

Plus their are other details that make me think you are bullshyting, if you had about 40 fights with 30 ko's you would be a very good amateur boxer. Trainers would be begging you to spar between fights as they would want to teach you stuff. 40 fights is a ton of fights, a serious commitment of time and money, you just say, "a gym in Nevada" ?? That sounds fishy, i trained out of Newsboy Gym in Toronto. Most fighters are proud to mention the gym that gave them their start.

Do the right thing and either give LOTs more details about your gym in Nevada, which i should be able to access on line via contacts with Nevada gyms to confirm your claim OR come totally clean and make a post begging for forgiveness from this forum for trying to pull the oldest trick in the book on a boxing forum.

Trust me if you don't come clean it will HAUNT you, people on this forum remember, you will be forever mocked about this whenever you try to debate any subject whatsoever. You don't want that swag, i have seen it happen too often. To some darn good posters as well. Guys that had lots of passion that simply went too far claiming themselves to be EX BOXERs.

Ok, either come clean or give us the DETAILs starting with the name of your Nevada Gym.

Let me guess, it was a long time ago and it closed down?

That type of answer is going to end up coming back on you swag.

I want a answer with very specific details of reality for a reason, if its not true all the specific details of reality then make it far easier to figure out why its not true. If its true then the details make it easier to figure out how and why its true. However, you already know that deep down, thus just give me what i want, lots of FREE and EASY flowing details about your Nevada gym and your 40 amateur fights out of that Nevada gym.

 

30 ko's out of 40 fights is good going, is that with either hand ??
I had 37 fights but only won 20 with 3 ko's or stoppages from my left hook.
I never got counted out but i did get stopped on a cut.
Id have loved a dig in my right fist.

 

30 ko's out of 40 is extremely good going,

as in a very good boxer that would of been fighting other very good boxers.

boxers that were going places.

until this guy gives more easy flowing freely offered details don't take his claims too seriously, lol, well do what you want, i am just saying i have seen this happen so many times, everyone keeps asking them little questions and the guy just keeps giving endless evasive answers while trying to claim he is a good ex boxer.

 

Your record is nothing to be ashamed of .

 

that's not bad, to have a winning record in boxing is way way harder than most would consider. Gyms are sneaky at a low level and if you don't have a sneaky Gym you are likely going to come up against fghters that are above your level of training and skill even if their record doesn't show it, their trainers will know it. No gym wants their guys loosing.

 

I don't necessarily agree that one punch power goes to Marciano. He stopped two top heavyweights with one punch.
Walcott was 37 and I think he elected to stay down in their second fight,so I discount that one , just as I do the second Ali vListon ko. Walcott's chin was only average anyway
In their first fight Walcott gradually faded from the pace and retreated more often to the ropes .
It was a great shot but something of a one of imo. I'll give you two examples of men who not only were not one shot bangers,they weren't even really bangers ,yet they scored one punch kos .
Wilfredo Benitez v Maurice Hope and Michael Nunn v Sumbu Kalambay
.
Layne had taken a systematic beating before being ko'd.
He had a very porous defence and Marciano had no difficulty in landing on him he basically softened him up till he was ready to go.

More important than how big Marciano was is the size of the men he was hitting.
He never stopped a decent fighter who was over 200lbs,and anywhere near prime.

In contrast Tyson was banging out huge men.

Your ****ogy should be taken a step further ie A 220lbs man can usually absorb more punching power than a180lbs man.
Don C*ckell, a fat light-heavyweight who had been stopped by middleweight Randy Turpin went 9 rounds with Marciano.

If Marciano had true one punch ko power how come it took him so long to grind C*ckell down?

Roland Lastarza went the distance in their first fight and into the 11th in their second, how come he was still around?

Ezzard Charles went the distance in their first fight and into the 8th in the second one, his chin like Lastarza's was nothing Chuvalesqe Walcott kod him with one left hook, why was he still around at the end?

Archie More ,who Rocky floored 4 times until he couldn't find the strength to get up anymore ,said Marciano got to him by sheer bulldogging ruggedness and then he eventually ground him down.

Marciano ruined guys ,he ruined Walcott,Charles ,Layne , and C*ckell and he did it precisely because he was a grinder. He battered and bruised them with relentless and unceasing attrition over many rounds and, because of his unrivalled condition he carried his power into the late stages of a fight.
One punch ko's ,especially if they happen early in a fight do not allow a boxer to accumulate the physical damage that a sustained beating puts on a body.
Here's an example.
Henry Cooper ,our one time heavyweight hope had a long career because he never really took a systematic beating ,he was either stopped on cuts or banged out by a couple of shots,as he was by Ingo,Floyd and Zora. His body never absorbed the beating that Layne's ,Charles', and C*ckell's did against Rocky.

 

cheers !!
Like you, I've loved the sport all my life and competing was the best part of it.
You had more than me didn't you ??

 

I think that is a brilliant way of answering the question. I was going to do a thread on Marciano and ask people who his power compared to because I think he's hard to judge; he punched above his weight, so to speak.

But as you say size and weight have to be factors, among many others. I hate it on here when people say "such and such was 240lbs" as if it automatically makes them a big hitter; if that was true Bugner and Mathis would have records like Foreman!

The obvious answer is Tyson is the harder hitter, but by how much I am not sure. Marciano could certainly bang, but used accumulation for most of his wins. Tyson seemed to load up more on his shots than Rocky.

Also, how would Marciano have done against guys like Thomas, Holmes, etc; big men with good chins? He might not have made a dent in them or at least we have no proof that he would because he didn't beat guys that big.

So overall I'd have to say Tyson.

 

Only amateur ,truth be told I wasn't any great shakes.