This is nonsense. In the other thread, I voted for Frazier because he's clearly the overall better puncher. In this one, where i'm asked out-and-out to speculated on who had the hardest punch, I have speculated that it was Williams. Nobody pm'd me. I voted in each case with my best guess based upon what I know. Putting it off on a conspiracy theory - literally - because it doesn't jive with what you want to happen is pathetic. They are definitely not the same question.
No they voted, Frazier was A BETTER PUNCHER than Williams. So far the majority agree Williams hit harder than Frazier.
Ok. So maybe nobody private messaged each other. I apologise for that assumption. It never occurred to me that there was a difference. The best punch is the hardest punch in my view. So To me, it's the same thing. Who would you rather hit like? I would rather hit like Frazier. He knocked out guys consistently and at a better level. And on film his knockouts are great! let's say Williams was the harder puncher. Would that be based on his potential or what he did? Because if their is a difference between hardest and best then where was he hitting harder? I know Every one is entitled to an opinion. And it is okay to disagree without getting nasty with one another. I honestly would like to understand the thought process that comes up with Williams hitting harder than Joe Frazier. We have film. We know the guys on film being hit by both Frazier and by Williams. I mean, nobody will believe this, but before I made my conclusion, I gave it some deep thought, I researched, I first tried to make a case for Williams hitting harder before ruling him out. If best punch is not the same as the hardest punch what was Williams hardest punch and when did he land it? And who did he land it on? Don't we need examples?
You've contradicted this a million times on the forum, stressing delivery and accuracy at the expense of pure power which you believe to be subservient. But this is fine with me. As long as it's an idea that's expressed consistently, i've no problem - the best punch is the hardest punch.
Ali has better KO's than both. Does that make him a harder puncher? Williams was quite likely the hardest punchers of the 60's. Just like Shavers was of the 70's. But neither managed to translate that into many wins over world class opposition.
Can we just end this nonsense? Frazier was the better puncher. Without a doubt. Williams was likely the harder two handed puncher (even though Frazier's left hook might have been as hard or even harder than any of William's punches). And everyone on this forum knows the difference, except for the times when it suits their agenda. Because no one says Ali was the hardest puncher of the 60's and 70's even though he undoubtedly had the best KO's/stoppages of that period. We can just watch film and safely say that he wasn't close to being the hardest puncher of those decades.
I don't believe the underlined,I think you knew exactly what your were doing when you changed your original statement that Frazier would be the hardest hitter and strongest fighter that Liston ever fought. As McGrain has pointed out you saw the subtle difference quickly enough and altered it.As I said dishonest and sly.
Based on what? I think Sonny Liston hit harder than Williams. Sonny fought Frankie Daniels the same time as Sonny only he knocked Daniels out. I would expect if Frankie is still around he wouldn't hear of Williams being talked up as the hardest puncher of the 1960s when he went 20 rounds with him and only one round with Sonny. Frankie fought them one after the other in 1958. Sonny flattened Daniels. And so did 6 guys before he even met Williams. So I don't think it unreasonable to assume Williams was behind Sonny for punch power.
It's embarrassing for you because you've been caught out once again stealthily trying to move the goalposts!lol