Who is more powerful- David Tua or George Foreman

dbl

 

Why are you ***gots wetting yourselves over Foremans supposed superhuman "power"

You act as if no one could hit as hard as he could. Im sure Bruno, Tyson, Ruddock, and Tua all hit as hard or even harder. Liston probably hit harder as well. Even people who have tasted Foremans power are wrong to you cocksuckers because what they say isnt the same as your ****** fantasies about overrated Foreman who lost to Jimmy Young and Tommy Morrison.

 

Tyson one shotted Lou Savaresse through his guard while Foreman couldn't put him away after 12 rounds and squeaked by with a SD victory.

Tyson also destroyed Alex Stewart in a single round while Foreman won a 10 round MD over him.

Tyson is the far better puncher and his power exceeds Foreman's. He would bust up old Foreman and KO him within 4 rounds and younger Foreman within 6 or 7. Foreman is the most overrated boxer ever. Tyson was on another level in his prime than any heavyweight ever.

No one in history had the same KO power as Tyson.

 

Last sentence is wrong.

But it's more than likely Tyson could hit harder.
Foreman didn't use that much leverage, Tyson was much more compact and had at 215-220 lbs much more muscle and speed, technique.

So yea, between a 220 lbs Foreman and a 220 lbs Tyson I'd bet on Tyson hitting harder with most punches.

 

Using your logic, Bert Cooper>Foreman>Tyson.

After all, Cooper dropped and hurt Holyfield badly when they fought. Foreman didn't put Evander on the mat, but hurt him in the seventh and and visibly affected him on a couple of other occasions. Tyson wasn't able to achieve either of these results, despite meeting Holyfield twice.

Just saying...


Of course, we both know that this isn't the case...But the fact is this: punching power is variable, not static, and one's punches might affect one guy in a manner that's a lot different and more dramatic than another. That's something that's been proved time and again over the history of this sport.

So it strikes me as being futile to engage in ad hominem attacks or to write about a certain fighter's power in quasi-masturbatory tones or to insist beyond the scope of reason that your view of a particular match-up is the only possible result that could occur.

Fact is this, Tyson, Tua, Foreman (and Cooper, to a lesser extant) all hit damned hard, and whether the power was borne of leverage and velocity (Tyson), or sheer stupid strength (Foreman), their power often affected their opponents in a manner that prevented them from being able to mount any sort of effective offense...(tough to do when you;re lying on the floor).

And that's something that really shouldn't be up for debate.

 

I think that is big difference between Foreman 1990-1991 and Foreman after 1994.In fights 1990-1991 he shows great power I think equal to young days maybe even stronger but after Holyfield fight his power seemed not be there like before.Maybe it was because his age or maybe he wasn't same after holyfield fight.

 

He wasn't landing as much and wasn't fighting with the same passion. Power is the last thing to go, and I don't think it ever left Foreman.

You can see a difference in the way he fought in his two title attempts and in his just regular keep busy fights. Fought with more determination and didn't sort of just go through the motions like he did against some of the others.

 

I'm gonna say this is a great post. All these guys were lethal as hell. If you were in the ring with them, the danger of getting sat down was very, very high. That should be enough.

 

I think quality of opposition played a huge role. After Holyfield, George fought guys that were a little better than his early comeback victims (excluding the hapless Jimmy Ellis). It's harder to knock out better fighters. Alex Stewart was a big step up in class over the likes of Terry Anderson, Guido Trane, Bobby Crabtree, etc. So were guys like Pierre Coetzer and Lou Savarese. I mean, these guys weren't world beaters, but they were big, strong, durable guys, and George didn't stop them. Most of the guys Foreman kayoed early in his comeback were "fall-down experts"!:yep

 

Jimmy Thunder knocked out Crawford Grimsley with his first punch, and Foreman couldn't drop Grimsley in 12 rounds of fighting.
Same for Lou Savarese: Savarese goes 12 hard rounds with Foreman (never once hitting the canvas), yet in his next fight gets knocked out by David Izon.

 

:huh

Coetzer was stopped in eight by Foreman. And Stewart was dropped twice and almost stopped in the second of his fight with Big George. Both fights are indicative of the fact that Foreman wasn't exactly feather-fisted...even at that advanced stage of his second career.

 

B-b-but Foreman knocked out the iron-chinned Ken Norton! atsch

 

You should called yourself "Tyson Ballbags".

There were training reasons I believe and Foreman went into the Jimmy Young fight weak and he was mentally fragile at that point.

It's also VERY funny to hear Lou Savarese name being mentioned how old was George then ?? 46? 47??

The younger Foreman power was better because he was hell of a lot meaner.

 

Exactly. Old George moved forward because of size, strength, and the potency of his jab, but he was much more of a boxer; He didn't have the speed of the stamina to launch the assaults he could in his prime. He was STILL dropping guys with single shots. As he aged, he lost the reflexes, timing, and still more speed required to stop people. His shots still hurt like hell, but he just couldn't hit the button on high level opposition, save the fateful night when Mike Moorer stood right in front of him and begged for it.

 

This content is protected