Thread: 03 Wladimir Klitchksco VS Joe Frazier

Originally Posted by Master

Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita

Originally Posted by Master

Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita

Originally Posted by Max Power

Originally Posted by bradlee180

Earnie Shavers hit harder than them, and he was 6', 210 pounds.

Foreman did not fight Earnie Shavers.

And Shavers did not hit as hard as Wladimir's hard punching opponents. Obviously he would have hit harder than say Byrd and Chambers because he committed everything to it.

Shavers shows definite drop in knock out power the heftier his opponents got.

I think he could be considered the hardest puncher of the cruiserweight division maybe but not of HW. Against 200+ HW's his KOratio is in the 60 odd percentile, that's nothing special compare the the 70-80 odd for most power punchers. And against opponents the size of the average modern HW today, Shaver's KO ratio drops below Chris Byrd.

Summary: Shavers is dangerous mainly to bums, which he mainly fought, and cruiserweights which he also mainly fought.

The only time Shavers ever wasted a natural HW with a good record to my recollection was KEn Norton, a renowned glass jaw. Not impressive!

Definitely agree with this one. Shavers get so overrated but one thing is clear..

Shavers is NOT the hardest HW puncher of all-time... that's total bs

Who is then? Ask Holmes.

There are couple of modern HWs who hits harder than Shavers .. for one, I have no doubt in my mind that Wilder's right is more damaging than anything shavers can throw..

We have to take the size of these two fighters and their oppositions into consideration when gauging their punching power.. shavers was 6ft which is tiny by todays standards.. there is no possible way that a 6ft powerpuncher can generate more muster their shots than a 6"6 power hitter who is able to get a lot more leverage on his punches.

Wilder's overall size and the leverage he gets on his punches is something Shavers can only dream of having..

Wilder is a harder puncher than shavers..

Tyson was under 6 foot and he hit harder than Wilder.

Tyson's power came from speed and his opponents were hurt because they didnt see the shots coming. And on top of that, guys were scared before the bell even rang so often times they just went down out of fear...

There is a difference between a great puncher and powerful puncher.. for instance, Joe louis and Tyson I consider as great punchers due to their technique and shot placement..

George foreman may lack the technique of those two guys but he's heavy handed and I bet you his punches are much more damaging when landed flush..

Punch for punch, Wilder generates more power than Tyson..

Shavers had natural power like Foreman, he was heavy handed too.

Originally Posted by Master

Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita

Originally Posted by Max Power

Originally Posted by bradlee180

Earnie Shavers hit harder than them, and he was 6', 210 pounds.

Foreman did not fight Earnie Shavers.

And Shavers did not hit as hard as Wladimir's hard punching opponents. Obviously he would have hit harder than say Byrd and Chambers because he committed everything to it.

Shavers shows definite drop in knock out power the heftier his opponents got.

I think he could be considered the hardest puncher of the cruiserweight division maybe but not of HW. Against 200+ HW's his KOratio is in the 60 odd percentile, that's nothing special compare the the 70-80 odd for most power punchers. And against opponents the size of the average modern HW today, Shaver's KO ratio drops below Chris Byrd.

Summary: Shavers is dangerous mainly to bums, which he mainly fought, and cruiserweights which he also mainly fought.

The only time Shavers ever wasted a natural HW with a good record to my recollection was KEn Norton, a renowned glass jaw. Not impressive!

Definitely agree with this one. Shavers get so overrated but one thing is clear..

Shavers is NOT the hardest HW puncher of all-time... that's total bs

Who is then? Ask Holmes.

Why because Holmes alleged that Shavers was the hardest hitter he faced?

Well that kind of heresay is a bit worthless really for a start, but let's see.

Holmes got up to BEAT Shaver's so by claiming Shaver's hit hardest he pumps himself up because he beat him. We all know the hardest hitting opponent Holmes faced was Tyson because he canvas KO'd him for the only time in his career!

Originally Posted by Master

Shavers had natural power like Foreman, he was heavy handed too.

Come on Master, you gotta be realistic here. I know you hate it when I mention size and weight but the average HW these days is about 230lbs and 6'3"-6'4"

Shavers at 6' and 200-210lbs would have been the smallest opponent that either Klitschko could ever face. He is the same size as a modern CW at fight night.

He enjoyed none of the modern power training that modern boxers do.

He threw everything into his shots with no regard for balance so yeah he hit hard but you are talking about a guy 2 or 3 weight ranges below the superheavyweights of today in reality.

Not saying this one did not hit hard but you can show me no opponent that Shavers has knocked out in 90 odd fights that goes any distance to prove he hit the hardest. Over 90 fights that is representative of his true place in heavyhandedness.

George Foreman was the hardest puncher of that era I have zero doubt.

Then by your reckoning, 7', 320 lb Nikolay Valuev should hit harder than all other Boxers ever as he's both taller and heavier, yet that's clearly not the case regarding his punching power.

What gives?!

Something does give Brad. Size is not everything. That's obvious otherwise there'd be no point in boxing or trying to measure punching power. But it is also obvious that all else being equal, the bigger man hits harder.

Valuev is an arm puncher and lacks any snap and is slow, no great mystery there.

Plenty of other boxers have more snap and better punch technique and more explosive than Shaver's and also have the luxury of being bigger (and better boxers in general too).

The best gauge is to check who in fact they managed to knock out and hurt.

Shaver's failed to knock out Holmes.
Shaver's failed to even drop Ali, a former CW! That would be like Wladimir or Tyson or Morrison any of those type guys connecting full power with say Chris Byrd or David Haye or Mormeck and them not even hitting the deck!

(WHAT IS USUALLY USED AS EVIDENCE OF ALI'S FABRICATED CHIN IS IN FACT EVIDENCE OF THE LIMITEDNESS OF SHAVER'S PUNCH POWER COMPARED TO TODAY!)

Shaver's failed to knock out any non-bummy opponents who were over 200lbs with one exception.

Ken Norton. A glass jawed HW with a basically non-existent punch.

(SHAVER'S WAS DANGEROUS TO BUMS AND CRUISERS MAINLY BUT NOT HEAVY TOP OPPOSITION)

Shaver's is a tomato can who was pumped up by the better boxers of his day to be something he was not because they felt sorry for his lack of boxing ability. Sure of it! lol

...because they felt sorry for his lack of boxing ability. Sure of it! lol

I feel sorry for your lack of Boxing knowledge, your ignorance, and your limited capacity regarding learning.


Congratulations !!!

Your brain is a piece of $#!t !!!

No worries.. Fan boy of Shavers!! =P

Max and Finito lets put it this way.

Wilder may hit p4p harder than Shavers but KO artist is about technique rather than just raw power. Shavers has fought, hurt, knocked down and out great fighters with great chins such as Holmes and Ali who have testified that Earnie hit the hardest. Wilder does have power but his level of opposition is not in the league of Shavers and may never be. Being a KO artist is not about how hard you hit but who you hit and the affects on them.

That's just it though @Master, Shaver's opposition was NOT on the level of Deontay Wilder's! Wilder may cop crap for being bums etc, but his opponents are all genuine HW's for which he has a KO ratio of 100% and Shavers only 60.

What's more the records of Wilder's opponents are MUCH better than the opponents of Shaver's, check if you don't believe me.

Shaver's did not drop Ali, he hit him full power and he did not drop! Holmes dropped but got up to win.

By contrast, Chagaev hit Wladimir full power but failed to drop him, does that much Chag the hardest hitter? Peter dropped Wlad but still lost, does that make Peter the hardest hitter?

The only decent opponent he did KO was Norton and Norton did NOT have a good chin by anybodys standards!

I wonder what would happen if Holmes or Ali has to withstand a power shot from Wilder instead of Shaver's?? That would be interesting. I know which one I'd rather stand in front of!!

See the article "Are bums of the Klitschko era better than top fighters of Ali's era?" For a detailed look at the striking quality difference between the eras competition. Boxer 2010 is Deontay Wilder, Boxer 1970 is I believe Ken Norton.

Originally Posted by Max Power

That's just it though @Master, Shaver's opposition was NOT on the level of Deontay Wilder's! Wilder may cop crap for being bums etc, but his opponents are all genuine HW's for which he has a KO ratio of 100% and Shavers only 60.

What's more the records of Wilder's opponents are MUCH better than the opponents of Shaver's, check if you don't believe me.

Shaver's did not drop Ali, he hit him full power and he did not drop! Holmes dropped but got up to win.

By contrast, Chagaev hit Wladimir full power but failed to drop him, does that much Chag the hardest hitter? Peter dropped Wlad but still lost, does that make Peter the hardest hitter?

The only decent opponent he did KO was Norton and Norton did NOT have a good chin by anybodys standards!

I wonder what would happen if Holmes or Ali has to withstand a power shot from Wilder instead of Shaver's?? That would be interesting. I know which one I'd rather stand in front of!!

See the article "Are bums of the Klitschko era better than top fighters of Ali's era?" For a detailed look at the striking quality difference between the eras competition. Boxer 2010 is Deontay Wilder, Boxer 1970 is I believe Ken Norton.

You...are...a....fucking.......moron. The amount of verbal diarrhea you spew is astonishing.

Originally Posted by Max Power

That's just it though @Master, Shaver's opposition was NOT on the level of Deontay Wilder's! Wilder may cop crap for being bums etc, but his opponents are all genuine HW's for which he has a KO ratio of 100% and Shavers only 60.

What's more the records of Wilder's opponents are MUCH better than the opponents of Shaver's, check if you don't believe me.

Shaver's did not drop Ali, he hit him full power and he did not drop! Holmes dropped but got up to win.

By contrast, Chagaev hit Wladimir full power but failed to drop him, does that much Chag the hardest hitter? Peter dropped Wlad but still lost, does that make Peter the hardest hitter?

The only decent opponent he did KO was Norton and Norton did NOT have a good chin by anybodys standards!

I wonder what would happen if Holmes or Ali has to withstand a power shot from Wilder instead of Shaver's?? That would be interesting. I know which one I'd rather stand in front of!!

See the article "Are bums of the Klitschko era better than top fighters of Ali's era?" For a detailed look at the striking quality difference between the eras competition. Boxer 2010 is Deontay Wilder, Boxer 1970 is I believe Ken Norton.

Now that's just embarrassing.

Originally Posted by Spicoli

Originally Posted by Max Power

That's just it though @Master, Shaver's opposition was NOT on the level of Deontay Wilder's! Wilder may cop crap for being bums etc, but his opponents are all genuine HW's for which he has a KO ratio of 100% and Shavers only 60.

What's more the records of Wilder's opponents are MUCH better than the opponents of Shaver's, check if you don't believe me.

Shaver's did not drop Ali, he hit him full power and he did not drop! Holmes dropped but got up to win.

By contrast, Chagaev hit Wladimir full power but failed to drop him, does that much Chag the hardest hitter? Peter dropped Wlad but still lost, does that make Peter the hardest hitter?

The only decent opponent he did KO was Norton and Norton did NOT have a good chin by anybodys standards!

I wonder what would happen if Holmes or Ali has to withstand a power shot from Wilder instead of Shaver's?? That would be interesting. I know which one I'd rather stand in front of!!

See the article "Are bums of the Klitschko era better than top fighters of Ali's era?" For a detailed look at the striking quality difference between the eras competition. Boxer 2010 is Deontay Wilder, Boxer 1970 is I believe Ken Norton.

Now that's just embarrassing.

And yet I see a lot of abuse once again but no serious counter argument.

You try and tell me that some midget underweight tomato can like Shaver's can hit harder than modern day power punchers you must be his great nephew or something!! I don't want to disrespect Shaver's here but what did he really do to earn this reputation? F/A!!!!!!!!

Max. Boxing can not be measured as an upwardly moving diagonal line.

It is not true that you can simply put James Corbett at one end and Wladamir Klitschko at the other and assume that boxers have continually improved exponentially and that any boxer from one end of the line will always beat one from lower down and further back in time. While their may be an upward trend in size and weight this is a fairly recent development. It is not as dramatic a trend as you would think and neither does it have such a huge influence on ability to get that job done as you would like us all to believe. The line is wavy with peaks and troughs and several outstanding fighters from several eras could not just survive, but be competitive in other time periods. This is not wearing rose tinted spectacles it is simple being aware that unlike many other athletic endeavours the skill set and intangible qualities involved in becoming a great fighter are far more complex than running 100 metres or a mile.

It is very cute that you are so in love with your theory but it is just that, a theory. Until someone brings a prime Jack Johnson/Joe Louis/Larry Holmes etc forward thru time and puts them in the ring with the deluded dish washing hype job awesome Deontay Wilder it will remain one. The big difference is that legends Like Joe Louis,Frazier, and even people like Earnie Shavers and Ken Norton already earned their rightful reputation in meaningful title fights against proven opposition. Wilder meanwhile is an unknown quantity yet to be properly measured or quantified.

Originally Posted by Greenbeanz

Max. Boxing can not be measured as an upwardly moving diagonal line.

It is not true that you can simply put James Corbett at one end and Wladamir Klitschko at the other and assume that boxers have continually improved exponentially and that any boxer from one end of the line will always beat one from lower down and further back in time. While their may be an upward trend in size and weight this is a fairly recent development. It is not as dramatic a trend as you would think and neither does it have such a huge influence on ability to get that job done as you would like us all to believe. The line is wavy with peaks and troughs and several outstanding fighters from several eras could not just survive, but be competitive in other time periods. This is not wearing rose tinted spectacles it is simple being aware that unlike many other athletic endeavours the skill set and intangible qualities involved in becoming a great fighter are far more complex than running 100 metres or a mile.

It is very cute that you are so in love with your theory but it is just that, a theory. Until someone brings a prime Jack Johnson/Joe Louis/Larry Holmes etc forward thru time and puts them in the ring with the deluded dish washing hype job awesome Deontay Wilder it will remain one. The big difference is that legends Like Joe Louis,Frazier, and even people like Earnie Shavers and Ken Norton already earned their rightful reputation in meaningful title fights against proven opposition. Wilder meanwhile is an unknown quantity yet to be properly measured or quantified.

Alright I'll pay that because it is as you say a "theory" after all.

And also because I actually agree in the case of Wilder that he hasn't as yet got his ass up and proved himself against the top level of opposition like his predecessors did.

I've only little objection to that comment!