Was the power of Earnie Shavers overrated?

Earnie Shavers retired with a 74 (KO68)-14 (KO 7)-1 record and an impressive KO percentage of 76.4. Each year his awesome power seems to grow in legendary status, but I for one think it just might be a bit overrated. Sure, icing guys like Ken Norton, Henry Clark, Jimmy Young, and Jimmy Ellis is impressive, but knocking out Lou Bailey (17-35-5), Tommy Howard (2-17-2), (Charley Polite 913-21-3), Cleo Daniels (7-24), Johnny Mac (5-6), Art Miller (21-25-2), and Lee Estes (12-23-3) is quite something else. When Shavers stepped down, he usually chilled, but when he stepped up, he had only fair success and was chilled seven times. Still, he won almost twenty seven fights in a row by knockout and tallied twenty four first round wins..

He is rated tenth in Ring Magazine's 100 Greatest Punchers. And below is Boxing Illustrated’s ten Hardest Punchers P4P of All-Time.

1. Jimmy Wilde
2. Max Baer
3. Bob Fitzsimmons
4. George Chaney
5. Charles Ledoux
6. Bob Satterfield
7. Earnie Shavers
8. Joe Louis
9. Jack Dempsey
10. Sandy Saddler

Like Bob Satterfield, he came out bombing, letting caution to the wind and with no “what if” plans. He tired badly in the later rounds--but his punches were like jackhammers! He was pure excitement. Many boxing articles start out as folloows: “Earnie Shavers was a devastating one punch knockout artist. He wasn't overly quick or agile and didn't take a great punch, but he had the best one punch power in the history of boxing.”

Legend has it that Shavers split his glove open from the force of a hard punch he landed on Colombian Bernardo Mercado when they fought in 1980. What the story often fails to include is that Mercado went on to earn a seventh round technical knockout over the always dangerous, multiple-time world title challenger. In his previous fight, “The Acorn” had floored Larry Holmes with mind numbing shot, but still could not close the show and, as was the case against Mercado, was stopped in the later rounds. In 1977, he hit Muhammad Ali with a number of flush power punches, but Ali withstood the onslaught and won by 15-round UD.

In one of the truly great fights ever, Shavers stopped a gassed Roy “Tiger” Williams after 10 rounds of incredible back-and-forth action in 1976. But this KO was more the result of an accumulation of punches than any single shot. In 1974, he iced Roy “Cookie” Wallace in one. However, this win was book-ended by losses to Bob Stallings (21-24) and Jerry Quarry (47-6-4).

Shavers vs. Lyle -1975

In 1975 in one of the greatest fight ever fought under the radar, Shavers (49-4-1 coming in) met rugged Ron Lyle in Denver. The “Acorn” had just come off three straight wins over limited Leon Shaw, Rochelle Norris and Oliver Wright, respectfully, but Lyle (30-3-1) was far from limited. Shavers decked Lyle in round two with two malefic left hooks and looked to close matters in the third, but Lyle regrouped and came storming back. In round four Shavers almost decked Lyle again after having been hurt earlier in the round. At this point, the crowd was going wild. In round five, Shavers gassed as is his wont, as Lyle then savaged him with sharp combos. Earnie came out for the sixth stanza seemingly groggy and Lyle wasted little time jumping on him with several consecutive shots the last of which cracked The Acorn cold and left him lying face down on the canvas.

In what this is all about, Ron Lyle snatched victory from certain defeat to knockout Earnie Shavers because Shavers could not close matters. As for Lyle, he would fight his classic battle with George Foreman in his next fight and would never be the same afterthat war. But on this night in his hometown of Denver, he was the MAN.

1980-1995

After his stoppage loss to Mercado, Shavers won a ten-rounder against Leroy Boone. In another 1980 bout, he hit Tex Cobb with everything but the kitchen sink (in arguably his last high-profile bout), but could not do what Dee Collier later accomplished. He lost this brawl by eighth round TKO after being pummeled on the top of his shaven head non-stop. He then has success against moderate opposition (including a win over Joe Bugner on cuts) until he was out pointed by James Tillis in 1982 and again by Walter Santamore (17-10) that same year. In 1983, the power seemed all but gone as he went 10 successful rounds with one Robin Griffin (0-0 coming in).

After being DQd against George Chaplin in 1983, he KOd Larry Sims (3-18-3) in one, but then, in an ill-advised comeback, he went the eight round distance against hapless Brian Morgan (4-20-1). His last fight was a humiliating first round KO loss to none other than Brian “B-52” Yates who retried with a less than compelling slate of 13-86-3.

In retrospect, Earnie was a wrecking machine, but in many key fights against solid opposition, he was unable to execute a clean KO after he had staggered his opponent and seemingly had him on the brink. He seemed to lack that clean one-shot closer in the manner of a Bob Satterfield, Tommy Hearns, Wilfredo Gomez, Bob Foster, Alexis Arguello, Carlos Zarate, Gerald McClellan, Julian Jackson or even a prime Mike Tyson. There were many others I believe who are worthy of legendary status as one-punch KO artists-- and that’s my point. The perception of Shavers being a great one-punch KO artist just doesn’t seem to square with reality. Maybe it’s time for a new list.

Today

Earnie Shavers remains a fine credit to boxing having become an ordained Christian minister.

For me it's who started the claim: Fighters who fought Shavers, how do we dispute them? Why would we dispute them?

Tyson for example: doesn't have foes who speak on him as the hardest puncher, but rather state: He is a hard puncher for a guy his size.

Ruddock got his jaw broke against Tyson in fight II because fight one was called premature- 12 +7 rounds Tyson couldn't do what Lennox did to Ruddock in a few rounds.

Holyfield: Never dropped by Tyson

Douglas: rose from the canvas like many of shavers opponents you accurately named.

Bruce Seldon: got hit on his flat top fro, I won't even go there on how fixed it looked.

Buster Mathis Jr. a fat chaloopa was considered a KO, but he was on his feet when it was stopped.

McNeely? Not sure how to respond whose next 5 losses were all TKO/KO's.

To this day, I will not watch the Lennox, fight, the way Tyson took a beating. But I will not dillute the power of Tyson just because he couldnt do what McCall & Rahman did: stop Lennox. Tyson's mental block or inability to bully Lennox is why he failed IMO. Beat Tyson mentally; stand up to him and he withers after 5-6 rounds.

Same with McBride & Danny Williams, they withstood Tyson's power & bully mindset, but I dont think it lessens Tyson power anymore than some bums who withstood Shavers power.

Alot of steam left his punches when he fought Ruddock II past 6 rounds.- Did Shavers loses steam as well?

IMO Shavers place in history as a hard puncher goes beyond historians and fans, because it begins with the guys who fought him. Many tomato cans retired because of him and the top who beat him don't speak of his boxing skills or his chin: they speak of his power as brutal. I accept their claim.

I think it's just a case of people losing sight (or being ignorant of) the dramatic change in size and athletic ability that has gone on in the last 40-50 years. Earnie deserved his reputation as one of the game's biggest bombers because he has the backing of his peers, and his insane KO ratio speaks for itself. The guy was a huge bomber.

If you talk to anyone here, I think we all understand that a bomber at 147 (Thurman, Maidana, Pac, ect) does not hit as hard as a bomber at 160 (GGG, Lemieux, ect). GGG and Lemieux, who are brutal punchers at 160, pale in comparison to the power of a guy like Kovalev, who is a brutal puncher at 175. We see this all the time: a guy is a huge puncher at his original weight, he moves up and suddenly he's a decent puncher. He moves up again, and suddenly he only gets a knockout every couple of years. Look at Duran: hands of stone, destroying guys at 135, 63-1, 52 KO's. He goes up to WW, he doesn't have nearly the power. He goes up to MW, he doesn't stop anyone outside of a few inexperienced bums who had no business being in there with him. I'm not breaking any new ground, we can all agree and understand that LW power doesn't = WW power and so on.

So if we all know this, why do people still think that a 185lb guy like Dempsey or Marciano, or a 205-210lb guy like Shavers hits harder than a 250lb bomber like Samuel Peter?

And before people bring it up, I know that weight isn't everything and there's a lot more that goes into a punch than size. We've seen guys over 300lbs who weren't very big punchers. We've seen guys around the 210lb range in recent years (David Haye, Herbie Hide come to mind) who hit very hard. They were both very explosive athletes. George Foreman and Shavers were not explosive athletes, they were pure power guys with very flawed technique. And when you're comparing pure power guys at 205-215 and pure power guys at 245-255, there's going to be a big difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlimTrae

For me it's who started the claim: Fighters who fought Shavers, how do we dispute them? Why would we dispute them?

Tyson for example: doesn't have foes who speak on him as the hardest puncher, but rather state: He is a hard puncher for a guy his size.

Ruddock got his jaw broke against Tyson in fight II because fight one was called premature- 12 +7 rounds Tyson couldn't do what Lennox did to Ruddock in a few rounds.

Holyfield: Never dropped by Tyson

Douglas: rose from the canvas like many of shavers opponents you accurately named.

Bruce Seldon: got hit on his flat top fro, I won't even go there on how fixed it looked.

Buster Mathis Jr. a fat chaloopa was considered a KO, but he was on his feet when it was stopped.

McNeely? Not sure how to respond whose next 5 losses were all TKO/KO's.

To this day, I will not watch the Lennox, fight, the way Tyson took a beating. But I will not dillute the power of Tyson just because he couldnt do what McCall & Rahman did: stop Lennox. Tyson's mental block or inability to bully Lennox is why he failed IMO. Beat Tyson mentally; stand up to him and he withers after 5-6 rounds.

Same with McBride & Danny Williams, they withstood Tyson's power & bully mindset, but I dont think it lessens Tyson power anymore than some bums who withstood Shavers power.

Alot of steam left his punches when he fought Ruddock II past 6 rounds.- Did Shavers loses steam as well?

IMO Shavers place in history as a hard puncher goes beyond historians and fans, because it begins with the guys who fought him. Many tomato cans retired because of him and the top who beat him don't speak of his boxing skills or his chin: they speak of his power as brutal. I accept their claim.

---

I think you're kind of reaching when you bring up the Tyson who fought McBride and Danny Williams... :rolleyes:

I'll say this: I'm a huge George Foreman fan, I've seen every fight you can see by the guy from his first career and second career, I've seen every Earnie Shavers fight available, I know they both hit like trucks, but I've NEVER seen either of them throw a punch with the concussive force that a 250lb Samuel Peter hit Jeremy Williams with. Very rarely did you see either of them knock a guy cold where he wasn't prone for several minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kATKwqF16v4

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlimTrae

For me it's who started the claim: Fighters who fought Shavers, how do we dispute them? Why would we dispute them?

Tyson for example: doesn't have foes who speak on him as the hardest puncher, but rather state: He is a hard puncher for a guy his size.

Ruddock got his jaw broke against Tyson in fight II because fight one was called premature- 12 +7 rounds Tyson couldn't do what Lennox did to Ruddock in a few rounds.

Holyfield: Never dropped by Tyson

Douglas: rose from the canvas like many of shavers opponents you accurately named.

Bruce Seldon: got hit on his flat top fro, I won't even go there on how fixed it looked.

Buster Mathis Jr. a fat chaloopa was considered a KO, but he was on his feet when it was stopped.

McNeely? Not sure how to respond whose next 5 losses were all TKO/KO's.

To this day, I will not watch the Lennox, fight, the way Tyson took a beating. But I will not dillute the power of Tyson just because he couldnt do what McCall & Rahman did: stop Lennox. Tyson's mental block or inability to bully Lennox is why he failed IMO. Beat Tyson mentally; stand up to him and he withers after 5-6 rounds.

Same with McBride & Danny Williams, they withstood Tyson's power & bully mindset, but I dont think it lessens Tyson power anymore than some bums who withstood Shavers power.

Alot of steam left his punches when he fought Ruddock II past 6 rounds.- Did Shavers loses steam as well?

IMO Shavers place in history as a hard puncher goes beyond historians and fans, because it begins with the guys who fought him. Many tomato cans retired because of him and the top who beat him don't speak of his boxing skills or his chin: they speak of his power as brutal. I accept their claim.

---

I think you're kind of reaching when you bring up the Tyson who fought McBride and Danny Williams... :rolleyes:

---

Like stretch arm strong...;D
Well the old saying is power is the last to leave you, nevertheless, they can be omitted from this discussion!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by holmcall

Earnie Shavers retired with a 74 (KO68)-14 (KO 7)-1 record and an impressive KO percentage of 76.4. Each year his awesome power seems to grow in legendary status, but I for one think it just might be a bit overrated. Sure, icing guys like Ken Norton, Henry Clark, Jimmy Young, and Jimmy Ellis is impressive, but knocking out Lou Bailey (17-35-5), Tommy Howard (2-17-2), (Charley Polite 913-21-3), Cleo Daniels (7-24), Johnny Mac (5-6), Art Miller (21-25-2), and Lee Estes (12-23-3) is quite something else. When Shavers stepped down, he usually chilled, but when he stepped up, he had only fair success and was chilled seven times. Still, he won almost twenty seven fights in a row by knockout and tallied twenty four first round wins..

He is rated tenth in Ring Magazine's 100 Greatest Punchers. And below is Boxing Illustrated’s ten Hardest Punchers P4P of All-Time.

1. Jimmy Wilde
2. Max Baer
3. Bob Fitzsimmons
4. George Chaney
5. Charles Ledoux
6. Bob Satterfield
7. Earnie Shavers
8. Joe Louis
9. Jack Dempsey
10. Sandy Saddler

Like Bob Satterfield, he came out bombing, letting caution to the wind and with no “what if” plans. He tired badly in the later rounds--but his punches were like jackhammers! He was pure excitement. Many boxing articles start out as folloows: “Earnie Shavers was a devastating one punch knockout artist. He wasn't overly quick or agile and didn't take a great punch, but he had the best one punch power in the history of boxing.”

Legend has it that Shavers split his glove open from the force of a hard punch he landed on Colombian Bernardo Mercado when they fought in 1980. What the story often fails to include is that Mercado went on to earn a seventh round technical knockout over the always dangerous, multiple-time world title challenger. In his previous fight, “The Acorn” had floored Larry Holmes with mind numbing shot, but still could not close the show and, as was the case against Mercado, was stopped in the later rounds. In 1977, he hit Muhammad Ali with a number of flush power punches, but Ali withstood the onslaught and won by 15-round UD.

In one of the truly great fights ever, Shavers stopped a gassed Roy “Tiger” Williams after 10 rounds of incredible back-and-forth action in 1976. But this KO was more the result of an accumulation of punches than any single shot. In 1974, he iced Roy “Cookie” Wallace in one. However, this win was book-ended by losses to Bob Stallings (21-24) and Jerry Quarry (47-6-4).

Shavers vs. Lyle -1975

In 1975 in one of the greatest fight ever fought under the radar, Shavers (49-4-1 coming in) met rugged Ron Lyle in Denver. The “Acorn” had just come off three straight wins over limited Leon Shaw, Rochelle Norris and Oliver Wright, respectfully, but Lyle (30-3-1) was far from limited. Shavers decked Lyle in round two with two malefic left hooks and looked to close matters in the third, but Lyle regrouped and came storming back. In round four Shavers almost decked Lyle again after having been hurt earlier in the round. At this point, the crowd was going wild. In round five, Shavers gassed as is his wont, as Lyle then savaged him with sharp combos. Earnie came out for the sixth stanza seemingly groggy and Lyle wasted little time jumping on him with several consecutive shots the last of which cracked The Acorn cold and left him lying face down on the canvas.

In what this is all about, Ron Lyle snatched victory from certain defeat to knockout Earnie Shavers because Shavers could not close matters. As for Lyle, he would fight his classic battle with George Foreman in his next fight and would never be the same afterthat war. But on this night in his hometown of Denver, he was the MAN.

1980-1995

After his stoppage loss to Mercado, Shavers won a ten-rounder against Leroy Boone. In another 1980 bout, he hit Tex Cobb with everything but the kitchen sink (in arguably his last high-profile bout), but could not do what Dee Collier later accomplished. He lost this brawl by eighth round TKO after being pummeled on the top of his shaven head non-stop. He then has success against moderate opposition (including a win over Joe Bugner on cuts) until he was out pointed by James Tillis in 1982 and again by Walter Santamore (17-10) that same year. In 1983, the power seemed all but gone as he went 10 successful rounds with one Robin Griffin (0-0 coming in).

After being DQd against George Chaplin in 1983, he KOd Larry Sims (3-18-3) in one, but then, in an ill-advised comeback, he went the eight round distance against hapless Brian Morgan (4-20-1). His last fight was a humiliating first round KO loss to none other than Brian “B-52” Yates who retried with a less than compelling slate of 13-86-3.

In retrospect, Earnie was a wrecking machine, but in many key fights against solid opposition, he was unable to execute a clean KO after he had staggered his opponent and seemingly had him on the brink. He seemed to lack that clean one-shot closer in the manner of a Bob Satterfield, Tommy Hearns, Wilfredo Gomez, Bob Foster, Alexis Arguello, Carlos Zarate, Gerald McClellan, Julian Jackson or even a prime Mike Tyson. There were many others I believe who are worthy of legendary status as one-punch KO artists-- and that’s my point. The perception of Shavers being a great one-punch KO artist just doesn’t seem to square with reality. Maybe it’s time for a new list.

Today

Earnie Shavers remains a fine credit to boxing having become an ordained Christian minister.

---

Bottom line: 76 wins, 68 knockouts.
Ernie brought home the bacon.

Earnie 'The Razor' Shavers

Was the man !

How anyone can question the power of this man.

And he had a nice head of hair.

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=HN.608...d=1.9&rs=0&p=0

No his power was not over rated Ali and Holmes testified to his power and they fought Foreman and Tyson. It is not about pure power, it about landing it at the right time, place and person.

BTW Shavers would have done the same to Jeremy Williams.

Anyone who doubts Ali, Holmes, Lyle saying Shavers hit hardest of all SHOULD GET THEIR ASS IN THE RING AND SEE or just shut the fuck up.

Earnie Shavers

The only guy to drop Roy 'Tiger' Williams {6' 4" @ 235 lbs.}.

That was an impossible feat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

Anyone who doubts Ali, Holmes, Lyle saying Shavers hit hardest of all SHOULD GET THEIR ASS IN THE RING AND SEE or just shut the fuck up.

---

I'm just asking; not saying. ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

BTW Shavers would have done the same to Jeremy Williams.

---

He probably would have gotten knocked out. He stunk

Shavers punch/KO power does not compare with the power of Mike Tyson.

They play in totally separate leagues.

Despite all the comments about Tysons power in the second post being questionable, it doesn't detract from the overall picture.

Mike Tyson was only allowed to fight very few Cruiserweights, whereas Shavers record consists of mostly Cruisers.

When we break down Shavers and Tysons records vs -200, 200-215 and 215+ (today's HW at fight), we see the dramatic difference in performance.

Sub 200, both guys are indomitable punchers.

200-215, Tyson is still in the 90%ile, ALREADY, just over the HW limit, Shavers KO% drops to around 65%. He was still a hard puncher at this HW but borderline Cruisery stage, but already NOTHING SPECIAL.

215+, Which only the smallest of former cruisers box below at HW these days, Tyson STILL shows a 70%ile KO performance, a very hard puncher, and Shavers KO performance drops into the 40%ile.

In the realm of what we TODAY call HW, Mike Tyson is a power puncher and Earnie Shavers is a FEATHERFIST!

I didn't run numbers but consider this, the AVERAGE HW boxer today is 225-230lbs! The AVERAGE Klitschko opponent today is 235-240lbs! At 230+ lbs, Tyson is still a good puncher, Shaver's is basically non-existent.

Hey Max,

You no like Earnie ?

Muhammad Ali, Joe Bugner, Larry Holmes, Ron Lyle and Ken Norton - all agreed Shavers was the hardest puncher they faced. Ali in interviews has stated without hesitation that Ernie Shavers was the hardest puncher he ever fought. See round two of their fight.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom

Hey Max,

You no like Earnie ?

---

I don't like or dislike Earnie.

He simply is what he is.

His power is obviously and clearly overrated and all the heresay from the boxers he fought flies in the face of actual truth.

They all beat Shavers.

They were mostly all knocked out or hospitalised by obviously harder punchers.

They praise Earnie to pump up their own wins and protect their own legacy.. OF course.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

Anyone who doubts Ali, Holmes, Lyle saying Shavers hit hardest of all SHOULD GET THEIR ASS IN THE RING AND SEE or just shut the fuck up.

---

Exactly, 2nd post is spot on. Fighters testified to his punches. AND as much as i like Mike Tyson AND his explosive shots, his foes dont call him the hardest puncher. Personally P4P i like the KO ratio OF Julian Jackson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlimTrae

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

Anyone who doubts Ali, Holmes, Lyle saying Shavers hit hardest of all SHOULD GET THEIR ASS IN THE RING AND SEE or just shut the fuck up.

---

Exactly, 2nd post is spot on. Fighters testified to his punches. AND as much as i like Mike Tyson AND his explosive shots, his foes dont call him the hardest puncher. Personally P4P i like the KO ratio OF Julian Jackson

---

No boxers from any other era would be silly enough to make such outrageous claims that's why.

I don't hear ANY boxers saying this guy hit harder than that guy ever these days.

Stands to reason the shots that knock you flat are harder than the ones you can even REMEMBER! It's boxing LOL If these guys can remember the punch, it can't have been that hard period!

There's an obvious reason why they boast the Shavers wins isn't there, because it sounds much better than them saying they got hit or decked by a C grade fighter that usually has trouble landing on a heavy bag.

MAX,

I don't think you really believe what you're saying.

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=HN.608...d=1.9&rs=0&p=0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

I'll say this: I'm a huge George Foreman fan, I've seen every fight you can see by the guy from his first career and second career, I've seen every Earnie Shavers fight available, I know they both hit like trucks, but I've NEVER seen either of them throw a punch with the concussive force that a 250lb Samuel Peter hit Jeremy Williams with. Very rarely did you see either of them knock a guy cold where he wasn't prone for several minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kATKwqF16v4

---

Its Jeremy Williams ;D I've always wondered if that was a hill to top for Peter as he went on, relying on power wise.

I think for the large part power tends to be overrated and overstated. Its who are you ko'ing...and can-are you doing it while facing adversity.

Shavers was one of the first boxers to use weights in his training routine. His upper body was massive:o but he neglected the legs. His muscularity was reported to have caused him a stamina issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom

MAX,

I don't think you really believe what you're saying.

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=HN.608...d=1.9&rs=0&p=0

---

Liston up @Bill Paxtom

I don't think you really understand what is going on.

This picture you uploaded of Shavers, for anybody in the street who is a modern boxing fan and has little idea who Shavers is, this image of him is ridiculous.

If you showed them this guy, just a picture and tried to tell them that this guy is one of the all time hardest punchers, you would be lauged in the face at.

You have to admit he LOOKS ridiculous. He doesn't even LOOK like a hard puncher.

Bring up that 2 round fight of Samuel Peter and Jeremy Williams above. Take a look at the quality of Shavers fights and then look at the quality of Peters.

You can SEE clearly the difference in skills. You can SEE clearly the modern fighters are FASTER DESPITE BEING LARGER! And Williams didn't even make it to top level!

You can HEAR and almost FEEL the punches they are so hard.

And then there is the devastating knockout!

There is no comparison between the power of Samuel Peter and Earnie Shavers. They DON'T EVEN PLAY IN THE SAME LEAGUE AS EACH OTHER!

OF course I believe what I am saying. It's utterly unbelievable that a fully grown man like I assume you and your OTNB friends are cannot see it for yourself!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli

Its Jeremy Williams ;D I've always wondered if that was a hill to top for Peter as he went on, relying on power wise.

I think for the large part power tends to be overrated and overstated. Its who are you ko'ing...and can-are you doing it while facing adversity.

---

So you will bummify Jeremy Williams here to try and refute Peters power OR as you've also alluded to, try to DOWNGRADE power as a virtue altogether to cover it up AND make the claim that it matters WHO you are knocking out.

Your first point is off base because Jeremy Williams would have been one of Earnie Shavers best opponents and better than a lot of opponents who beat Earnie. In fact I think Jeremy Williams would have beaten Shavers.

Second point, Power is DEFINITELY a virtue of great magnitude. OF COURSE it is not the only thing relevant but many boxers (George Foreman, Samuel Peter, David Tua, EARNIE SHAVERS) have achieved top level with relatively little more), so obviously it is of importance, especially in the HW division!

Third point is particularly nefarious, considering Peters overall competition is approximately 100x better than the competition of Earnie Shavers was completely objectively. Samuel Peter was HW champ, there's a reason for that and Earnie never was and Earnie NEVER KNOCKED OUT A DECENT OPPONENT! With the single exception of Ken Norton who was a prolific bum buster himself, had no boxing pedigree and had a glass jaw and never even won his own title in the ring!

Unbelievable what some guys will post around here.

I've never seen such blatant bias!

This Shavers guy could barely even BOX for Christ sake!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by holmcall

Shavers was one of the first boxers to use weights in his training routine. His upper body was massive:o but he neglected the legs. His muscularity was reported to have caused him a stamina issue.

---

The first boxer to use weights PROPERLY for boxing scientifically was in fact Michael Spinks. There were boxers who used weights primatively well before Shavers and all of them sucked badly the same as he did.

Weights ALWAYS affects stamina, it is one of the worst things for ring stamina and is why boxers who lift weights now periodize.

Shavers looked like crap, body and style. Ridiculous figure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom

Hey Max,

You no like Earnie ?

---

he momma got "acorned" and now its old man butt hurt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom

Hey Max,

You no like Earnie ?

---

he momma got "acorned" and now its old man butt hurt.

---

Yeah whatever, I don't hate Earnie at all. And in fact the only reason I'm dissing him as with most other boxers is because guys here are blowing more smoke up his ass than was produced by Mt. Etna.

Call it "counter-trolling".

Here are the facts.

Earnie was great at knocking out bums. Earnie was no good at all at knocking out quality opponents!

Earnie was great at knocking out Cruisers. Earnie was not very good at knocking out genuine HW's.

And that's all there is to it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

BTW Shavers would have done the same to Jeremy Williams.

---

He probably would have gotten knocked out. He stunk

---

What did Jeremy Williams ever amount too?

Shavers body is built naturally. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Beanflicker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Master

BTW Shavers would have done the same to Jeremy Williams.

---

He probably would have gotten knocked out. He stunk

---

What did Jeremy Williams ever amount too?

Shavers body is built naturally. ;)

---

It does not matter if Jeremy Williams did not achieve more than Shavers, the level of competition each man had to contend with was worlds apart.

Besides the ONLY thing Shaver had more of to boast about, non-era specific was more fights! But Williams was disallowed to pad vs cruisers, and Earnie Shavers CHOSE to pad his record with a small army's worth of bums whereas Williams CHOSE to fight mainly the opponents at the best level he could get!

What matters is that Williams was a better athlete and skillwise much better boxer than Shavers. One of those obscure HW's to guys like you (who really aren't that obscure, you just pretend they are) who actually has a GOOD record!

Odds are he would dust Shavers. Most would put cash on it were they to have really fought because no one likes losing money on a tomato can like Earnie! ;)

Earnie Shavers

A damn good Heavyweight, who could end a fight with one-punch.

One of the hardest hitting fighters of All-Time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom

Earnie Shavers

A damn good Heavyweight FOR THAT TIME, who could end a fight with one-punch AGAINST BUMS AND CRUISERS HE MASSIVELY OUTSIZED ONLY!

One of the hardest hitting fighters of ONE-Time.

---

Fixed it for you ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom

Earnie Shavers

A damn good Heavyweight FOR THAT TIME, who could end a fight with one-punch AGAINST BUMS AND CRUISERS HE MASSIVELY OUTSIZED ONLY!

One of the hardest hitting fighters of ONE-Time.

---

Fixed it for you ;)

---

You cant know this. You are stating that bigger means they hit harder which is true for most people but not all. Fighters who have fought each other know how hard someone hits and it happens all the time that fighters hit harder than their size suggests. A recent example would be GGG where cruisers and light heavies he has sparred have said he hits harder than anyone they have faced. If you look at his physique he is in good shape but I wouldnt say he is in the same condition as other middleweights of present and old but Id be fairly certain he hits harder. Further, compare him to super middles of present, andre ward has a similar frame to golovkin only bigger but he doesnt hit harder.

Even transfer this to the heavyweights. Fury is a very very big heavy but he doesnt hit all that hard. A good comparison would be to David Haye. A smaller heavy. Im pretty sure Haye hits harder.

There are plenty of examples where big heavyweights dont necessarily hit that hard. Mike Perez, Kubrat Pulev, Bryant Jennings, Odlanier Solis, Manuel Charr and biggest of them all Nicolai Valuev.

There is more to how hard you hit then just how big you are. Probably the most important is technique, but then size, bone density etc all also contribute.

I highly doubt Shavers hits as hard as Klitschko or Haye but I would think he can hit harder than a lot of the current heavies who are bigger than him. Im also not an hayday hugger and think Wlad would be able to beat any heavyweight of any era but you have to look beyond just size, and more importantly you have to take note of fighters opinions rather than just completely disregard them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bill Paxtom

Earnie Shavers

A damn good Heavyweight FOR THAT TIME, who could end a fight with one-punch AGAINST BUMS AND CRUISERS HE MASSIVELY OUTSIZED ONLY!

One of the hardest hitting fighters of ONE-Time.

---

Fixed it for you ;)

---

You cant know this. You are stating that bigger means they hit harder which is true for most people but not all. Fighters who have fought each other know how hard someone hits and it happens all the time that fighters hit harder than their size suggests. A recent example would be GGG where cruisers and light heavies he has sparred have said he hits harder than anyone they have faced. If you look at his physique he is in good shape but I wouldnt say he is in the same condition as other middleweights of present and old but Id be fairly certain he hits harder. Further, compare him to super middles of present, andre ward has a similar frame to golovkin only bigger but he doesnt hit harder.

Even transfer this to the heavyweights. Fury is a very very big heavy but he doesnt hit all that hard. A good comparison would be to David Haye. A smaller heavy. Im pretty sure Haye hits harder.

There are plenty of examples where big heavyweights dont necessarily hit that hard. Mike Perez, Kubrat Pulev, Bryant Jennings, Odlanier Solis, Manuel Charr and biggest of them all Nicolai Valuev.

There is more to how hard you hit then just how big you are. Probably the most important is technique, but then size, bone density etc all also contribute.

I highly doubt Shavers hits as hard as Klitschko or Haye but I would think he can hit harder than a lot of the current heavies who are bigger than him. Im also not an hayday hugger and think Wlad would be able to beat any heavyweight of any era but you have to look beyond just size, and more importantly you have to take note of fighters opinions rather than just completely disregard them.

---

I am not just considering size=power. As if I would ever make such an idiotic statement as that!

It's just that Shavers had a lot of fights which provides a very representative sample. And you can see clearly that Shavers, like almost every other boxer, his power drops significantly the heavier his opponents got, until at about the entry point for HW, his KO performance was in the neighbourhood of Chris Byrd's!

I didn't make up the numbers, they are all there.

It's only when you look at Shavers career as being equal to other guys careers that Shavers seems like a destroyer but when you analyse it closely, he FAILED to KO bigger guys!

I also focussed on quality! Shavers also failed against GOOD opposition, size irrelevant, based purely on the oppoennts record at bout.

Now I'm sure Shavers is not a weak puncher. His power was the mainstay of his success. But he certainly didn't hit hard enough to KO most modern HW's and he wasn't skilled enough to land those ridiculous punches anyway.

He is no Wlad or Haye.
He is no Peter or Stiverne.

I agree. I dont think he was that good and wouldnt beat most top heavies from this era. If Wilder fails to KO Stiverne does that automatically mean his power is overrated and not good?

I think we have to define what overrated means here. Personally, when I say Earnie Shavers' power is overrated, I just mean I don't believe he was the hardest puncher of all time. He was one of them, but I don't think he can compare to a bomber who outweighs him by 40-50lbs. It's just physics.

Saying Shavers' power was "overrated" doesn't necessarily mean he couldn't punch. He was undoubtedly one of the hardest punchers of all time.

He was a shit fighter though. No chin, no heart, no stamina, basic skills. When people talk about him beating up the top HW's of today I have to shake my fucking head. I don't think these people have watched any Shavers' fights outside of KO highlights. Anybody who watches the guy and knows a thing about boxing knows that this guy wasn't championship material in any era. He fought a washed up, 36 year old Muhammad Ali, got in the best shape of his life, and couldn't get the job done. He landed a great punch vs Holmes (Larry had gotten careless from easily winning the last 21 rounds they had fought), he couldn't close the deal, he got stopped AGAIN. Oh, and he knocked out a 36 year old washed up Ken Norton. That's what he's known for. That's why he's so great? Because he knocked down Larry Holmes and failed to beat a geriatric Ali?

Exactly what Beanflicker said. I never saw anybody calling shaver's power overrated.. I just said that he is Not the hardest puncher of all time like the old timers claim.. It is not the same..

Shavers was a shitty fighter doe.. Imagine what James Toney would've done to him.. He'll Lamon Brewster would have mirked him..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Silkeyjoe

I agree. I dont think he was that good and wouldnt beat most top heavies from this era. If Wilder fails to KO Stiverne does that automatically mean his power is overrated and not good?

---

No and that's a good point.

Failing against Stiverne would not detract from his obvious power.

That's why after making the comparisons against both weight AND record (=more total quality), I often then look at performance against JUST quality and JUST weight.

We can then get a better picture through end-point analysis, whether the boxer is a big puncher but not a good boxer or a good boxer but not a big puncher also.

It could also be that Wilder might fail against Stiverne but be able to flog out most of the other top heavies, which simply would just credit Bermane for beating such a good opponent and make Deontay just a notch below Stiv in my rankings.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Max Power

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Spicoli

Its Jeremy Williams ;D I've always wondered if that was a hill to top for Peter as he went on, relying on power wise.

I think for the large part power tends to be overrated and overstated. Its who are you ko'ing...and can-are you doing it while facing adversity.

---

So you will bummify Jeremy Williams here to try and refute Peters power OR as you've also alluded to, try to DOWNGRADE power as a virtue altogether to cover it up AND make the claim that it matters WHO you are knocking out.

Your first point is off base because Jeremy Williams would have been one of Earnie Shavers best opponents and better than a lot of opponents who beat Earnie. In fact I think Jeremy Williams would have beaten Shavers.

Second point, Power is DEFINITELY a virtue of great magnitude. OF COURSE it is not the only thing relevant but many boxers (George Foreman, Samuel Peter, David Tua, EARNIE SHAVERS) have achieved top level with relatively little more), so obviously it is of importance, especially in the HW division!

Third point is particularly nefarious, considering Peters overall competition is approximately 100x better than the competition of Earnie Shavers was completely objectively. Samuel Peter was HW champ, there's a reason for that and Earnie never was and Earnie NEVER KNOCKED OUT A DECENT OPPONENT! With the single exception of Ken Norton who was a prolific bum buster himself, had no boxing pedigree and had a glass jaw and never even won his own title in the ring!

---

Its not the bummification of Williams, its simply the fact that a notorious puncher like Henry Akinwande was able to starch him with a single shot years earlier and Brian Nielson literally embarrassing him. The guy was near same weight as Shavers and showed shat stamina and a chin with the punch resistance of a Wal Mart bag full of light bulbs his entire career and between retirements. Great shot often talked about but certainly didn't make Peter the one punch ko artist he thought himself afterwards.

Power is indeed a virtue at heavy but lumping Foreman with a Tua, Shavers or even Peter is a stretch. As with Peter I think the Ruiz highlight ko was a back handed blessing for Tua. He got stuck on it and it turned out to be a one trick pony he always fell back on. Power without a delivery system, a set up, skill and discipline leaves you just throwing bricks with your eyes closed. Foreman early on had some caveman in him but damn sure developed all of the above and ran off another career with it. Tua was by all accounts the lil train that couldn't.

An off injury and rust covered Oleg Maskaev losing a trinket to Peter may be more of an indictment on the pimpification and pollution of trinkets falling out of gumball machines today rather than anything else. Are we making that Peters most significant ko while also disparaging Shavers ko of Norton with a straight face? Or would that be Jeremy Williams? Come on man ;D

Earnie Shavers

Only wanted to be an entertaining slugger.

He wasn't into playing Tiddly-Winks in the Ring.

Earnie Shavers >

"I could have easily boxed and jabbed. But who the Hell wants to see that. That is
why they have Featherweights."

"When people spend their hard earned money, they want to see Heavyweights slug
it out. I have no problem losing a bout. There will always be another one."