Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
-
SaadOffTheDeck
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 19602
- Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38
Re: Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
Who were the two guys bigger than Lewis that he stopped cold? I can't think of one. If Michael Grant was bigger than Lennox, then a lot of guys should have more.
Re: Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
I'd go with Foreman.
Tyson and Shavers were close behind.
Tyson and Shavers were close behind.
Re: Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
I nuance it to Foreman.
He had the least to worry about when it came to incoming, among these top candidates. So his power was more available.
Doesn't make him a harder hitter than Shavers, which he actually could be, but it does make him more effective if we say they are near equals.
And if you drop him out because he's "too big". Then I'm with Saad....Louis is the man.
He had the least to worry about when it came to incoming, among these top candidates. So his power was more available.
Doesn't make him a harder hitter than Shavers, which he actually could be, but it does make him more effective if we say they are near equals.
And if you drop him out because he's "too big". Then I'm with Saad....Louis is the man.
-
MEISINGER
- Heavyweight

Re: Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
i have seen all 3 live in personyancey wrote:I'd go with Foreman.
Tyson and Shavers were close behind.
foreman was early on in his comeback
and was the only fighter i can honestly say
that you could hear the wind woosh by
and i was in the 7th row.
it sounded like swinging a baseball bat
but i loved watching shavers he was my favorite ko artist
he was either taking you out or going out himself
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15173
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
Max Schemeling would have 3, he knocked out Walter Nuesel, Steve Hamas and Joe Louis.
Floyd Patterson would have 3 or 4, depending if you count Tom McNeeley as fringe world class. He knocked out Moore, London, and Johansson. He weighed just a pound and 1/4 more than Cooper when he knocked him out.
Tommy Burns had 3 or 4, depending if Gunner Moir counts. He knocked out Jim Flynn, Billy Squires, and Bill Lang.
Floyd Patterson would have 3 or 4, depending if you count Tom McNeeley as fringe world class. He knocked out Moore, London, and Johansson. He weighed just a pound and 1/4 more than Cooper when he knocked him out.
Tommy Burns had 3 or 4, depending if Gunner Moir counts. He knocked out Jim Flynn, Billy Squires, and Bill Lang.
Re: Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
Fair points but many of marciano's were one shot and out punches. Dempsey's were mostly early rounds where more often than not a modern ref would not have had time to step in.Ambling Alp II wrote:I think it is somewhat interesting in a way. The biggest problem is "clean Ko's." Those have gotton harder and harder to come by over the years. The referee have stopped fights earlier and earlier as the years have gone on. Many of the "clean ko" from fighters from years ago would not have happened under more modern standards. The fight would have been stopped earlier.
It would be better to count TKos. Of course that would hurt fighters from older eras somewaht because some fights went the distance that would have stopped in more recent times. Still, it would be a somwhat more accurrate in judging someone's power.
Not surprised by Shavers not doing better. He wasn't a good finisher and could stopped himself easier than most of the fighters mentioned.
Though definitely Tyson would have had +1 for Berbick.
Holyfield does well.
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15173
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
Ezz, which 6 fights are you counting for Marciano and Dempsey?Ezzard wrote:Fair points but many of marciano's were one shot and out punches. Dempsey's were mostly early rounds where more often than not a modern ref would not have had time to step in.Ambling Alp II wrote:I think it is somewhat interesting in a way. The biggest problem is "clean Ko's." Those have gotton harder and harder to come by over the years. The referee have stopped fights earlier and earlier as the years have gone on. Many of the "clean ko" from fighters from years ago would not have happened under more modern standards. The fight would have been stopped earlier.
It would be better to count TKos. Of course that would hurt fighters from older eras somewaht because some fights went the distance that would have stopped in more recent times. Still, it would be a somwhat more accurrate in judging someone's power.
Not surprised by Shavers not doing better. He wasn't a good finisher and could stopped himself easier than most of the fighters mentioned.
Though definitely Tyson would have had +1 for Berbick.
Holyfield does well.
Re: Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
Calling Polecat...
Re: Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
Under this criteria Mike Weaver must have a few? (Tate, Coetzee, Williams)
Re: Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
He's got 2... Williams was a TKO
Re: Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
Where is Polecat?
Not quite sure if this helps or hinders his argument but be interesting to hear what he thinks.
Not quite sure if this helps or hinders his argument but be interesting to hear what he thinks.
-
loaded_gloves
- Cruiserweight
- Posts: 1907
- Joined: 09 Mar 2011, 12:18
Re: Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
No one's seriously suggesting that these men aren't serous heavyweight slaying knockout artists, simply because a referee didn't allow a fight to continue until an opponent was clean unconscious/dead are they?
Is that seriously what this forum has sunk to? Or have I lazily misread the posts?
Tyson was downing giants. Those blurring big shots will discourage, dislodge the biggest man. It doesn't tickle in there. But does it not count now unless a big man's carried out on a stretcher?
This is madness. We've all gone mad.
PS. where's Bruno? It took about ten men to lift up Coetzee and Ribalta after he one-punched 'em. What about Lyle? Cooney?
Is that seriously what this forum has sunk to? Or have I lazily misread the posts?
Tyson was downing giants. Those blurring big shots will discourage, dislodge the biggest man. It doesn't tickle in there. But does it not count now unless a big man's carried out on a stretcher?
This is madness. We've all gone mad.
PS. where's Bruno? It took about ten men to lift up Coetzee and Ribalta after he one-punched 'em. What about Lyle? Cooney?
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15173
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
Well, I don't think we have all gone mad!
Do agree that you have to count TKO's to get a better measure of who the biggest puncher is. Of course, no formula is going to be perfect.
Bruno would only have the Coetzee KO. Ribalta was certainly not a world class fighter.
The only one for Lyle would be his Ko vs Buster Mathis.
Don't think you could count any for Cooney even if you count TKOs. Lyle, Young, and Norton were all well past it when he fought them.
Another point worth consider in regard to this thread is that a fighter big for era will have less opportunities to knockout bigger opponents. How many world class opponents could Foreman have knocked out who were bigger than himself?
Still this can fun. We can keep digging for other fighters, but I again I really think you have to count TKOs.
Do agree that you have to count TKO's to get a better measure of who the biggest puncher is. Of course, no formula is going to be perfect.
Bruno would only have the Coetzee KO. Ribalta was certainly not a world class fighter.
The only one for Lyle would be his Ko vs Buster Mathis.
Don't think you could count any for Cooney even if you count TKOs. Lyle, Young, and Norton were all well past it when he fought them.
Another point worth consider in regard to this thread is that a fighter big for era will have less opportunities to knockout bigger opponents. How many world class opponents could Foreman have knocked out who were bigger than himself?
Still this can fun. We can keep digging for other fighters, but I again I really think you have to count TKOs.
Re: Biggest Puncher at Heavy – Definitive, of all-time, ever...
You're right Ezzard.Ezzard wrote:He's got 2... Williams was a TKO