BoxRec

Who out of these boys hit harder?

(George Foreman aint here, cause he would just win the poll).

Marciano hit harder than all of these heavyweights including Tyson. According the the study done on Marciano and the heavyweights of the 1980s Marciano is the hardest puncher of all time followed by Frank Bruno then George Foreman.

I can just imagine the "scientfic formula" that was used to keep this study credible.

Earnie Shavers could belt pretty good from what I understand.

and yet he seems to have missed the cut....

The Scranton Assassin wrote:Marciano hit harder than all of these heavyweights including Tyson. According the the study done on Marciano and the heavyweights of the 1980s Marciano is the hardest puncher of all time followed by Frank Bruno then George Foreman.

Marciano didn't punch anywhere near as hard as Foreman, Tyson or Shavers. That 'alleged' study must have been carried out by a retard

Of all of the heavies that I have seen on television and
in person, Earnie Shavers is the hardest puncher.

- Chuck Johnston

The Scranton Assassin wrote:Marciano hit harder than all of these heavyweights including Tyson. According the the study done on Marciano and the heavyweights of the 1980s Marciano is the hardest puncher of all time followed by Frank Bruno then George Foreman.

As good as a KO record that Marciano I don't think he was a deadly as a lot of people think he was. For a start he normally stopped fighters with barrages of punches (eg. Moore and Cockell). He scored good one punch KO's over Walcott but Walcott had been stopped several times before. Charles took numerous punches from Marciano and was stopped more from exhaustion than anything else. A lot of Marciano KO's were against poor opposition which makes his 'great' record deceiving.

Single punch power I would say Tyson out of the ones in the poll.

Overall it would be a close contest between Shavers and Foreman.

Crease wrote:Who out of these boys hit harder?

(George Foreman aint here, cause he would just win the poll).

Joe Louis

Controversial wrote:

The Scranton Assassin wrote:Marciano hit harder than all of these heavyweights including Tyson. According the the study done on Marciano and the heavyweights of the 1980s Marciano is the hardest puncher of all time followed by Frank Bruno then George Foreman.

As good as a KO record that Marciano I don't think he was a deadly as a lot of people think he was. For a start he normally stopped fighters with barrages of punches (eg. Moore and Cockell). He scored good one punch KO's over Walcott but Walcott had been stopped several times before. Charles took numerous punches from Marciano and was stopped more from exhaustion than anything else. A lot of Marciano KO's were against poor opposition which makes his 'great' record deceiving.

Single punch power I would say Tyson out of the ones in the poll.

Overall it would be a close contest between Shavers and Foreman.

Bullshit.

Marciano altered his style after 1952, or rather, Charlie Goldman did. In order to take down the slicksters of his day, Marciano couldn't just keep loading up the right hand and looking for the one punch knockout. So, Goldman helped Rocky shorten his punches and stance, to throw combinations and keep a steady and solid workrate.

From 1952 and back, Marciano was a true one punch knockout artist. Apart from his filmed one punch knockouts over Jersey Joe Walcott and Rex Layne, Marciano also has a double left hook knockout over Harry Matthews on tape also. These were top contenders, Walcott the champion, and each were knocked senseless, out cold. There are many accounts and reports of Marciano taking out men in one or two single punches that unfortunately aren't on film.

In a pound-for-pound sense, Marciano hit the hardest.

Joe Louis' punches were the sharpest and most accurate. He was the greatest puncher from the list.

Mike Tyson probably hit the hardest, though Marciano would have something to say about that I'm sure.

Tyson's KOs came just as much from speed and explosiveness as power, even moreso then Louis in my opinion. Look at Tyson in post-Holyfield earbite. Beside the Botha KO, he wasn't scoring those highlight reel KOs anymore. As past his prime as he was, can you even imagine Brian Nielson going so many rounds with a 37 yr old Joe Louis????

Joe Louis. He was the heaviest handed from that list.

Did someone say Frank Bruno?? Wow.... wow.....

I've played the Marciano punch on Walcott on TiVo slow motion, and it looks like his fist literally gets buried on Walcott's face

according to The ring's list of top 100 punchers Joe Louis is the hardest puncher.

I agree.

..my vote goes to joe louis.

ferroz wrote:according to The ring's list of top 100 punchers Joe Louis is the hardest puncher.

I agree.

Sorry, you are mistaken. The Ring rated him as the greatest puncher of all time... Not the hardest. There is a difference.

For instance, George Foreman probably hit harder than Louis, but Joe combined much more speed, accuracy and combinations. His timing was far better, and he still contained a lot of power. He was a much better puncher than Foreman, though probably didn't contain the same raw power.

That's why Carlos Monzon is rated over Eugene Hart, for example.

Joe Louis for me

I read today that back in the 1950s the United States Testing Company put together an experiment to test Marciano's punch. After the test was developed and Marciano was measured his punch received a rating of 925 foot pounds, which I don't really understand the mean, but another test of the same method measured the pounds of the most powerful American handgun at the time, which I think they said was a .45, but the result came out as 690 foot pounds mean that Marciano's best punch was more powerful than an armor-piercing bullet. Pretty amazing if you ask me! I would like to find out if they tested many more fighters with the same test.

There has to be a way to refine this and actually use this in boxing to promote various fighters. Sort of like the weigh in. Something objective that you can discuss punching power and speed. This will not work for more intangibles, but for those two areas it would seem you could get very understandable objective data.

I read today that back in the 1950s the United States Testing Company put together an experiment to test Marciano's punch. After the test was developed and Marciano was measured his punch received a rating of 925 foot pounds, which I don't really understand the mean, but another test of the same method measured the pounds of the most powerful American handgun at the time, which I think they said was a .45, but the result came out as 690 foot pounds mean that Marciano's best punch was more powerful than an armor-piercing bullet. Pretty amazing if you ask me! I would like to find out if they tested many more fighters with the same test.

They did a similar test to Jimmy Wilde. Who RING magazine named the number two greatest puncher of all time. Wilde, was a very small man, but he was known in his earlier career for having fights with men twice his size and knocking them out. The tests were inconclusive---because Wilde possessed not that great of physical strength at all. What they concluded was, that Wilde was simply a great KO artist because of his speed and timing.

barry wrote:I read today that back in the 1950s the United States Testing Company put together an experiment to test Marciano's punch. After the test was developed and Marciano was measured his punch received a rating of 925 foot pounds, which I don't really understand the mean, but another test of the same method measured the pounds of the most powerful American handgun at the time, which I think they said was a .45, but the result came out as 690 foot pounds mean that Marciano's best punch was more powerful than an armor-piercing bullet. Pretty amazing if you ask me! I would like to find out if they tested many more fighters with the same test.

I don't think these sort of tests prove much. In real fights there are too many factors too take into account, like where the punch lands (temple, point of chin), the speed of punch, if one fighter was walking onto the punch hence giving it greater force, tiredness of fighters and of course different fighters abilities too take a punch better than others.

A similar test was done a few years back when Bruno fought Tyson. Brunos punch was meant to be the same as being hit with a sledgehammer at 30 miles per hour.

DoubleM wrote:

Controversial wrote:

The Scranton Assassin wrote:Marciano hit harder than all of these heavyweights including Tyson. According the the study done on Marciano and the heavyweights of the 1980s Marciano is the hardest puncher of all time followed by Frank Bruno then George Foreman.

As good as a KO record that Marciano I don't think he was a deadly as a lot of people think he was. For a start he normally stopped fighters with barrages of punches (eg. Moore and Cockell). He scored good one punch KO's over Walcott but Walcott had been stopped several times before. Charles took numerous punches from Marciano and was stopped more from exhaustion than anything else. A lot of Marciano KO's were against poor opposition which makes his 'great' record deceiving.

Single punch power I would say Tyson out of the ones in the poll.

Overall it would be a close contest between Shavers and Foreman.

Bullshit.

Marciano altered his style after 1952, or rather, Charlie Goldman did. In order to take down the slicksters of his day, Marciano couldn't just keep loading up the right hand and looking for the one punch knockout. So, Goldman helped Rocky shorten his punches and stance, to throw combinations and keep a steady and solid workrate.

From 1952 and back, Marciano was a true one punch knockout artist. Apart from his filmed one punch knockouts over Jersey Joe Walcott and Rex Layne, Marciano also has a double left hook knockout over Harry Matthews on tape also. These were top contenders, Walcott the champion, and each were knocked senseless, out cold. There are many accounts and reports of Marciano taking out men in one or two single punches that unfortunately aren't on film.

In a pound-for-pound sense, Marciano hit the hardest.

Joe Louis' punches were the sharpest and most accurate. He was the greatest puncher from the list.

Mike Tyson probably hit the hardest, though Marciano would have something to say about that I'm sure.

That maybe true, but pre 1952 Marciano didn't fight too many world class fighters, so his punch was mainly tested against low level opposition. Matthews, as good as a fighter as he was, was only a lightheavyweight, and as stated Walcott had been stopped several times before. I believe he was KO'ed in one-round before so he was hardly granite chinned.

Jack Dempsey, no contest. Who are all these other bums anyway?

Controversial wrote:

DoubleM wrote:

Controversial wrote: As good as a KO record that Marciano I don't think he was a deadly as a lot of people think he was. For a start he normally stopped fighters with barrages of punches (eg. Moore and Cockell). He scored good one punch KO's over Walcott but Walcott had been stopped several times before. Charles took numerous punches from Marciano and was stopped more from exhaustion than anything else. A lot of Marciano KO's were against poor opposition which makes his 'great' record deceiving.

Single punch power I would say Tyson out of the ones in the poll.

Overall it would be a close contest between Shavers and Foreman.

Bullshit.

Marciano altered his style after 1952, or rather, Charlie Goldman did. In order to take down the slicksters of his day, Marciano couldn't just keep loading up the right hand and looking for the one punch knockout. So, Goldman helped Rocky shorten his punches and stance, to throw combinations and keep a steady and solid workrate.

From 1952 and back, Marciano was a true one punch knockout artist. Apart from his filmed one punch knockouts over Jersey Joe Walcott and Rex Layne, Marciano also has a double left hook knockout over Harry Matthews on tape also. These were top contenders, Walcott the champion, and each were knocked senseless, out cold. There are many accounts and reports of Marciano taking out men in one or two single punches that unfortunately aren't on film.

In a pound-for-pound sense, Marciano hit the hardest.

Joe Louis' punches were the sharpest and most accurate. He was the greatest puncher from the list.

Mike Tyson probably hit the hardest, though Marciano would have something to say about that I'm sure.

That maybe true, but pre 1952 Marciano didn't fight too many world class fighters, so his punch was mainly tested against low level opposition. Matthews, as good as a fighter as he was, was only a lightheavyweight, and as stated Walcott had been stopped several times before. I believe he was KO'ed in one-round before so he was hardly granite chinned.

what does world class fighters have to do with it? what matters is how durable the guy is.


walcott defintley had a good chin. he faced very hard punches yet from 1944-52 he was knocked out just twice, by marciano and louis.


old joe louis
rex layne
roland lastarza
harry kid mathews
jersey joe walcott

were all world class fighters who pre 1952 with either knocked out or knocked down by marciano with only 1 or 2 punches.






goldman defintley tinkered with marcianos style post 1953. you can see it on film. he doesnt load up as much as he did in 51-52.


Double m said it perfectle "
From 1952 and back, Marciano was a true one punch knockout artist. Apart from his filmed one punch knockouts over Jersey Joe Walcott and Rex Layne, Marciano also has a double left hook knockout over Harry Matthews on tape also. These were top contenders, Walcott the champion, and each were knocked senseless, out cold. There are many accounts and reports of Marciano taking out men in one or two single punches that unfortunately aren't on film."




in a pound for pound sense rocky marciano or jack dempsey




hardest hitting heavyweight in terms of brute force? earnie shavers

greatest punchers? mike tyson and joe louis






I think louis in terms of one punch power is getting underated here. I seen him knock out/down durable world class fighters with 1/2 punches. louis could hit very hard. add to the fact he had a lot of snap in his punches made his power deadly.

..i think decagon's assessment is best. if the thread was on "best knockout punchers" of heavyweight champions it would be louis way out in front.