BoxRec

I got into this a few weeks back with two blokes in a bar (I work the door at the place). Boiled down to this...

Who hit harder, pound-for-pound? Foreman or Hearns, &, secondly, who do you rank as the more accomplished of these two ring legends?

Go!

For me, Foreman hit harder and accomplished more than Tommy....Both for me are top 50 all-time greats, pound per pound.

I agree with elmer.

george was the p4p bigger hitter proven in his comeback... i couldnt rate what either of them achieved above each other

I'll have to go with Tommy as the harder hitter and also as having achieved more. I know this will probably go against the grain a bit but it's usually easier to pick the HW as a harder hitter but quite often it's plain wrong. I'd say the % of HW's KOing each other is generally higher than in the lower weights. No doubt George had a massive wallop but Hearns KOing welterweights, junior middles, middles and super middles not to mention Lightheavies is a greater achievement than what George could manage. Think about it...less than 6 years after fighting welterweights Hearns was KOing a Lightheavy titleholder

George defended the title the first time around, what twice? And against who? And he didn't defend it the second time against any top heavies and no way in the world was he going to defend against slick boxer types

Hearns for me on both counts

I am with bollox.

Hearns is clearly the bigger PFP hitter . . .he knocked out guys cold from 147 to 175.

Foreman was just a big, abnormally strong man.

How can we say that Tommy was the bigger hitter when Big George scored 24 straight KO wins from 1970 to 1974...That was an impressive KO streak. He has a larger KO percentage than any heavyweight champion ever (83.95%), make it 84%. Tommy lost in the 2 biggest fights of his career against Sugar Ray Leonard and Marvin Hagler while Foreman ahniliated the great Joe Frazier in Jamaica, even though I don't consider that Smokin' Joe was in his prime then, but, it was a huge and impressive win.

Biggest win for Foreman: WTKO2 Joe Frazier
Biggest win for Hearns: WTKO2 Roberto Duran??? A washed up version in my view.

elmersalsa wrote:How can we say that Tommy was the bigger hitter when Big George scored 24 straight KO wins from 1970 to 1974...That was an impressive KO streak. He has a larger KO percentage than any heavyweight champion ever (83.95%), make it 84%. Tommy lost in the 2 biggest fights of his career against Sugar Ray Leonard and Marvin Hagler while Foreman ahniliated the great Joe Frazier in Jamaica, even though I don't consider that Smokin' Joe was in his prime then, but, it was a huge and impressive win.

Biggest win for Foreman: WTKO2 Joe Frazier
Biggest win for Hearns: WTKO2 Roberto Duran??? A washed up version in my view.

You can argue Foreman had the better career or beat better opponents. But to say, pound for a pound, the huge Foreman hit harder than Hearns doesn't make sense. Hearns racked up knockouts vs top comp across 5 different weight classes. You could make an argument for Hearns be a top 5 PFP hitter ever. Foreman, one of the biggest HW hitters ever.

I believe Marciano's KO percentage is the best at Heavyweight, isn't it?

In any event, Foreman's power ranks on any all-time list --- it shouldn't be restricted to a Heavyweight compilation.

Where the HW's are involved there always seems to be an emphasis on their power and to a degree rightly so. Those guys are big and no doubt all of them can hit hard. Although I stand by the claim that the higher the weight class the easier it is to KO an opponent (and just as importantly it's easier to be KO'd). Their sheer size always makes the KO's more spectacular. Hearns KOing Duran IMO has much more merit than Foreman KOing.....any opponent. Julian Jackson's KO of Herol Graham was also more spectacular and worthy of merit than any Foreman KO

As for accomplishments.....who were George's best opponents that he defeated? Norton? Yep, amazing. Frazier? The manner of his win was amazing but not the fact that it happened. Joe was made for a puncher like George

Strange pairing, but Foremans two legit reigns icing The Man each time, 21 years apart tops all the weight division hopping/cherry picking titles here & there that Manny Steward orchestrated for his cash cow after his welterweight days.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:I believe Marciano's KO percentage is the best at Heavyweight, isn't it?

In any event, Foreman's power ranks on any all-time list --- it shouldn't be restricted to a Heavyweight compilation.

georges is the greatest wins coming from knockout he beats marciano if you dont count the losses(where exept for ali he always went the distance)

dempseyfire wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:How can we say that Tommy was the bigger hitter when Big George scored 24 straight KO wins from 1970 to 1974...That was an impressive KO streak. He has a larger KO percentage than any heavyweight champion ever (83.95%), make it 84%. Tommy lost in the 2 biggest fights of his career against Sugar Ray Leonard and Marvin Hagler while Foreman ahniliated the great Joe Frazier in Jamaica, even though I don't consider that Smokin' Joe was in his prime then, but, it was a huge and impressive win.

Biggest win for Foreman: WTKO2 Joe Frazier
Biggest win for Hearns: WTKO2 Roberto Duran??? A washed up version in my view.

You can argue Foreman had the better career or beat better opponents. But to say, pound for a pound, the huge Foreman hit harder than Hearns doesn't make sense. Hearns racked up knockouts vs top comp across 5 different weight classes. You could make an argument for Hearns be a top 5 PFP hitter ever. Foreman, one of the biggest HW hitters ever.

Tell me a world class opponent that Tommy KO'd after 147 pounds? I only see a washed up Duran and Juan Roldan in that resume...After that, Tommy did not KOd no one of world class competition. From 154lbs down, Tommy was a terrific hitter, 160lbs and up, very overrated as a puncher.

I'd pick Hearns for both.

Depends on how you define power. Hearns has more accuracy and speed to his shots which added to their effect. He was sneaky with his shots and that made them all the more destructive. At 147 though, to hit that hard, it wasn't natural.

He beat more top fighters than George and all in all had more skill.

As for power, it's hard to say. Hearns was probably the hardest hitting welterweight champion; while Foreman was was probably the hardest hitting heavyweight champion.

Hearns was almost as hard hitting at 154, the ko of Duran was phenomenal. Duran was out cold before he even hit the canvas. Duran was never crushed like that in many fights several years after this.

Hearns did also knock out people like Mark Medal, James Shuler and Dennis Andries. However, though he ceratinaly wasn't a weak puncher at 160 and above, his power seemed to decrease a lot when he moved up.

Foreman's destruction of Frazier was nothing short of phenomenal. His ko of Norton is very underrated; Norton was never knocked down any of time in his prime.

So power is pretty close. Hearns had better skills, but of course Foreman had the better chin. Foreman accomplishments are pretty close to Hearns.

forman hit harder and hearns was first 5 weight champ that beats oldest man any day

Adamj1987 wrote:forman hit harder and hearns was first 5 weight champ that beats oldest man any day

Not when the, "old man" wins the legitimate title, & Hearns cherry-picks second & third-tier belts.

If longevity counts for anything then there's another point in favour of Hearns

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Adamj1987 wrote:forman hit harder and hearns was first 5 weight champ that beats oldest man any day

Not when the, "old man" wins the legitimate title, & Hearns cherry-picks second & third-tier belts.

Yep, thats what i said -- some people seem infatuated by the bag of handpicked belts, but Foremans two titles were won by knocking out The Man.