Does anyone still think the old time heavyweights were too small to be competitive in the modern era?

[Marchegiano]

Yep, Bob Sapp! I should have thought of him. Ricky Hatton could knock him out.

But I once read an article on Ricky which said he punched with enough force to fell some kind of big animal. I forget what it was but I think it was a bull. I don't have it or remember where I saw it. It gave a large number for his punch force too, which I don't remember either but was probably ridiculous. I seem to think it was 12 or 13 hundred. All to say such stories of fist force are often apocryphal but never official.

I said he punched hard. He was a hard puncher. But F=MA, and Rocky had less of both quan****** on the right side of the equation to work with. We already know he was on the slow side, so there goes Acceleration, and we also know he weighed less than 190, which is less Mass to put into a punch.

This extra-super punching force would have to come from somewhere else. The only thing left that I can think of is more technical refinement of punching form and weight transfer. Maybe Goldman did not want to take too many chances interfering with his natural power--just enough instruction where he needed it most. He saw he had no tap dancer here. The boy already had power. He was even awkwardly good with weight transfer. Coming out of a squat you can do that. Now we will do what we can with the ballerina in him--but not too much! He has a chin like an anvil. I wanna work on is left. All imagination of course, except for the first two sentences.

He got a lot of body leverage already but may have hit even a little harder with more technique training. Or... would he? Goldman knew Rock already hit hard enough for what was out there. And Charlie knew exactly what was out there.

Given that Rock is not going to be able to punch faster or gain a bunch of weight, he can still in effect gain mass secondhand by increased body leverage. The thing is, he was already putting close to everything he had on his punches. He fought three ATGs but everybody knows they were old and their targeting systems, speed, reflexes and stamina had declined--and likely their chins too! It doesn't matter that much that they were highly ranked at the time--they were still the best of a rotten field is all, but had declined significantly. Most of the rest of Rock's competition was lamb on the hoof.

A heavy criterion for me is one punch KOs. I believe they mean real power most of the time, especially early when the opponent is fresh. He KOd a lot of early scrubs but I don't if they were with one punch... The first fighter he met even good enough to have a record listed on Boxrec was Harry Harry Haft, an Auschwitz survivor who had a 1 year pro career in the U.S. of A. Marciano threw him in the trash in three. Ted Lowry had already been a pro for 16 years when Rocky decisioned him twice. Not exactly in his prime.

Rocky's first KO of Walcott landed on a famous fighter but not a famous chin. Joe was KOd 6 times in his career. He had been a pro for 25 years when Rocky got to him. The 2nd fight does not even count as a show of great PP except to show that Rock beat everything out of Joe the first time and Joe did absolutely does not want to fight. Beat before he even stepped in the ring, looking for the first opportunity to be stopped rather than go through that hell again.

In another post sometime I will credit Rock's merits and advantages. This one got kind of long.

Force, energy, and power are different. You're not looking for force. you might think you should be, but you are wrong. I don't mean to be a ****, just super clear; you are wrong to use force to judge anyone's punches.

A gust of wind is plenty forceful without much power. Electricity is plenty of power without much force. You don't actually want that either. Energy is what you are after and that is why guns and cars use energy not power or force when they get rated for what the consumer will call "power"



I think it's kind of interesting you brought up one punch KO. For more than a decade I have tried to tell boxing fans the guys scoring KOs hit harder then the men scoring TKOs. It's like the easiest way I see to simplify all that's actually being asked when y'all ask this sort of stuff. Because energy-force-power dude, you don't deal with that stuff ever, you don't ever make those distinctions, and you guys use power when you mean energy on the daily. So if you want to just cut through that crap, yes, I think the KOs do tell you a lot. KO vs TKO says a lot.

Just check the guys. Look at Shaver's KOs to TKO and then George's KOs to TKOs. George got a high KO % but it is mostly TKOs. Shavers got them KOs. Ali probably was not whistling Dixie, Ernie hit harder. Proof in them T's.




If you want a little cheat for energy vs force vs power. Punches that move men have force, they must, that does not mean there's much power or energy. Punches that leave an immediate effect have a lot of power but that does not mean force or energy. cuts and such, a headbutt is a power-forward attack that doesn't allow for much energy and does not necessarily mean much force. When they just touch and the dude goes out like a light, only energy delivers that. So you can watch and see it too, but what you are after is energy. Force can only tell you how well Marciano could potentially move a person.

[Bronson66]

How do you overrate 925ft-lbs?

How do you even justify 925ft-lbs coming from a human let alone a human only 185 pounds?

How can you assume a man can throw out more energy regardless of size?




Why wouldn't a 190 be able to handle Wilder's power? I don't understand what the assumption is here. I don't think it is possible for any human being to simple handle a perfect kinematic chain at any size but I don't understand how a 190 is meant to have any deficit in chin compared to a 290 or any other absurdity in weight. Not being a ****, honest question, do you know how bone density works?





Bob Sapp, Huge traps, goes down with the first slap. Not a boxer though.





Boxing, if some of youse don't know, is essentially sword fighting without the sword. The techniques and traditions and such, a lot of it came from sword fighting and it really is not hard to see. Hit and don't get hit back = rapier and dagger. Hit me I hit back harder = sword and shield.

In that mixing of ideas there is bound to be lost truths.

There are frequency KOs. There is an answer to power that can just as easily cut off the lights as power does using the same exact physical effect on the brain is a different way. I don't ever see it thrown out there as any justification, but, there are these guys who seem to defy conventional wisdom for how they are able to put a man to sleep seemingly while at a power deficit.


Just putting it out there. Assuming you've seen hundreds of KOs out there, it is statistically impossible for them to have never shown a frequency KO, you have seen it and you did not notice the difference and so, it is likely, the answers youse seek for explaining yourselves is in front of you face while you lack the eyes and knowledge to understand it.




Not saying Rock was a frequency based artist. What I am saying is it is never brought up. There is only ever the argument of his power based on his films. No one wants to deal with the inhuman 925. No one has any alternative logic, it's just "look, you see what I see?" Oh, No? we argue den" over and over again. boringly.

Several of Marciano's opponents said they were hit harder by other men.Louis,Charles ,Layne,Moore,Lastarza ,****ell , to name a few.

What ****ell and Lastarza also remarked on was the constant frequency of hard punches that Marciano was capable of throwing.
Which is down to conditioning.
Marciano could ko a man with one punch,but he usually did so after a constant bombardment had worn his man down.
I consider him an attrition puncher similar to Frazier,but a slightly harder hitter.

Marciano wasn't accurate enough with his punches to regularly ko men with a single shot. Whatever Marciano's punch was measured at means very little to me.
I'm much more convinced by watching how his punches affected his opponents ,and in some cases did not visibly affect them.
Some men, a very few men, have the ability to punch out of proportion to their stature/weight.
Langford,Dempsey,Fitzsimmons,Choynski,Wilde, and Marciano were among these few.

Marciano actually Ko'd 23 men
I'm counting the Louis fight as a ko
Those men have a total of126 ko losses on their records,and well over 200 losses between them.

[Mr Mitts]

When it comes to punches--no force no power, so I put the idea in graspable form. A waterfall has plenty of force and can be used to generate more power, just like when Rock steps forward with a punch. It is a bit like math semantics, but me this time.

But in general usage, a lot of terms get mistakenly used interchangeably that are not interchangeable mathematically. Speed and Velocity; Energy and Power; in acoustics Volume and Intensity.

Here's a decent trick. Substitute MA for F in the power equation P=FV. The A is sensibly and legally (I think) removed and replaced with V because the punch will land with one definite velocity in the instant we are dealing with. Velocity is only Acceleration at any single instant. We are left with:

P=MV vs F=MA. Pretty neat? We can see that the only difference between force and power is the symbol V substituted for A, velocity for acceleration, which quantities are precisely the very same value at any given instant, and an instant is what we are dealing with.

Two remotely controlled cars of the exact same make and model are racing toward a brick wall. Car X is ahead and gets to its absolute top speed first. But car Y has a little kick left and manages to hit the wall at the exact same instant as X going the exact same speed with a better kick a bit higher but is exactly at one100 at the finish. Which car...shall we say..."hits" the wall harder, the car already at 100mph or the one that accelerates to that same top speed at the last stretch? Or are they the same?

There is no follow through. Both cars are programmed to let off the accelerator at the infinitesimal instant they infinitesimally contact the wall.

*******

Sir, on TKO and KO we are the same man.

[ShoulderRoll]

?

If you take the power equation P = FV, and substitute in F=MA…you end up with with P=MAV.

Which would mean power equals mass times acceleration times velocity.

[Mr Mitts]

?

If you take the power equation P = FV, and substitute in F=MA…you end up with with P=MAV.

Which would mean power equals mass times acceleration times velocity.

You didn't understand, old buddy. You only needed to read more carefully. A is replaced by V because at any single instant, acceleration is merely a velocity. Have you ever studied calculus? We can make that instant so short with calculus that there is no time for any acceleration to take place, or an infinitesimal amount.

That is not to say a punch that follows through is not more destructive, but that is not the question I posed and I think follow through is more force, and point of delivery just before that is more power, for whatever that is worth.

[Willie Pep 229]

I never took calculus but I am certain of one thing. I have no clue what either of you are talking about.

Any chance you can dumb it down a bit?

[Mr Mitts]

I never took calculus but I am certain of one thing. I have no clue what either of you are talking about.

Any chance you can dumb it down a bit?

Power and Force as regarding Acceleration vs a steady velocity. Does acceleration in that instant produce greater force than a steady speed at the same velocity?

[Willie Pep 229]

Power and Force as regarding Acceleration vs a steady velocity. Does acceleration in that instant produce greater force than a steady speed at the same velocity?

OK. Thank you.

Here is a totally non-math answer.

As a lay person I think that the only moment that counts is the moment of impact.

So acceleration would not matter assuming both punches land at the same velocity. What the punch is doing enroute, accelerating or at constant velocity should not matter.

But I'll bet a math guy would probably laugh at such a simple conclusion.

[Marchegiano]

When it comes to punches--no force no power, so I put the idea in graspable form. A waterfall has plenty of force and can be used to generate more power, just like when Rock steps forward with a punch. It is a bit like math semantics, but me this time.

But in general usage, a lot of terms get mistakenly used interchangeably that are not interchangeable mathematically. Speed and Velocity; Energy and Power; in acoustics Volume and Intensity.

Here's a decent trick. Substitute MA for F in the power equation P=FV. The A is sensibly and legally (I think) removed and replaced with V because the punch will land with one definite velocity in the instant we are dealing with. Velocity is only Acceleration at any single instant. We are left with:

P=MV vs F=MA. Pretty neat? We can see that the only difference between force and power is the symbol V substituted for A, velocity for acceleration, which quantities are precisely the very same value at any given instant, and an instant is what we are dealing with.

Two remotely controlled cars of the exact same make and model are racing toward a brick wall. Car X is ahead and gets to its absolute top speed first. But car Y has a little kick left and manages to hit the wall at the exact same instant as X going the exact same speed with a better kick a bit higher but is exactly at one100 at the finish. Which car...shall we say..."hits" the wall harder, the car already at 100mph or the one that accelerates to that same top speed at the last stretch? Or are they the same?

There is no follow through. Both cars are programmed to let off the accelerator at the infinitesimal instant they infinitesimally contact the wall.

*******

Sir, on TKO and KO we are the same man.

Why not measure energy and not assume how the energy is used to cause the KO.

It is perfectly acceptable to claim X gets his KOs from forceful punching, Y from power punching, and Z seems to come out of no where with no real tell for either.

Foreman seems kinda pushy, imo.

Tyson doesn't, Tyson's pretty snappy.

I don't think anyone should be shocked to find George had more force in his punches and Tyson had more power but both have plenty of physics to explain how they dropped folks.


With your car stuff, bro we fixing to get into kinematic chains! I love that ****, if you want to I'm down. I don't have an argument perse, much like the above it's more like submitting for consideration.

[Marchegiano]

OK. Thank you.

Here is a totally non-math answer.

As a lay person I think that the only moment that counts is the moment of impact.

So acceleration would not matter assuming both punches land at the same velocity. What the punch is doing enroute, accelerating or at constant velocity should not matter.

But I'll bet a math guy would probably laugh at such a simple conclusion.

Yup. inertia doesn't care about how you got there.

People scoff like they're too simple to learn from but I been doing human physic as a job for over twenty years now and I still see new elements from the old newton's cradle. It is simple but that's also what makes it just a brilliant little device. Mine is not on my desk just for display or to play.

My point is do not feel silly questioning basic things. You asked good questions and understood just fine.