How hard did Tyson really hit? He couldn't stop Tillis, who had already been stopped by Page, Witherspoon, and Thomas, and he also failed to stop Green, Smith, and Tucker.
-
-
Green and Smith had great beards and avoided a lot of Tyson's power by smothering him. Tucker used movement well and avoided the power too. Tillis is probably the only opponent who ever survived the finish by Tyson after being hurt, Next to Douglass(who was saved by the bell) and Tucker rematch. Point is I don't think you can necessarily judge their power by looking at who went the distance with them.
But anyway, Ray, you wanna take this one? -
Oh yes, let's criticise his power based on a few survived opponents. Never mind the multitude of top opponents totally wasted though
Anybody doubting Tyson's power is a knucklehead!
The irony in supporting cruiser punchers like Shaver and Liston about 3 punch classes below Tyson and Foreman about 1 punch class below is unparalleled here.Comment
-
i totally agree mikes speed and power were phenomenal but why criticize shavers or Liston who hit a ton as well far from cruiser power levelOriginally posted by Elroy1 View PostOh yes, let's criticise his power based on a few survived opponents. Never mind the multitude of top opponents totally wasted though
Anybody doubting Tyson's power is a knucklehead!
The irony in supporting cruiser punchers like Shaver and Liston about 3 punch classes below Tyson and Foreman about 1 punch class below is unparalleled here.
Comment
-
That is simply not true at all...Originally posted by rightsideup View Posti totally agree mikes speed and power were phenomenal but why criticize shavers or Liston who hit a ton as well far from cruiser power level
Earnie Shavers, when his power was properly analysed is revealed as having KO power only against cruisery opponents. To be fair he WAS reasonably powerful against what we would technically called HW's today (in the just over 200+ category) except this range is ALSO what might be construed as the weight of todays Cruisers on fight night as well. Of course once we get to what today we still undoubtedly call HW (approximately 215lbs+) then we see Shavers KO power drop to 50%.. In the same realm as Chris Byrd's whom we unamimously refer to as a featherfist. Please note that this Shavers for all his fights also has hardly any wins against good opponents.
And Sonny Liston is another extreme example. Not only was his record absolutley chock a block full of bums, but almost all of his decent opponents were cruisers!
It might SEEM to you on gut feeling that these guys hit hard but it simply isn't supported by the math.
And then when we cross reference the numbers with the fight video we see Tyson's power looked absolutely awesome and Shavers and Liston looked completely rubbish, even in highlight video's which are meant to make then look GOOD!
When 2 of the strongest lines of evidence converge together on the same outcome there really isn't much room for serious debate and from that moment onward any argument to the contrary can be completely handwaved as total nut baggery very safely.
The irony is that the same posters who try to PROMOTE some of their old favourites such as Shavers and Liston as being really powerful in light of crushing evidence to the contrary are ALSO the ones who are trying to discredit a TRULY powerful puncher like Mike Tyson who is actually supported by a considerable mountain of evidence.
An agenda is immediately implicated
Comment
-
People who truly understand boxing don't use math to evaluate talent. Boxing isn't that type of sport.Originally posted by Elroy1 View Post
Happy New Year troll geek.Comment
-
no one especially myself is trying to promote shavers or possibly Liston to mikes level . Shavers hit a ton but was limited both offensively and defensively because of a lack of speed. Liston we may never have seen him at his best because of his late start in boxing and his incarceration during his early boxing years. I would have liked to have a time machine and pit the liston that distroyed clevland williams against mike. Shavers was just to slow to have any chance against mikeOriginally posted by Elroy1 View PostThat is simply not true at all...
Earnie Shavers, when his power was properly analysed is revealed as having KO power only against cruisery opponents. To be fair he WAS reasonably powerful against what we would technically called HW's today (in the just over 200+ category) except this range is ALSO what might be construed as the weight of todays Cruisers on fight night as well. Of course once we get to what today we still undoubtedly call HW (approximately 215lbs+) then we see Shavers KO power drop to 50%.. In the same realm as Chris Byrd's whom we unamimously refer to as a featherfist. Please note that this Shavers for all his fights also has hardly any wins against good opponents.
And Sonny Liston is another extreme example. Not only was his record absolutley chock a block full of bums, but almost all of his decent opponents were cruisers!both liston and shavers fought in an era were fighters were lighter than in iron mikes era by at least 15lbs but each could have knocked out larger men sonny for example koed Cleveland Williams twice and at an advanced age gained the powerful George foreman a furious workout. Shavers was not a well rounded fighter but he hurt some men with size and championship pedigree. i personally would have liked to own a time machine and watched tyson of 86 thru 89 against a prime Liston. sonny s prime may have been before he officially won the title, shavers was too one dimensional to give mike a challenge. i hope we are closer to an accurate evaluation of the fighters discussed.
It might SEEM to you on gut feeling that these guys hit hard but it simply isn't supported by the math.
And then when we cross reference the numbers with the fight video we see Tyson's power looked absolutely awesome and Shavers and Liston looked completely rubbish, even in highlight video's which are meant to make then look GOOD!
When 2 of the strongest lines of evidence converge together on the same outcome there really isn't much room for serious debate and from that moment onward any argument to the contrary can be completely handwaved as total nut baggery very safely.
The irony is that the same posters who try to PROMOTE some of their old favourites such as Shavers and Liston as being really powerful in light of crushing evidence to the contrary are ALSO the ones who are trying to discredit a TRULY powerful puncher like Mike Tyson who is actually supported by a considerable mountain of evidence.An agenda is immediately implicatedComment
-
no heavyweight in history punched harder than Mike TysonComment
-
You mentioned you'd like to see the Liston who beat Williams against Mike?Originally posted by rightsideup View Post
As if Williams was some kind of decent opponent!
Mike fought many opponents much better than Williams and completely smashed every single one of them.
Williams was a featherfist by the standards of Mike's day, an utterly atrocious boxer who at 210lbs was laughingly referred to stylistically as a "puncher", in other words devoid of any real skill, slow as a wet wig and most importantly- he fought and beat almost EXCLUSIVELY absolute bums, and of course cruisers.
How can you even use this guy as some sort of bench mark for Liston's performance against Mike is unfathomable to any realist.
Sonny Liston never even fought a decent opponent let alone beat one!
His only somewhat decent achievement was fighting a piss weak child like Ali to a draw on the scorecards and then threw in the towel with a sore shoulder! He failed to waste a chinny cruiser like Ali who was already practically wasted by a 185lb bum previously in Cooper. Pathetic!Comment
-
You presented no evidence elroyOriginally posted by Elroy1 View PostThat is simply not true at all...
Earnie Shavers, when his power was properly analysed is revealed as having KO power only against cruisery opponents. To be fair he WAS reasonably powerful against what we would technically called HW's today (in the just over 200+ category) except this range is ALSO what might be construed as the weight of todays Cruisers on fight night as well. Of course once we get to what today we still undoubtedly call HW (approximately 215lbs+) then we see Shavers KO power drop to 50%.. In the same realm as Chris Byrd's whom we unamimously refer to as a featherfist. Please note that this Shavers for all his fights also has hardly any wins against good opponents.
And Sonny Liston is another extreme example. Not only was his record absolutley chock a block full of bums, but almost all of his decent opponents were cruisers!
It might SEEM to you on gut feeling that these guys hit hard but it simply isn't supported by the math.
And then when we cross reference the numbers with the fight video we see Tyson's power looked absolutely awesome and Shavers and Liston looked completely rubbish, even in highlight video's which are meant to make then look GOOD!
When 2 of the strongest lines of evidence converge together on the same outcome there really isn't much room for serious debate and from that moment onward any argument to the contrary can be completely handwaved as total nut baggery very safely.
The irony is that the same posters who try to PROMOTE some of their old favourites such as Shavers and Liston as being really powerful in light of crushing evidence to the contrary are ALSO the ones who are trying to discredit a TRULY powerful puncher like Mike Tyson who is actually supported by a considerable mountain of evidence.
An agenda is immediately implicated
Cruisery is not a category the heavyweight division is open and there is no corelation between weight and punch resistance...notice i said "corelation" because there certainly is not an established relationship, which is after a corelation if one exists, which means there is no "math" to speak of here.
I would be interested to see where you can show that Shaver's power drops consistantly when he fights larger opponents, can you show this?
Regarding Liston, I don't know if he ever fought a cruiser weight opponent. You can't make up a statement like this Elroy.
You are using adjectives like "mountain" (in the context you use it) and "crushing" yet provide virtually no evidence what so ever.Comment
Comment