Harder puncher: Tua, Foreman or Tyson?

It was a huge right hand but remember, Johnson had just been knocked down already by a huge left hook to the body. On top of that, Johnson hadn't fought in two years before fighting Tyson. I don't think Johnson is even close to the best example of Tyson's power.

I'm really not sure how Michael Johnson even equates with Norton or Frazier in the chin department. On top of that, there is no way in hell I see either Frazier or Norton going down from that initial body shot like Johnson did.

But to answer the question, I'd rather take the shot Tyson hit Johnson with rather than any of the clubbing shots that Foreman used to literally bounce the otherwise durable Frazier all over the ring.

Just my opinion.

 

I hear you; the same durable Frazier who was knocked down twice by Bonavena. Just taking the punch period was hell. Even if he does not go down from the body shot, that punch vaporizes him all the same way. If that were the first punch of the fight he's gone!

 

I'd sooner take the shots Norton & Joe took, but only because George's hardest shots didn't land flush perfect on their nose.

But it's a moot point because if I took any of them Im fairly certain my neck would snap.

 

Is that a knock of some sort? Seriously, Frazier had better than 35 fights during one of the absolutely toughest eras in boxing and was stopped only by Foreman and Ali. And the Ali was stoppage was an accumulation beatdown not a single punch.

Seriously, it comes off like your comparing Michael Johnson's durability to Joe Frazier's. That's insane. Johnson was knocked senseless by almost everyone he faced.

So again, a punch that stops Michael Jack Johnson doesn't scare me near as much as the one that stops Joe Frazier.

Personally the Berbick temple shot or the Jesse Ferguson uppercut or the right against Holmes are far more devastating shots from Tyson. Those were scary.

 

No shot! I was talking about the power of the punch regardless of who the recipient was. It was a devestating show of power regardless of who took the shot. The Francois Botha shot was devastating, too. I guess I should have used that as an example that compares to other world class guys, instead of the sheer power shot thrown and landed on Johnson.

 

While I agree Foreman had more power than Tyson, & this was evidenced by the lack of speed & accuracy in his shots Tyson enjoyed, I still think Tyson is in the mix here in terms of pure, raw power. He still had a pulverising punch long after his speed had abandoned him.

 

I think it was Larry Holmes that was asked about Tyson's punching vs Shavers

He said when Shavers his you, you felt it to your core,,he described it as beinng hit by a MAC truck going 20 mph. Whatever is in its way is going down

He said with Mike, it was the power but even more so the SPEED
He said with Mike iwas getting hit by a ferriari doing 100mph and it was one after another
Even if you absorbed one well, 3 more might come and all be jut as hard

 

George Chuvalo said similar things when comparing Frazier and Foreman.

 

christ, Shavers could really hit

 

Yeah it was just numbing, stupid power. I loved watching the reaction of guys he hit.

 

Yeah but Foreman KO'd guys with one shot (meaning Moorer) when he was a year older than Tyson is now.

 

Don't you think Frazier and Norton are millions of miles better than the bum you're basing your Tyson argument on?

 

He already posted that. He's just talking about the punch itself.

 

100%, I agree Foreman's power was superior --- just stating Tyson's raw shots deserve their regard, even if his speed was a huge contributing factor during his pomp (& it was).

 

That was a dive.

 

exactly! guys immediately looked like they had no idea where they were or how they got there upon impact

 

Obviously Foreman. Foreman could knock you out with a punch you were watching coming for 2 minutes (he was that slow in his second career). Tyson relied on speed and timing much more. Once that was gone, he couldn't ko bums.

 

This is sorta bullshit.

First off, does it really matter who hit harder when they were out of their primes?

Secondly, Tyson blitzed the piss out of fringe contenders at the end of his career such as Botha, Norris, Francis, Savarese, Golota, Nielsen (7 rds, but a 1 punch ko), and Etienne. How did Foreman's career end? Well, when he came back he blitzed a lot of really shitty fighters compared to the guys I just named and he ko'd early about nobody who compares to them. Maybe Edilson Rodrigues. Otherwise, he was going 12 with shit fighters.

Thirdly, it's not like Tyson was so fast that no one saw his punches coming. In their primes, he was way faster than Foreman, but it's not like he was a featherweight. His punches often ko'd people because they were so damn hard, not because they were fast.

In their primes, they both got rid of quality guys early in fights and they both got rid of most lesser guys early in fights. Foreman may have hit harder, but during Tyson's prime the poll results would probably be flipped. It's just become more commonplace to lift Foreman and lower Tyson in any ranking, I think.

 

In fairness, mikE, Tyson wasn't fighting to nearly fifty, ala Foreman.