Weakest correlation between punch power and KO Percentage.

Usually there's a strong correlation between the two: the harder you punch the higher your KO percentage. But there are certain X factors that can come into play (finishing ability, aggression for examples...) that could and have rendered the correlation counterintuitive in past or present fighters.

Gimme the weakest correlation(s) you can think of between the two, i.e. the lightest puncher with the highest KO percentage or the Heaviest puncher with the lowest KO percentage.

Shane Mosley and Fernando Vargas had ridiculous KO %ages at one point and I never saw either as having particularly hard punches.
Chris Eubank on the other hand could hit like a son of a bitch...but his fights invariably went the distance.

 

Yeah, Mosley had no power....

Which explains why at damn near 40 he almost put your love interest on his back with one right hand.

 

Iran Barkley had pretty good power but only a 43% KO percentage.

 

Vitali Klitschko ended his career with 45 wins with 41 coming by knockout. He obviously was far from feather fisted but with record like that you would expect a bigger puncher.

 

I never said Shane had no power, just saying that he didn't punch as hard as his KO percentage suggested. Why are you so difficult?

 

Great example.

 

Another good example.

 

I'm good at examples.

 

He was a huge puncher up until around the Byrd fight. Then either the shoulder injury or a strategic decision turned him into a volume puncher. Big enough and strong enough to still get stoppages, but he wasn't close in power to what he was.

 

, no, he was only a ''huge'' puncher because he fought scrub. You could see in his fight vs Byrd that he was far from one.

 

Vassily Jirov got 32 KO's from 38 wins and was no puncher. Pure pressure and volume.

 

He was hurt early against Byrd.

The power a fighter demonstrates against scrubs is often more indicative of actual power than how well you can apply it against higher level fighters.

 

REED's Always Taken Issue w/How KO% is Tabulated...Instead of Factoring in ALL Fights (ie., Wins, Losses and Draws), Only WINS Should be Relevant...

The % of Your WINS that Resulted in KO's is TRUER Measure of KO%....






REED

 

agREED

 

Bonecrusher Smith at 52% and Mike Weaver at 47% are well below guys like Ali, Patterson etc

 

Dwight Qawi at 47% is pretty low too considering how dangerous.he was

 

Tremendous examples!

 

Vitaly was my first pick. And no he wasnt a huge puncher before the byrd fight

 

Yeah well I beat you to it so enjoy second place.





















:l3:

 

Ben Tackie hit like a motherfucker but he had a modest KO percentage

Juan LaPorte hit very hard (some of his low percentage is down to the quality of his comp)

going back a bit, Ike Williams was a very hard puncher but had a low relative KO percentage (great opposition and a lot of bouts against Welterweights certainly played a part)

 

Mosley remains a weirdly underrated puncher for a guy who knocked so many opponents cold with single punches

 

you really are!

 

Not as hard as Ike Turner.

 

That welsh faggot has a pretty good ko percentage, even if he couldnt punch his way out of a wet paper bag.

 

Mosley hit hard, but his KO% at one time was higher than that of Felix Trinidad. He didn't hit as hard as Trinidad....nowhere close in fact.

 

::

 

Tito was naturally a weight or so bigger- factor that out there's not that much in it. He was a very hard puncher

 

Cool topic. I nominate Cleveland Williams. He had knockout wins that left guys crumpled as if hit with a bazooka. Guys like Liston, Foreman and Terrell spoke about about the Big Cat's punching power. But the dude's KO percentage was a luke warm 63%.

He doesn't really meet the criteria, but if you ever watched a Bob Foster knockout, you might think his KO% would rival Marcino's but it's really a tame 71%.

 

Yeah, that made me laugh too.

 

Good call on Cleveland Williams and even Bob Foster.