Hardest Heavyweight Hitters - Top Ten

First topic message reminder :


Been thinking about this in one of those idle moments when you're knackered but can't be bothered to get off the sofa and go to bed, so thought I'd post.

Who are the hardest heavyweight hitters of all time? Logically you'd have to go with shavers first although I think Big George runs him close. The rest are probably interchangeable depending on your viewpoint. One thing that makes this hard is the variation in size within one weight category - for example on a p4p basis you might say Marciano hits harder than Lewis, but then can you judge men from the same weight class on a p4p basis? Because the reality is that a man of Rockys size and weight cannot physically hit as hard as a 6'5" 240lb Lewis, so must come lower. Should he even be on the list on that basis - by that reasoning the likes of Vitali will be ahead too. Here's my initial list to get us started, can we decide on a final ten?

Ernie Shavers
George Foreman
Sonny Liston
Jack Dempsey 
Mike Tyson
Max Baer
Joe Louis
Lennox Lewis
Joe Frazier
Rocky Marciano 

Thank god I can't stand jazz, at least one of us is still failing to find absolutely any common ground with Azania

rowley wrote:Thank god I can't stand jazz, at least one of us is still failing to find absolutely any common ground with Azania

Keep flying the flag, mate.

rowley wrote:Thank god I can't stand jazz, at least one of us is still failing to find absolutely any common ground with Azania

I despise jazz. Blues now, a different story.

I did catch myself agreeing with az a couple of times over the past few weeks - but it seems we are over that troubling period of harmony and normal service can now resume.

Not a massive blues fan either, had a mate who was massively into it and in that really superior way blues fans can sometimes get so think that put me off it. Love proper 60's RnB though such as the Animals, Spencer Davis Group, Chris Farlowe and the Small faces and that. Am a scooter boy at heart

rowley wrote:Not a massive blues fan either, had a mate who was massively into it and in that really superior way blues fans can sometimes get so think that put me off it. Love proper 60's RnB though such as the Animals, Spencer Davis Group, Chris Farlowe and the Small faces and that. Am a scooter boy at heart

Ah jeff. I guess you just can't be cultured enough to appreciate proper blues music

Lol - I know the patronising you mean - pisses me off too. Especially since half the time the artists they rave about aren't worth the raving.

I defy you, however, to listen to John Lee Hooker's Urban blues and not enjoy it.

Anyway - animals, spencer davis group all good - small faces I'm less convinced by.

Now Creedence clearwater revival - different story. What a band!

I owned a Vespa Ox, before anyone will sell it you they ask you if you like the Small Faces and the Who, some of the more hardcore dealers even make you sit a test.

You're right about the blues, my mate was intolerable, anything you listened to he would look down his nose at and bore you rigid about how it was based on the blues for about three days. Am sure you know the kind but was the sort of guy who didn't listen to Robert Johnson as he was too commercial. However since that was a long time ago and a lot of the bands I listen to now cover the old blues like Hooker may dip my toes again.

David Tua surely has to be up there...When he hits you stay hit

oxring wrote:

rowley wrote:Not a massive blues fan either, had a mate who was massively into it and in that really superior way blues fans can sometimes get so think that put me off it. Love proper 60's RnB though such as the Animals, Spencer Davis Group, Chris Farlowe and the Small faces and that. Am a scooter boy at heart

Ah jeff. I guess you just can't be cultured enough to appreciate proper blues music

Lol - I know the patronising you mean - pisses me off too. Especially since half the time the artists they rave about aren't worth the raving.

I defy you, however, to listen to John Lee Hooker's Urban blues and not enjoy it.

Anyway - animals, spencer davis group all good - small faces I'm less convinced by.

Now Creedence clearwater revival - different story. What a band!

Aww come on guys. Y'all know you secretely agree with me but refuse to admit it.

Oxy, mind your language please

azania wrote:

oxring wrote:

rowley wrote:Not a massive blues fan either, had a mate who was massively into it and in that really superior way blues fans can sometimes get so think that put me off it. Love proper 60's RnB though such as the Animals, Spencer Davis Group, Chris Farlowe and the Small faces and that. Am a scooter boy at heart

Ah jeff. I guess you just can't be cultured enough to appreciate proper blues music

Lol - I know the patronising you mean - pisses me off too. Especially since half the time the artists they rave about aren't worth the raving.

I defy you, however, to listen to John Lee Hooker's Urban blues and not enjoy it.

Anyway - animals, spencer davis group all good - small faces I'm less convinced by.

Now Creedence clearwater revival - different story. What a band!

Aww come on guys. Y'all know you secretely agree with me but refuse to admit it.

Oxy, mind your language please

The world is upside down. I commend you for your duty good sir.

The genius of PBF wrote:David Tua surely has to be up there...When he hits you stay hit

Agreed. Very under-rated power and often over-looked. If you was born 60 years ago he would be an ATG and another freak of nature.

azania wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:David Tua surely has to be up there...When he hits you stay hit

Agreed. Very under-rated power and often over-looked. If you was born 60 years ago he would be an ATG and another freak of nature.

If he were born 60 years ago he would be lucky to get a title shot. Great power but anyone with a jab boxes the ears, nose and whiskers off him. 60 years ago - so I'll take that as born 1951 and coming into his boxing age in the 70s with Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Shavers, Norton.

I don't see him doing that well in that company.

I'd give most skillsters a chance against Tua - and yes Az, that includes Patterson (although if Tua landed heavy it would be all over, I'll give you that).

azania wrote:

The genius of PBF wrote:David Tua surely has to be up there...When he hits you stay hit

Agreed. Very under-rated power and often over-looked. If you was born 60 years ago he would be an ATG and another freak of nature.

If you had been born 60 years ago you might have benefitted from an education of a sufficient standard to have forewarned you of the dangers of inserting your head quite so far into your rectum.

by oxring Today at 3:45 pm


azania wrote:
The genius of PBF wrote:
David Tua surely has to be up there...When he hits you stay hit

Agreed. Very under-rated power and often over-looked. If you was born 60 years ago he would be an ATG and another freak of nature.

If he were born 60 years ago he would be lucky to get a title shot. Great power but anyone with a jab boxes the ears, nose and whiskers off him. 60 years ago - so I'll take that as born 1951 and coming into his boxing age in the 70s with Ali, Foreman, Frazier, Shavers, Norton.

I don't see him doing that well in that company.

I'd give most skillsters a chance against Tua - and yes Az, that includes Patterson (although if Tua landed heavy it would be all over, I'll give you that).

As much as I am a fan of Floyd Patterson...he would have no chance against David Tua...Styles make fights...Tua walks through him

Quite right oxy. I should have said that were he active 60 years ago he would be an ATG.

As for Floyd Patterson, even Fitz beats him.

Not necessarily. Tua was great at walking through fighters with average defensive - ie the early Ruiz. But coming up against someone with a decent jab - especially someone who could move - he struggled. Ibeabuchi's jab gave him huge trouble, he just failed to deal with Lewis' jab all night.

For all Patterson's failings in terms of chin - he could hit hard as well. And he moved very well.

But if Byrd could beat Tua - Patterson certainly could - and lest we forget - Byrd didn't have a chin-of-the-ages either.

oxring wrote:Not necessarily. Tua was great at walking through fighters with average defensive - ie the early Ruiz. But coming up against someone with a decent jab - especially someone who could move - he struggled. Ibeabuchi's jab gave him huge trouble, he just failed to deal with Lewis' jab all night.

For all Patterson's failings in terms of chin - he could hit hard as well. And he moved very well.

But if Byrd could beat Tua - Patterson certainly could - and lest we forget - Byrd didn't have a chin-of-the-ages either.

Good point but I can't see Patterson avoiding Tua for 12 rounds...Byrd had a better chin then Patterson

oxring wrote:Not necessarily. Tua was great at walking through fighters with average defensive - ie the early Ruiz. But coming up against someone with a decent jab - especially someone who could move - he struggled. Ibeabuchi's jab gave him huge trouble, he just failed to deal with Lewis' jab all night.

For all Patterson's failings in terms of chin - he could hit hard as well. And he moved very well.

But if Byrd could beat Tua - Patterson certainly could - and lest we forget - Byrd didn't have a chin-of-the-ages either.

I think that fight was more of a case of byrd having the night of his life and Tua having a bad night. I've seen that fight and tua looked very flat. Yes a jab gives him problems (rocky anyone), and any boxer with a good jab would beat him. But Floyd was physically weak and I can see Tua walking him down in 3.

Then again, it depends on which Tua gets in the ring.

Ah I see. "peak Tua".

Who's better - peak Tua or peak Tyson?

#1 Ketchell.
#2 Foreman
#3 Wilde

Pacquaio hits as hard as Fitzsimmons, heard it all now and you have the audacity to call my opinions ridiculous

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Pacquaio hits as hard as Fitzsimmons, heard it all now and you have the audacity to call my opinions ridiculous

Waaaay ahead of you. 8)

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Pacquaio hits as hard as Fitzsimmons, heard it all now and you have the audacity to call my opinions ridiculous

How did a WUM get to be a moderator?

Lumbering_Jack wrote:

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Pacquaio hits as hard as Fitzsimmons, heard it all now and you have the audacity to call my opinions ridiculous

How did a WUM get to be a moderator?

Democracy.

oxring wrote:Not necessarily. Tua was great at walking through fighters with average defensive - ie the early Ruiz. But coming up against someone with a decent jab - especially someone who could move - he struggled. Ibeabuchi's jab gave him huge trouble, he just failed to deal with Lewis' jab all night.

For all Patterson's failings in terms of chin - he could hit hard as well. And he moved very well.

But if Byrd could beat Tua - Patterson certainly could - and lest we forget - Byrd didn't have a chin-of-the-ages either.

Byrd had a great chin.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Pacquaio hits as hard as Fitzsimmons, heard it all now and you have the audacity to call my opinions ridiculous

Yep, my comment was deliberately ridiculous. The fact is your assertion that Fitz hits harder that Haye is borderline insanity. My comment wasto highlight that fact. He would be a LMW today at best.

No he'd be a light heavyweight today actually Az but please don't take into account his best fighting weight at all and make a wild guess. Borderline insanity is dismissing the opinion of any expert who goes against what you think, Fitz was regarded as one the biggest punchers regardless of weight through to Marciano and beyond, would suggest he could bang.

Glass of rosé...tinted nostalgia, anyone..?

Stick to Boxrec Balti

I will, the conversation's better on there.

Joking aside though, you say that as though you've seen these guys live. Give it a rest. I said last night and I'll say it again now: your attempt at intellectual snobbery isn't very becoming.

I haven't seen them live but then again nor do I use boxrec as my primary research source

The thing is, do we discount fighters because we aint seen them live. Are reports not a credible source?

If an old pro says the hardest he has been hit is off a 160lb'er then I may be inclined to beleive him, especially when numerous people back it up.

Taken from a piece by Monte Cox:

There is no question that Fitzsimmons had a heavyweights punching power. In 1893, he knocked out seven men in one night and accomplished the feat in under nineteen rounds. All men weighed over 200 pounds. One stood 6-7 and weighed in at 240 pounds. The fact that a middleweight could knock out a man the size of Lennox Lewis demonstrates his worth as a hitter

Just because a guy was roughly the same size a Lennox Lewis, doesn't make him Lennox Lewis. Opponents of this type look great on paper because the fawning fans can point to the numbers and say "oh, Fitz was this and that and he could punch like a heavyweight".

Here you go: http://coxscorner.tripod.com/fitz.html

How many times do I have to remind you; CONTEXT.

There is no question that Fitzsimmons had a heavyweights punching power. In 1893, he knocked out seven men in one night and accomplished the feat in under nineteen rounds. All men weighed over 200 pounds. One stood 6-7 and weighed in at 240 pounds. The fact that a middleweight could knock out a man the size of Lennox Lewis demonstrates his worth as a hitter

It must have been like WWF back then.

oxring wrote:Not necessarily. Tua was great at walking through fighters with average defensive - ie the early Ruiz. But coming up against someone with a decent jab - especially someone who could move - he struggled. Ibeabuchi's jab gave him huge trouble, he just failed to deal with Lewis' jab all night.

For all Patterson's failings in terms of chin - he could hit hard as well. And he moved very well.

But if Byrd could beat Tua - Patterson certainly could - and lest we forget - Byrd didn't have a chin-of-the-ages either.

Ibeabuchi's jab? I must have missed that despite seeing the fight at least 10 times. I don't recall it being a major factor in the fight.

Tua's power held late as is evident against the then excellent jab of Hasim Rahman.

Byrds chin passed the Klitschko's test - twice. Byrd was defensively difficult to hit, it was only at the tail end of his career that he started to get Ko'd. (apart from Ike)

Tua could be outboxed and was also a bad trainer. I personally think Byrd got him at the right time. Give me the best of both fighters and Tua wins by KO.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:No he'd be a light heavyweight today actually Az but please don't take into account his best fighting weight at all and make a wild guess. Borderline insanity is dismissing the opinion of any expert who goes against what you think, Fitz was regarded as one the biggest punchers regardless of weight through to Marciano and beyond, would suggest he could bang.

Actually he would be a LMW. He would have boiled down and rehydrated to his optimum fight weight. In those days guys just came into the ring at whatever weight and duked it out.

And that travelling circus where he beat 9 men in one night reminds me of that Guy Ritchie film where Brad Pitt played the *pikey* (can I say that?).

WHat is borderline insanity is claiming that he hit harder than Haye. Haye is considered one of the biggest hitters in HW boxing today and you can say that this LMW part-time blacksmith with spindley legs can hit as hard as Haye? Pull the other.

McCallum said RJJ was the best boxer ever. Are we to believe him? After all he shared the ring with RJJ and fought and spared with many more.

Heck, I'd even pick Marg to beat Fitz. Hopkins would destroy him.

And you tell me to the pull other one, remind me Az how much do Mayweather, Pacquaio and Froch rehydrate?

Your lack of any respect or the most bits of knowledge are astounding

Respect? So showing respect is agreeing with you that Fitz hits harder than Haye.

PBF rehydrates by a couple of pounds, ditto Pac. Dont know about Froch. Point is both PBF and Pac can comfortably make LWW as they are small WW. Look at how much Ortiz rehydrated against Berto. Most boxers rehydrate after weigh-in. Oh I forgot. Fitz was a freak of nature.

Apply some common sense here.

Mayweather rehydrated against Jesus Chavez by 7lbs other than that his ring weight has almost always been the same or lower than his weigh in weight.

Applying common sense would be that Fitzsimmons optimum weight was about 170lbs and if we're plucking him straight from the 1890's he would be unable to boil so yes do apply some common sense.

Respect would be stopping with the little snidey comments about being a part time alcholic blacksmith and talk of cricus, it really does highlight how little you know

Why would he be unable to boil? Victorian DNA not allow it?

You have to condition your body to be able to boil down and then rehydrate it's not simply a case of just going ahead and doing it

That's why they have "coditioners".....More to it than you think..

But Truss if he has conditioners would you not assume he would therefore weigh more as they would surely work on building up his leg strength

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Mayweather rehydrated against Jesus Chavez by 7lbs other than that his ring weight has almost always been the same or lower than his weigh in weight.

Applying common sense would be that Fitzsimmons optimum weight was about 170lbs and if we're plucking him straight from the 1890's he would be unable to boil so yes do apply some common sense.

Respect would be stopping with the little snidey comments about being a part time alcholic blacksmith and talk of cricus, it really does highlight how little you know

Fighting 9 guys in one night is a circus act. However you want to dress it up,it remains a circus act. Toughmen contests. Nothing more.

As for rehydration, very few boxers below MW dont rehydrate. Many factors are involved in that which includes keeping in shape and in optimum condition all year round. Looking at pictures of Fitz, he could easily cut weight especially with the variety of means available which were not available then.

Tony Sibson weighed in lower that his weigh in weight against Andries. That's because he stuffed his shorts with sand and other weights. I am unaware that PBF weighed in lower than the weigh in weight. Must be your superior knowledge kicking in once again.

Imperial Ghosty wrote:But Truss if he has conditioners would you not assume he would therefore weigh more as they would surely work on building up his leg strength

Not really as the other guys would be doing the same thing leaving Fitz at a disadvantage still.

So we apply conditioning to Fitz and he doesn't weight 170lbs does he, can't pick and choose which aspects of the modern game you wish to apply to him

I'll remember in future that you can just go about making stuff up although is being a former blacksmith as bad as being a proven drugs cheat?

Why is it so far-fetched that a man who had at times weighed around 150 should be able to cut weight in the manner so familiar to current boxing?

He had at times weighed just like Mayweather used to weigh 130lbs and Pacquiao 112lbs, can they both still do it?

Fitzsimmons was a 168/170lb man who felt comfortable at that weight, we can't apply modern conditioning to him because we would simply be guessing as to what the results would be.

Would he have been a blacksmith to start with in the modern era?
Would he weigh more or less?
How would these factors effect his power?

Imperial Ghosty wrote:So we apply conditioning to Fitz and he doesn't weight 170lbs does he, can't pick and choose which aspects of the modern game you wish to apply to him

I'll remember in future that you can just go about making stuff up although is being a former blacksmith as bad as being a proven drugs cheat?

Too much knowledge again.

Fitz can go up and down in weight. If he goes up other naturally bigger guys can also increase their weight, leaving Fitz as a disadvantage. He weighed in at 156 for some fights I believe (probably Jeffires but your vast knowledge can confirm that). He can cut 2lbs and easily make LWW. Ortiz cut weight to make 147 and walked in heavier than Fitz.

But nevermind. Fitz probably punched the titanic causing it to sink.

Except it wouldn't be purely guessing, would it? It'd be educated guesswork based on his height, build, and his weight at different points of his career-his natural physical development. Whether or not he'd be a blacksmith is irrelevant because we're taking his physique as is, and working from that.