George Foreman vs Wladimir Klitschko – Who is the hardest hitter?

GEORGE FOREMAN is considered a power hitter by fans and boxing experts.

Usually when good-old-time nostalgists claim something you have to check it thrice because it very often turns out to be fiction, not fact. I analyzed some ancient fighters at

and it always turned out that the punching power of these fighters is overrated or even GROSSLY overrated.

However, George Foreman is of a different caliber. George Foreman was INDEED one of the hardest punchers and his KO abilities are very good.

 

 

How does the KO power of George Foreman compare to Wladimir Klitschko?

The first difference between Wladimir Klitschko is already visible from the following table: Wladimir Klitschko KOs his opponents left and right whatever weight and quality. Whereas George Foreman and Mike Tyson are clearly negatively influenced by weight AND quality.

nameKO'ratioKO'ratio (200+ lbs opponents)KO'ratio (215+ lbs opponents)KO'ratio (215+ lbs opponents, non-bums)Rounds between KOs (less is better) (215+ lbs opponents, non-bums)
·Wladimir Klitschko
87.5% (49of56)
87.5% (49of56)
87.5% (42of48)
84.6% (22of26)
6.2 (136.5 rounds for 22 KOs)
·Mike Tyson
80.0% (44of55)
78.0% (39of50)
73.6% (28of38)
62.5% (15of24)
7.7 (115.5 rounds for 15 KOs)
·George Foreman
83.9% (68of81)
82.8% (53of64)
78.9% (30of38)
58.8% (10of17)
12.0 (120.5 rounds for 10 KOs)

Fistic Statistic [#2490.1]

All numbers exclude NCs, WDQs, Headbutt fights and KOs in round 13+. A KO in round 2 counts as 1.5 rounds.

(I used the 215+ lbs figure because 215+ is the current de facto standard for heavyweight and heavyweight fights below 215 lbs hardly happen, hence it makes a Foreman/Klitschko comparison more accurate.)

Let's check the QUALITY of Wladimir's KO'victims opponents by assessing their heavyweight records (at bout time).

nameKO'wins (non-bums, 200×2)Average record of these KO'victims (200×2, at bout, aside)Average record of these KO'victims (215×2, at bout, aside)KO'wins (non-bums, 215×2)Average record of these KO'victims (200×2, at bout, aside)Average record of these KO'victims (215×2, at bout, aside)
·Wladimir Klitschko2526-218-12226-219-1
·Lennox Lewis1526-217-11526-217-1
·Muhammad Ali716-11-0319-14-0
·Mike Tyson1725-113-11527-114-1
·George Foreman1416-13-01017-14-0
·Rocky Marciano00-00-000-00-0
·Joe Louis420-38-100-00-0
·Joe Frazier410-22-000-00-0
·Larry Holmes1216-13-0114-27-2
·Sonny Liston412-20-0117-41-1

Fistic Statistic [#2490.2]

 

Reading examples:

  1. Lennox Lewis has KO'ed 15 non-bummy[?] opponents in real heavyweight fights (= where he and his opponent were both 200+ lbs = 200×2 lbs).
    These 15 KO'victims had (at bout time with Lennox Lewis) an average WinLoss record of 26-2 (aside = not counting possible previous encounters with Lennox Lewis himself) in their own 200×2 fights (= when they and their opponents were 200 lbs).
  2. George Foreman has KO'ed 10 non-bummy opponents in 215×2 fights. The average record of these KO'victims was 4-0 in their own 215×2 fights.

 

As you can see Wladimir Klitschko performs much better than George Foreman.

Actually only Lennox Lewis and Mike Tyson come close.

And please note that I am still generous here, because Wladimir Klitschko's MEDIAN opponent is around 230 lbs thus these tables are actually flattering to ancient greats like Foreman, Ali or Liston.

And on a side note: This little table above is a result of an analysis of 7'000 boxers and their 138'000+ fights. You won't find similar stats ANYWHERE ELSE but here in my blog.

So to sum it up in clear words:

 

Wladimir Klitschko KOs his opponents
2 times faster than George Foreman
(6 rounds needed per KO vs 12 rounds)
(non-bums[?], 215+ lbs)

-and-

Wladimir Klitschko has
a KO'ratio several leagues higher than George Foreman
(50+% vs 80%+)
(non-bums, 215+ lbs)

-and-

Wladimir Klitschko KO'ed
more than 2 times as many opponents as George Foreman
(10 vs 25)
(non-bums, 215+ lbs)

-and-

Wladimir Klitschko KO'ed
the far higher quality opposition than Foreman
(at real heavyweight 200×2 lbs: approximately 2 times as good: 16-1 vs 26-2)
(at ultraheavyweight 215×2 lbs: approximately 4 times as good: 4-0 vs 19-1)

 

 

 

KO'ratio against non-southpaws

Although Wladimir Klitschko's KO'performance already looks good it's actually better.

Why?

Because the above table includes southpaws like ·Sultan Ibragimov, ·Chris Byrd, ·Corrie Sanders and ·Tony Thompson. Southpaws are difficult opponents and cause the most problems.

Thus Mike Tyson (who ducked all southpaws of his era) and George Foreman (who fought only 1 non-bummy southpaw in his career) have an illegitimate advantage.

Once you exclude southpaws and only include orthodox fighters the stats look like this:

nameKO'ratio (200+ lbs opponents, non-bums, orthodox stance)KO'ratio (215+ lbs opponents, non-bums, orthodox stance)Rounds between KOs (less is better) (215+ lbs opponents, non-bums, orthodox stance)
·Mike Tyson
65.3% (17of26)
62.5% (15of24)
7.7 (115.5 rounds for 15 KOs)
·George Foreman
61.9% (13of21)
56.2% (9of16)
12.3 (111 rounds for 9 KOs)
·Wladimir Klitschko
91.3% (21of23)
90.4% (19of21)
5.2 (100 rounds for 19 KOs)

Fistic Statistic [#2490.3]

 

Now look at that:

Wladimir Klitschko KOs opponents
2 ROUNDS faster than Mike Tyson
and more than 2 TIMES faster than Foreman
(non-bums, 215+ lbs, orthodox stance)

 

 

Common opponents of George Foreman and Wladimir Klitschko

Foreman and Wlad had 3 common opponents: Schulz, Martin and Young

OpponentWladimir Klitschko's resultGeorge Foreman's result
·Axel SchulzKO8MD12
·Everett MartinKO8UD10
·Mark YoungKO2 (RTD2)TKO7

Fistic Statistic [#2490.4]

This shows a clear power superiority of Wladimir, but of course Foreman was already 40+ years old, so this comparison is of limited use, but nevertheless underlines the other comparisons on this page.

 

 

George Foreman and Wladimir Klitschko in world championship fights

The punching power of Wladimir Klitschko is so superior to Foreman that it also shows in their world champion ship stats:

nameKO'ratio in world title fights (200×2)
·George Foreman
42.8% (3of7)
·Mike Tyson
62.5% (10of16)
·Wladimir Klitschko
77.7% (14of18)

Fistic Statistic [#2490.5]

 

 

How dangerous is George Foreman in later rounds?

Another aspect is "dangerousness" = whether a KO'er is dangerous in the first rounds only or throughout the whole fight.

NameKO'ratio when fight ended in rounds 1-6 (non-bums)KO'ratio when fight ended in rounds 7-12 (non-bums)KO'ratio when fight ended in rounds 1-6 (non-bums, orthodox stance)KO'ratio when fight ended in rounds 7-12 (non-bums, orthodox stance)
·Wladimir Klitschko
87.5%
78.5% (11of14)
92.8%
88.8% (8of9)
·Mike Tyson
83.3%
25.0% (2of8)
83.3%
25.0% (2of8)
·George Foreman
100.0%
30.7% (4of13)
100.0%
25.0% (3of12)

Fistic Statistic [#2490.6]

You see how Tyson's and Foreman's dangerousness drops significantly the longer the fight goes on.

Wladimir Klitschko remains dangerous from first round to last.

In other words: Would you manage to survive the first rounds against Tyson or Foreman, your chances to survive the whole fight increase significantly whereas against Wladimir Klitschko your (little) chances increase only a little.

 

Wladimir Klitschko
KOs the far heavier opponents as fast as George Foreman (see below)
and is 3 times more dangerous
in later rounds than George Foreman.

 

 

Let's compare round1-3 KOs of George Foreman and Wladimir Klitschko

Let's compare their early KOs (rounds 1-3):

NameMedian weight (of KO'victim round 1)Median weight (of KO'victim round 2)Median weight (of KO'victim round 3)Median record at bout (of KO'victim round 1-3)Of which were outweighed
·George Foreman overall
199
212
211
14-6
86%
·George Foreman 1970s
196
212
206
11-6
80%
·Wladimir Klitschko
233
232
244
18-4
42%
·Mike Tyson
215
218
220
16-3
60%

Fistic Statistic [#2490.7]

 

Let's compare the total number of KOs.

NameKO'victims (sub-200 opponents, rounds1-3)KO'victims (200+ lbs opponents, rounds1-3)KO'victims (215+ opponents, rounds1-3)
·Wladimir Klitschko(not allowed)
28 KO'victims
23 KO'victims
·Mike Tyson
5 KO'victims
28 KO'victims
20 KO'victims
·George Foreman
12 KO'victims
34 KO'victims
17 KO'victims

Fistic Statistic [#2490.8]

As you can see Wladimir Klitschko has KO'ed the same amount of opponents 200+ lbs in round1-3 as Mike Tyson, and has KO'ed more ultraheavyweights 215+ lbs in round1-3 than George Foreman.

 

Let me summarize these tables in clear words:

  • Wladimir Klitschko KO'ed far heavier opponents than Mike Tyson or George Foreman in rounds 1-3
  • In fact the Top10 heaviest KOs (any round) George Foreman ever scored (median 213 lbs) are below the AVERAGE of Wladimir Klitschko's KOs 233 lbs (any round, total career KOs)
  • For the same weight Wladimir Klitschko needed 1 round where George Foreman and Tyson needed 3 or more rounds
  • Wladimir Klitschko WAS OUTWEIGHED when scoring round1-3 KOs, as opposed to Mike Tyson and George Foreman who were OUT-WEIGHING their opponents.
  • On average Wladimir Klitschko KO'ed the better opponents in round1-3 than Mike Tyson and George Foreman

 

George Foreman and Mike Tyson
are LESS EFFECTIVE KO'ers (rounds 1-3) than Wladimir Klitschko
despite Wladimir Klitschko fighting
the HEAVIER opponents
the BETTER opponents
and more HEAVIER-THAN-SELF opponents.

 

 

Wladimir Klitschko vs George Foreman

Thus it turns out again what I have already written at Hardest hitters of boxing: KO stats of Tyson, Klitschko, Foreman, Shavers and other knockout artists: When you talk about "Boxer XYZ -vs- Wladimir Klitschko" you are talking about "Boxer XYZ -vs- the best KO'er the world has ever seen".

So far 13 people survived fights with Foreman. But only 3 survived against Wlad.

Anybody who argues "What makes you think that Wladimir could withstand a fight with Foreman?" should completely revert that question into "What makes you think that Foreman could withstand a fight against Wladimir Klitschko?", especially since Foreman was wobbled, knocked down or even knocked out by featherfists (Michael Moorer, Jimmy Young, Muhammad Ali).

Additionally…

Prime George Foreman (median weight 217 lbs)
would be Wladimir Klitschko's
bottom-10 LIGHTEST opponent
and Vitali Klitschko's bottom-3 LIGHTEST opponent

I know they called him "Big George Foreman" back then, but that's how much times have changed.

big george foreman
George Foreman was one of the
tallest boxers in the
so called *Golden Age*

 

Probably the easiest way to convince good-old-time nostalgists of the superiority of Klitschko (compared to Foreman) is to mention that George Foreman has scored only 3 KOs in world championship fights 200×2, whereas Wladimir Klitschko has scored approximately 5 times as many.

 

 

Summary

  • However you try to spin it: Wladimir Klitschko's record is 1-2 KO leagues above Tyson and 3-5 leagues above George Foreman.
  • Thus you could conclude that Wladimir is the more powerful puncher OR is the more effective puncher OR has more heart than Foreman or Tyson (= isn't afraid of his opponents = attacks more) OR fares better against a wider variety of opponents.
  • However, Foreman's case is unique because he quit boxing at 28 years of age (= pre-prime) and continued at 38 (= post-prime). Thus it's likely that we never saw the best of Foreman.
  • I consider George Foreman to be the best heavyweight of the Golden Age of (what-they-called-then) Heavyweight.
    Wladimir Klitschko would probably KO Foreman inside of 6 rounds due to Foreman's small size, lack of footwork, somewhat mediocre championship performance and a doubtful chin (Foreman was wobbled, genuinely knocked down and knocked out by featherfists).
George Foreman vs Wladimir Klitschko - Who is the hardest hitter?, 3.3 out of 5 based on 43 ratings
Did you find this information useful? Then please donate...

Comments (71)

  • This is a joke says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Kuna Jydo]
    #165 This is a joke (2011-04-27th)

    You completely forgot to evaluate the competition each man fought. 'Non bums' doesn't apply to Wladimir Klitschko as every opponent he has faced have been bums compared to Foreman's level of competition. Also, pick a version of Foreman as the man had two completely different careers, one as a young brawler and one as a much older boxer/puncher. Ali wasn't featherfisted when he sat down on his shots and it was exhaustion and Ali's ring smarts that KO'd Foreman, he had an iron chin, Wlad has a glass chin, also, why throw Tyson in there??? Basically you don't have a clue about what you're talking about. Let people who know about boxing evaluate boxers and keep the biased stats to yourself.

    • Admin says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Suva Mywo]
      #186 Admin (2011-04-28th)
      Non bums doesn't apply to Wladimir Klitschko as every opponent he has faced have been bums

      Aaah, a Klitschko hater from the UK. How typical.

      Also, pick a version of Foreman as the man had two completely different careers, one as a young brawler and one as a much older boxer/puncher.

      Hey, good idea. I added now the stats of Foreman (1st career) (1970s). Unfortunately for you Foreman (1st career) has an EVEN WORSE record.

      Ali wasn't featherfisted when he sat down on his shots and it was exhaustion and Ali’s ring smarts that KO’d Foreman

      How Ali fared against Foreman is a different topic. This here is about how the power of Wladimir Klitschko compares to Foreman.

      he had an iron chin, Wlad has a glass chin

      That's the topic at [post=478]

      Basically you don’t have a clue about what you’re talking about. Let people who know about boxing evaluate boxers and keep the biased stats to yourself.

      Thank you

      • This is a joke says:
        flag
        [ip2username: Kuna Jydo]
        #214 This is a joke (2011-05-01st)

        What does my nationality have to do with whether or not i hate the Klitscko's? Just name me one person Wlad has beat that is an all time great or worthy of being a future hall of famer? the FACTS as you like to put it are that you are only as good as your opposition and therefore Wlad is slightly above bum status, he would have been a journeyman in the 70's. You need at least a decent chin to beat a good heavyweight, which Wlad has never done. Also, stats aren't necessarily facts when it comes to boxing as you don't seem to understand the basics of boxing so here's a boxing lesson. You keep on about Ali having no power like it's a terrible thing but you don't understand that he is a boxer and boxer's don't generally have a lot of power, they don't need it as they mostly win fights on points or a KO via accumulation of punches. Willie Pep is a good example of this also but you probably despise him too as he isn't modern like the Klits. Power is not the be all and end all of boxing, skill, heart, a good chin and speed are more important all of which Wlad lacks.

        • Admin says:
          flag
          [ip2username: Suva Mywo]
          #223 Admin (2011-05-01st)
          What does my nationality have to do with whether or not i hate the Klitscko's?

          _Theoretically_ your nationality has nothing to do with your Klitschko hate. But _practically_ nearly all haters are from the USA and UK. I specifically added flags to the comments so that EVERYBODY can see that.

          Wlad is slightly above bum status

          I wanted to answer you until I read that. Yup, you are officially a hater.

          Also, stats aren't necessarily facts

          I pre-answered this at [post=932]

          You keep on about Ali having no power like it's a terrible thing but you don't understand that he is a boxer and boxer's don't generally have a lot of power, they don't need it as they mostly win fights on points or a KO via accumulation of punches.

          1) I don't complain about Ali being a worse KOer than Wladimir Klitschko. Compared to Klitschko nearly everybody is a bad KOer. I just point out the fact how ABYSMAL Ali's KOperformance is even compared with other featherfists.
          2) In Ali's era this may have been true. Klitschko's era has (so far) produced 3x more real heavyweight KOers (200×2) than Ali's era has. And counting.

          Willie Pep is a good example of this also

          EVERYBODY should re-read what Kuna Jydo just wrote: He mentioned Willie Pep (a 120+ lbs guy from the 1940) as some kind of comparison to the Klitschkos. That's how far you have to sink to make a point.

          • This is a joke says:
            flag
            [ip2username: Kuna Jydo]
            #226 This is a joke (2011-05-01st)

            I did not compare Pep to the Klitschko's, i made a comparison of styles of boxing. I do not particularly hate either Klitschko as they obviously have done something right, your complete disrespect of past fighters just pissed me off and your stats use, stats don't lie but liars use stats.

            One last thing, you never answered this 'Just name me one person Wlad has beat that is an all time great or worthy of being a future hall of famer?'

            • Admin says:
              flag
              [ip2username: Suva Mywo]
              #231 Admin (2011-05-02nd)
              I did not compare Pep to the Klitschko's

              Then please never mention a 120+ lbs guy on a HEAVYWEIGHT site in an article about Foreman and Klitschko. If you disagree with my analysis then only compare heavyweights to heavyweights.

              your complete disrespect of past fighters

              I do not "completely disrespect past fighters". I have no idea where you read this from. Take for example this article ("Foreman vs Wladimir"). I have huge respect for Foreman. But in a comparison to Wladimir it has to be pointed out that Wladimir is far better.

              In no way I disrespect Foreman.

              and your stats use, stats don't lie but liars use stats.

              If it's so easy to lie with stats then please do so.

              One last thing, you never answered this 'Just name me one person Wlad has beat that is an all time great or worthy of being a future hall of famer?'

              Time will tell. Klitschkos opponents have to be retired at least 5 years to be considered. Additionally please read [post=341].

        • gary adams says:
          flag
          [ip2username: Divu Pamy]
          #7836 gary adams (2015-02-24th)

          Of the 17 title defense fights that Wladimir has had, 12 of those opponents had a win loss record of 305 wins against 4 losses, for a 98.7% win-loss record. Eight of them were undefeated, with 4 having one loss each. I thought Joe Louis was one of the best heavyweight fighters of all time. Joe's opponents that he defeated in his 25 title defense fights had a total of 201 losses. (I would say that is one hell of a difference) No heavyweight champion in history has a record that even comes close to Wladimir in that respect!! The average weight of Wladimir opponents in defending his current title is 233 lbs. Some of the fighters Larry Holmes beat defending his title, Wladimir could have beat with one hand. Although, I think Larry was one of the greatest heavyweight champions. His 7 years being heavyweight champion proves it. Wladimir's conditioning and training program is probably better than anyone has ever had. He has come in at a little over 240 lbs for many years even as he is getting older. That is a mark of superb conditioning. That should not come as a surprise, as he has a PHD in sports science.

    • Craig Sencer says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Riwu Kady]
      #5533 Craig Sencer (2013-03-03rd)

      I dont know how you can say Foreman was the top boxer of the golden age. I love him, but big mouth Ali was the best of that era and everyone alive then knows that.

  • Marcus Oattavio says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Tamy Oje]
    #169 Marcus Oattavio (2011-04-27th)

    Hey guees what? You are wrong! First of all,George Foreman WAS big! He was 6'4" and anywhere from 217-260 pounds? That is big! Michael Moorer WAS a hard puncher and he didn't really wobble Foreman,not to mention that he fought Foreman when Foreman was almost 46 years old! You can't really call any fighter a bum because any fighter can beat the other on a given night. George Foreman would tear heavy bags up after a few uses and he could easily break bones with his punches. All of these math equations and science tables don't mean anything! They can be very wrong and I'm sure they are wrong. Wlad Klitschko is a hard puncher but c'mon! George Foreman was the hardest hitter ever. All of your science can't duplicate what has happened in a ring and can't say what would happen based on stats. The plain truth is that George Foreman knocked out 68 men and Wlad will have to box for another 15 years to tie George's record. George is the all time KO king,two time lineal champion of the world as well as an olympic gold medalist and American Icon. There are always doubters and people who want to challenge what is widely believed to be true and I call those people "f*cking douchebags." George Foreman in his prime would KO Wlad Klitschko in 2 rounds easy because Foreman hit harder than Samuel Peter and the others who brought down Klitschko.

    Or,you people who started all of this nonsense can maybe go to George Foreman and challenge him to a fight,after he f*cks you in the ass,come and write another report saying sh*t about him. Why try to tear down an icon? Don't you have anything better to do? As for Tyson,I already knew that Wlad hit harder than him because Tyson was more about speed and accuracy plus mechanics rather than strength. Foreman was the best KO artist in history and you can't do sh*t about it! Try to hire actual boxers to write for you instead of math nerds and science geeks who never get laid. If you write a good article,I won't mention all of the other variables that you f*cking maniacs forgot to factor in.

    • Admin says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Suva Mywo]
      #194 Admin (2011-04-28th)
      He was 6'4" and anywhere from 217-260 pounds

      No, 217 lbs was NOT his lowest weight but his AVERAGE weight. That was in the 1970s when they gave him the name "Big". His MAXIMUM weight in the 1970s was 231 lbs and that's still LIGHTER than Wladimir Klitschko's AVERAGE KOvictim (234 lbs).

      Michael Moorer WAS a hard puncher and he didn't really wobble Foreman

      Michael Moorer was NOT a hard puncher. His KOratio in real heavyweight fights is 51% (18 of 35 fights). Such low KOratio is typical for former cruisers (Moorer was a former SUB-CRUISER). And Foreman WAS wobbled.

      George Foreman would tear heavy bags up after a few uses and he could easily break bones with his punches. All of these math equations and science tables don't mean anything! They can be very wrong and I'm sure they are wrong.

      Unfortunately for you "these science tables" are facts while "tearing heavy bags" are anecdotes.

      George Foreman was the hardest hitter ever. All of your science can't duplicate what has happened in a ring and can't say what would happen based on stats.

      I answered this already at [post=932]

      The plain truth is that George Foreman knocked out 68 men and Wlad will have to box for another 15 years to tie George's record. George is the all time KO king

      Nobody doubts that Foreman is one of the KO kings of boxing. But his KOperformance is still worse than the Klitschkos.

      George Foreman in his prime would KO Wlad Klitschko in 2 rounds easy because Foreman hit harder than Samuel Peter

      And Wladimir hits harder than Moorer, Jimmy Young and Muhammad Ali, guys who wobbled/knocked down/out Foreman.

      Why try to tear down an icon

      I didn't do any down tearing. George Foreman is the _best_ boxer of the 1970s and one of the best of all time. Nevertheless his record speaks a clear language: A worse performance than Wladimir Klitschko, ESPECIALLY considering that he scored only 3 KOs (200×2) in world championships.

      Try to hire actual boxers to write for you instead of math nerds and science geeks who never get laid.

      American boxing fans are an endless source of quotes.

      If you write a good article,I won't mention all of the other variables that you f*cking maniacs forgot to factor in.

      More variables are at [post=1267]

  • Someoneanonymous231 says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Tuka Gymo]
    #276 Someoneanonymous231 (2011-05-11th)

    Maybe Foreman is the harder hitter but he didn´t have real knockout power, he had POWER, but not 1 punch power, allso due to the way he punched and his anatomy prop! Look at some of Butterbeans or Tommy Morrisons ko´s, maybe they weren´t against good opponents i admit that, but Foreman didn´t have the punching style to deliver KO´s like that no matter the circumstances. Can´t say if he hit harder, but i would rather take one shot from Foreman based on clips i´ve seen than one wrighthand thrown flush by the bean on the chin! But that´s allso based on the clips i´ve seen, has allso something to do what chin it lands on OFCAUSE! And to answer your question, i think Vitali would win, Wlad if he didn´t get caught too many times. Prop both of them could out pinpoint prime George, and the fact that they´re both bigger and prop stronger(atleast Vitali) would allso make Foreman the physical underdog in terms of height and weight. Foreman liked to push people back when coming towards him, imagine him trying to push Klitchko back and cut of the ring with him, he maybe could but i don´t see him doing it easily. With all respect to Foreman but his style would be quiet a paradise for the both Klitchkoes imo! If Wlad had a better chin i would have him as the winner! 50/50 i say.

  • Honza says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Gapy Xoze]
    #374 Honza (2011-06-03rd)

    George was wobled by Lyle and by Cooney. Wlad was wobled by Brewster and Puritty. George was kd but he never get koed in first two rounds.

  • Honza says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Gapy Xoze]
    #378 Honza (2011-06-04th)

    Wlad was knockdowned by Steve Panell in first round.

  • LT says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Muxa Gylo]
    #507 LT (2011-07-08th)

    Hey I wanted to comment on your article. So I think you are a typical representative what is wrong with society. Using statistics to do some sort of simple conclusion. I rest my case by asking you to do the same statistic between Vitali and Lennox Lewis. Then check out who won. Do the same analysis between Big George and Ali. Check out again who won. Fighting doesn't work in statistics. If a fighter can figure out the right strategy to beat another fighter and has the intellectual abilities to implement the strategy correctly, then a fighter who may not have that impressive record can beat another. So we will never know who would have won between Ali and Klitschko or Forman and Klitschko. All I know is Ali was damm smart, what would he have done against a physical monster like Klitschko??? Ali didn't do anything against George but lean in the robes? What would Klitschko have done, his jab would have been worth nothing. Besides his Jab Klitschko has nothing to offer. Of course you need insane skills to lean in the robes like Ali did. It just bothers me if people come and claim Oh fighter X was so much stronger so he would have beat fighter Y. Ali had heart, Klitschko has nothing but his jab. Ali was able to adjust his style on a fighter..Klitschko just has his jab. Ali could talk a guy into submission…Klitschko has his jab and can't put one creative sentence together. I rest my case.

    • Admin says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Suva Mywo]
      #508 Admin (2011-07-08th)
      I rest my case by asking you to do the same statistic between Vitali and Lennox Lewis. Then check out who won. Do the same analysis between Big George and Ali.

      I did run these statistics and per statistic Lennox should win against Vitali, and Ali should win against Foreman.

      And now what?

      his jab would have been worth nothing

      Oh, I see. Ali was some ghost from the 47th dimension against whom no jab would work.

      Besides his Jab Klitschko has nothing to offer

      Except height, weight, power, experience, footwork and athleticity.

      So I think you are a typical representative what is wrong with society.

      And you are a prime example of what's wrong with AliFants: Ignoring facts, ignoring Klitschko's talent ("Besides his Jab Klitschko has nothing to offer") and dwelling in fantasies ("his jab would have been worth nothing").

      It's unbelievable what a mythological figure Clay is for some.

      • Tommo says:
        flag
        [ip2username: Puga Lyxo]
        #5718 Tommo (2013-03-27th)

        A Russian on here said it best, please let me inform the Swiss bloke admin… Ready Switzerland… Ali is featherfist punch bag bum… FACT! lol :)

  • NameUnspoken says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Gibu Zaxy]
    #657 NameUnspoken (2011-08-04th)

    I´m not a scientist, neither do i box for real, don´t know that much. But i have a feeling that Foreman was the heaviest and hardest clubbing puncher. And yes, i do think he hit harder than Valuev. Valuev despite his size doesn´t appear to be hitting that hard, but again if he can find momentum on his punch and somehow deliver it with all his weight behind guys like Valuev and Vitali might be at the same level or maybe harder hitting than George, they´re some of the few CLUBBING punchers who all lacks speed and leverage, therefore Foreman wasn´t a one punch knockout artist, and most people was able to get up, it wasn´t because he didn´t hit hard! I´ve seen all the footages of Foreman hitting the heavybag, if you watch Tyson practising his fast hooks on the bag you can sence he may have had more leverage, and the same might go for Wlad. He stings his punches and can have devastating effect, but Foreman didn´t have much sting or leverage. Still he has one of the best KO percentages of any boxer. Maybe Foreman didn´t paralyse people with his punches like others, but if he had a still standing object in front of him like a heavybag i don´t see many others doing more damage. So i would have to go with Foreman for pure power. For leverage which makes up for one punch KO´s Wlad wins imo.

    • Tommo says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Puga Lyxo]
      #5636 Tommo (2013-03-24th)

      Foremans punches are strong but lack snap. They knock opponents off balance. Wlads are the more powerful as he throws them with correct technique. They knock opponents right out.

  • Aswin says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Piku Nany]
    #753 Aswin (2011-08-18th)

    Great punchers can be easily identified by 1) The number of KOs they make 2) The number of rounds they take to KO their opponents, 3) The quality and chin of opponents KOed and 4) The manner in which they KO their opponents.

    Wladmir easily beats Foreman in the first aspect because his KO rate is as good as Foreman, if not better. Wladmir is also a powerful puncher based on his sheer size and weight. But I am afraid Foreman is the better puncher of the two, purely because of his quality of his opponents and the devastation caused by his punches.

    1) Foreman had brutal power – His training methods were inhuman because they involved pulling a half-a ton Jeep over a hill and cutting down wood for hours. Mind you, it takes great stamina to pull a bike across a hill, let alone a car. Foreman was a natural beast. Also, Foreman had greater bone density being an African-American. It is scientifically proven that Whites have lesser Bone density than Black People, barring a few exceptions.

    2) Foreman used a heavier punching bag compared to other boxers. Look at the training videos and you will find that his punchers cause some parts of the weight bag to compress and burst in some places. I am not very sure that even Tyson or Vitali could do that.

    3) We do not have scientific instruments that can measure the punching force of a boxer. But we do have videos of Foreman almost killing opponents with arm punches. In his first match against Frazier, one of his punches lifts the 205+ Joe Frazier off his feet for a second.
    Also, Foreman destroyed harder punchers like Ron Lyle, Gerry Cooney, Chuvalo, Norton, Frazier and almost killed Ali with some of the few punches he landed. Even Ali admitted that Foreman had him off his feet but wasted a lot of his energy trying to completely knock Ali out of the ring.

    4) Foreman had an 82 inch reach, as long as Wladmir or Vitali. Also, Foreman's jab was as strong as Wladmir's, so if they ever got to face together in their primes, Wladmir's reach is nullified.
    5) Wladmir was half an inch taller than the 6 foot 6 Gerry Cooney, we all knew what happened to Cooney when he faced a 40-year old Foreman.
    6) FOreman's chin was as hard as cast iron. Lyle rocked him twice and sent him down to the canvas, but Foreman still got up and banged him into submission, Holyfield rocked him with his punches, but Foreman never went down. Plus Foreman has been knocked out only once in his whole career. Considering that he was only knocked down 4+ times in over 60 fights, we have to consider the fact that he could easily take the best of Wladmir's punches. If Cooney, Lyle, peak-Holyfield, Shannon Briggs, Stewart or others couldn't knock Foreman down, I can never see Wladmir or Vitali doing it.

    7) The only thing Wladmir had an advantage over the 70s Foreman is weight. But a boxer's weight matters only when he can transfer his weight into his punches for extra leverage and knock him out. The Foreman of the early 70s had a solid chin too. The maximum advantage that Wladmir could get is to tie up Foreman in a clinch, but that would prove to be dangerous because Foreman was a devastating in-fighter, getting too close would only increase chances of a Foreman punch landing flush on Wladmir's face. Foreman was no featherfist, so Wladmir would not risk getting too close.
    8) The battle of Jabs would take place. Foreman vs Wladmir, Wladmir would jab frequently, but beyond a point, he would see that Foreman is not the least bothered by jabs and try to change his strategy, Foreman is good at uppercuts, there is a chance for him to land one on Wladmir

    9)Wladmir is a good enough boxer to understand not to go toe-to toe with Foreman, he will try to box from a range and keep landing accurate jabs on Foreman, winning a few rounds on points, but Foreman is so good at cutting off the ring that he finally closes in on Wladmir and lands off a great 1-2-3 combination and finishes off Wladmir.

    Foreman of the 70s wins by a KO in round 5-7. Foreman of the 90s loses to Wladmir on Points.

    • chike says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Bedi Duza]
      #3882 chike (2012-04-19th)

      this guy knows more about boxing that this writer. you just laid the fact down and thats true.Klitschko is now the strongest but the competition is weak, Foreman was a better boxer.

      • Tommo says:
        flag
        [ip2username: Puga Lyxo]
        #5658 Tommo (2013-03-25th)

        Don't say Foreman is a better boxer chike and ruin Aswin's credibility. This is the FIRST time he has actually had an intelligent point to make. I have also seen a study in which African people were found to have higher bone density which is why they are not good swimmers (they sink lol) but great sprinters requiring high impact. However Caucasian people were proven to possess greater total muscle strength. Anyhow despite Foremans reach being similar etc it's still highly doubtful that he could hit as forceful as Wladimir. He threw push punches not snapping punches which is why Foreman's opponents got back up, NOT because his opponents had hard chins (they were only cruisers mainly!) and looked pretty unco compared to Wlads. However it isn't a proven FACT that he couldn't hit as hard so there you have it Aswin.

  • shellbsd23 says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Lapy Voje]
    #3407 shellbsd23 (2011-12-17th)

    I just love how you dissect idiotic comments and answer them with good arguments. So far I agree with many things. The statistics speak for themselves.

    People feel the need to disagree because statistics are not a garantuee that the outcome will be the same eeverytime. Of course there are other factors (styles make fights, intimidation factor etc..) that have influence on fight results, but stats are reliable.

    Good article.

    Btw: who would win in a fight between the Klitschko brothers? I know the stats look better for Wladimir, but what is your personal opinion?

    • Tommo says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Puga Lyxo]
      #5630 Tommo (2013-03-24th)

      You would wonder why some of them even write such comments. "Foreman is a better boxer" lol what fights was THAT statement based on.

  • wessley says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Loje Tibu]
    #3446 wessley (2011-12-20th)

    Sorry but a prime foreman of 73 would knock wlad senseless in 2 rounds, he has a glass chin, even his trainer emanuel steward says so..when ever have you heard a trainer speak about there own fighter like that and the fighter dosnt even question it??
    Wlad has been smacked sensless and knocked down numerous times, his advantage is that he is very athletic compared to the over matched bums that he fights.
    Name one opponent that wlad has fought that anyone thought was going to be a good fight??
    There is a reason that fighters get to 'great' status you know, people want to watch them, even if it is to batter there opponent sensless they just watch anyway for the spectacle, wlad breaks this trend.

    Vitali on the other hand would have a much better chance than wlad, as he has a chin and comes to fight.
    Foreman has fought and beat/ narowly lost to hall of famers, there is no one that wlad or even the better brother vitali has beat who would get any where bear that list.
    The signture fight for either klitchko was the loss by vitali to a retiring, overweight, under trained couldnt be bothered lennox…some record that is.
    The klitchkos dominate an era of boxing nearly as bad as the 50's in which marciano was critised for, although rocky went unbeaten through it, blasting out his opponents who outweighed him on most occasions, and also managed to draw crowds and excitement.

    The klitchkos have a physical superiority over there hapless opponents.
    You dont seem to take into consideration the quality of opponents, they are terrible, so says the whole boxing community.

    • Admin says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Suva Mywo]
      #3467 Admin (2011-12-25th)
      Sorry but a prime foreman of 73 would knock wlad senseless in 2 rounds

      Based on what? On his win against Kirkman (6'1"), Chuvalo (6'0") or Frazier (5'11")?

      And actually Foreman '73 wasn't prime. We never saw Foreman's prime.

      Until 1973 Foreman had 39 fights, of which 15 went 3+ rounds. Do you claim that Foreman KOed Pires in 5 rounds, yet could KO Klitschko in 2?

      he has a glass chin, even his trainer emanuel steward says so..when ever have you heard a trainer speak about there own fighter like that and the fighter dosnt even question it??

      Where does Stewart say so?

      Wlad has been smacked sensless and knocked down numerous times, his advantage is that he is very athletic compared to the over matched bums that he fights.

      Typical language of haters "smacked", "senseless", "numerous times", "overmatched bums", "name just one opponent"

      Please read:
      [post=478]
      about Klitschko's glass chin.

      The klitchkos have a physical superiority over there hapless opponents. You dont seem to take into consideration the quality of opponents, they are terrible, so says the whole boxing community.

      No, only the British and American community says that. A community that, surprise surprise, loses in one fight after the other against the Klitschkos.

      I even wrote an article about ABCs ("American and British Complainers"):
      [post=2888]

      It's not by accident that you, too, are British. It's so typical for complainers to be British or American that one of the reasons why I started this blog was to show the FLAGs, so that everybody could actually see that criticism against the Klitschkos basically only stems from these 2 places.

  • george says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Mexi Mura]
    #3706 george (2012-01-09th)

    When I found this article – George Foreman vs Wladimir Klitschko – Who is the hardest hitter? – I thought it was a joke.. You are trying to prove some bullsh*t to yourself and others.. The quality of opponents is much more important, than their number. Tomorrow I can go out and KO some bums in the street..Even If I KO lot's of them, that won't make me a hard puncher. All these statistics worth nothing, cause Klitschko has never fought a really good fighter, on the other hand young and inexperienced Foreman knocked out one of the best fighter in boxing history just in two rounds… You don't need statistics, when you see how Frazier and other greatest boxers were jumping from one corner to another after George's inhuman punches..Look what happened to a heavy bag when George hit it… Watch Evander Holyfield interview, where he says that NOBODY throughout his whole carrier has ever hit him as hard as 46 year old man George Foreman. I'll give you one example – If we take into consideration only statistics, as you suggest, there are lots of better players in soccer than Maradona, but in reality that is bullsh*t, cause statistics will never tell you what he did on the field and won't describe his magic tricks, his phenomenal skills, how he used to leave 4-5 opponents behind just by one move, you must have eyes to see all these in flash and not in numbers and you should have brains to understand this greatness and appriciate it. Same goes with George Foreman . When you see how he punishes worlds best fighters like little kids, you must be absolutely ignorant to start talking about Klitschko after that.

    • Admin says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Suva Mywo]
      #3707 Admin (2012-01-09th)
      The quality of opponents is much more important, than their number.

      The Klitschkos KOed far better opponents than George Foreman did.

      Watch Evander Holyfield interview, where he says that NOBODY throughout his whole carrier has ever hit him as hard as 46 year old man George Foreman

      Hmm, strange Holyfield said, that Bowe hit hardest. Additionally Foreman II didn't have devastating KOpower. The fact alone that he couldn't KO Axel Schultz and had immense trouble with Moorer shows you that.

      You know how often George fought previously unKOed opponents?

      9 times (I excluded those who had 19 or less fights)

      Of which he managed to KO 4.

      Wladimir Klitschko?

      17 times, of which he managed to KO 14!

      Look, I don't want to take anything away from Foreman.

      Foreman is ONE OF THE BEST boxers of all time, and Foreman was THE BEST boxer of the 1970s, and wasn't even boxing in his prime.

      But KO-record-wise his achievements ARE FAR worse than Klitschkos, record-wise ANYWAY.

      what he did on the field and won't describe his magic tricks

      I wasn't conviced by your logic… until you mentioned some magic tricks of a soccer team player.

      • Bruce Crichton says:
        flag
        [ip2username: Lyxo Mexi]
        #5351 Bruce Crichton (2012-11-30th)

        "Hmm, strange Holyfield said, that Bowe hit hardest. Additionally Foreman II didn't have devastating KOpower. The fact alone that he couldn't KO Axel Schultz and had immense trouble with Moorer shows you that"

        Actually, he knocked out Moorer with one shot so lack of power wasn't the problem.

        As for not knocking out Schultz, the problem was that old George was so immobile that he couldn't land more than one punch and the same was true with Moorer in the first 9 rounds.

        Nothing wrong with Big George's power and he could stop Wlad, if he hit him and possibly Vitali, if he hit him. The emphasis here is on the if and both K brothers could also stop George as well, particularly in the late rounds.

        If Vitali wasn't cut early, he would probably stop George late and Wlad vs George could go either way and it isn't a fight I'd like to have money on.

        Fair play to you for giving more recent fighters their due.

        Few things are more irritating than 'old farts bias'. On some sites, I've seen 19th century fighters rated above 1980's fighters in their division. On what basis this is done is something I don't want to ask.

    • Tommo says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Puga Lyxo]
      #5631 Tommo (2013-03-24th)

      Youthful Foreman couldn't even KO a piss weak Muhammad Ali or Jimmy Young. He wiped out the rest of the bums of the era though. Old foreman failed against good Heavyweights like Tommy Morrison and Evander Holyfield. Wladimir only ever lost to power punchers early in his career, was winning on points before he was caught anyway etc and since then has cleared the division and dominated it for years. He has defeated other fighters who would also have wiped the floor in the golden age.

  • Eric says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Pixu Tany]
    #3755 Eric (2012-02-10th)

    You seem to be overly obsessed with the size of heavyweight fighters. Bigger isn't always better and in the case of heavyweight boxers, huge size has historically been more of a disadvantage than advantage. Little Jack Dempsey, all 6'1" 187-190lbs of him, destroyed giants like 6'4 1/2" Fred Fulton, 6' 4" Carl Morris, and of course the 6'6 1/4" 245lb Jess Willard. Joe Louis standing only 6'2" and weighing about 198-202lbs in his prime ko'ed men just as large as the Klitschos, large fighters like Primo Carnera 6'5 3/4" 260lbs, Buddy Baer 6'6 1/2" 250lbs, and Abe Simon 6'4 1/2" 255lbs. Granted these behemoths didn't possess the athletic skills of the Klitscho brothers but I will argue that Buddy Baer, whom many boxing experts consider to be one of the top punchers of all-time, could punch harder than Wlad, and at 6'6 1/2" 250lbs he matches up physically well with even today's heavyweights. Let's not forget that Foreman in his second coming also destroyed 6'6" Gerry Cooney in a 70's vs 80's punchers duel. Say what you will about Cooney but even his worst critics will tell you the man could punch. One of the main reasons fighters weigh more today than in Foreman's era is they're not in shape to fight hard for 12-15 rounds like the heavyweights of yesteryear. Fighters today seem to want to either look like a bodybuilder or just come into the ring with lard hanging over their trunks while hugging and mugging each other for 12 boring rounds. Another factor for the weight increase besides weight training, undertraining, overeating, etc., is of course steroids, which while they existed in Foreman's era, were seen as something foreign just like weight training, for a fighters training routine. The fighters of the past trained DOWN to the lightest possible weight they could fight without sacrificing stamina and strength which is why a 220lb Foreman would "walk around" at a reasonably svelte 250lbs between fights.

    • Admin says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Suva Mywo]
      #3756 Admin (2012-02-10th)
      You seem to be overly obsessed with the size of heavyweight fighters. Bigger isn't always better and in the case of heavyweight boxers, huge size has historically been more of a disadvantage than advantage. Little Jack Dempsey, all 6'1" 187-190lbs of him, destroyed giants like 6'4 1/2" Fred Fulton, 6' 4" Carl Morris, and of course the 6'6 1/4" 245lb Jess Willard. Joe Louis standing only 6'2" and weighing about 198-202lbs in his prime ko'ed men just as large as the Klitschos, large fighters like Primo Carnera 6'5 3/4" 260lbs, Buddy Baer 6'6 1/2" 250lbs, and Abe Simon 6'4 1/2" 255lbs.

      This is all answered at [post=932]

      Granted these behemoths didn't possess the athletic skills of the Klitscho brothers but I will argue that Buddy Baer, whom many boxing experts consider to be one of the top punchers of all-time, could punch harder than Wlad

      Baer was never champ and has only KOed 3 (THREE!) nonbummy boxers at real heavyweight 200×2 (Hogan, Simon, Galento).

      Baer's KOpower is SEVERAL leagues below Klitschko's.

      It's an insult to dare to compare Baer to Wlad.

      and at 6'6 1/2" 250lbs he matches up physically well with even today's heavyweights.

      He didn't even win the championship in the 1940s. How in the world could he win today?

      Let's not forget that Foreman in his second coming also destroyed 6'6" Gerry Cooney in a 70's vs 80's punchers duel.

      Sure, Foreman OUTWEIGHED Cooney. Exactly what I am saying.

      One of the main reasons fighters weigh more today than in Foreman's era is they're not in shape to fight hard for 12-15 rounds like the heavyweights of yesteryear.

      [post=126]

      Another factor for the weight increase besides weight training, undertraining, overeating, etc., is of course steroids, which while they existed in Foreman's era, were seen as something foreign just like weight training, for a fighters training routine. The fighters of the past trained DOWN to the lightest possible weight they could fight without sacrificing stamina and strength which is why a 220lb Foreman would "walk around" at a reasonably svelte 250lbs between fights.

      Of course it's an advantage to slim down when your opponents are cruisers. That way you can move faster.

      You see, you convert a liability into an asset: You claim that slimmed down Foreman shows how agile and fit past eras were, while in reality in only shows what a cruiser era it was. Nobody doubts that cruisers are faster. But you have to accept that Foreman's ENTIRE 70s career consisted of beating guys with a median weight of 205 lbs, of which 80% were former cruisers. It's obvious that in such an era being a slimmed down heavyweight might have advantages.

      When Foreman boxed in the 90s the median weight of his opponents was 227 lbs and additionally only 30%+ were former cruisers.

      This is like stepping up 2-3 divisions. Don't compare the 1970s CakaHweight era to the modern ultraheavyweight era.

  • Eric says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Pixu Tany]
    #3757 Eric (2012-02-10th)

    Foreman's list of victims in the 70's is far more impressive than his list of ko victims in the 90's. Knockout victims Joe Frazier, Ken Norton, Ron Lyle, hell even Scott Ledoux, Boone Kirkman, and Dino Dennis were all better fighters than the fighters Foreman ko'ed in the 80's-90's. To state that Foreman ko'ed Cooney because of the flab hanging over his trunks is downright ridiculous, maybe little 205lb Michael Spinks knocked out the 232lb Cooney because he was an overweight Light Heavyweight too. If you took a prime Foreman and fought him today, the 6'3"-6'4" depending on sources, would be much heavier than the 220-225lb he weighed in his prime. I'm not talking about the 250lb+ blob of Foreman we saw in the 90's but a well muscled 240-245lb physical specimen. As I stated previously fighters in Foreman's day and in the past never set foot in a weight room and steroids were something completely alien or not even around yet. Would a bulkier more muscled 245lb Foreman hit harder than the 220lb natural 70's version? The answer is DOUBTFUL, not to mention he would sacrifice speed, possibly some agility, and most important the extra muscle would rob Foreman of some of his already poor stamina. Also Buddy Baer is ranked in the Ring Magazines 100 Greatest Punchers of All-Time, I'm not sure how high but to be included as one of the top 100 punchers of all-time by boxing experts proves he was no slouch in the power department.

    • Admin says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Suva Mywo]
      #3759 Admin (2012-02-11th)
      Knockout victims Joe Frazier, Ken Norton, Ron Lyle, hell even Scott Ledoux, Boone Kirkman, and Dino Dennis were all better fighters than the fighters Foreman ko'ed in the 80's-90's.

      You again convert a worse performance into a virtue. That Foreman's KO wins of the 1970s are more impressive is exactly what _I_ am saying. That's because Foreman in the 1990s had to face a far superior type of ultraheavyweights hence his record is worse. But you try to convert it into some kind of proof that the division got worse.

      If you took a prime Foreman and fought him today, the 6'3"-6'4" depending on sources, would be much heavier than the 220-225lb he weighed in his prime. I'm not talking about the 250lb+ blob of Foreman we saw in the 90's but a well muscled 240-245lb physical specimen.

      A ridiculous speculation. Foreman is a head smaller than Wladimir Klitschko but would have more muscles than than Klitschko?

      Additionally you again ignore simple facts. Wlad Klitschko has a far superior KO record than Foreman, who was mainly specializing in KOing smaller worse former cruisers.

      Also Buddy Baer is ranked in the Ring Magazines 100 Greatest Punchers of All-Time, I'm not sure how high but to be included as one of the top 100 punchers of all-time by boxing experts proves he was no slouch in the power department.

      The Ring Mag is as biased as all the other sources. They have no clue how to assess a worthiness of a fighter and they judge by sample fights alone.

      • Tommo says:
        flag
        [ip2username: Puga Lyxo]
        #5632 Tommo (2013-03-24th)

        Foreman's list of KO victims in the 70s was nothing impressive. Foreman KO'd NOBODY, not one fighter in the 70s who would have any relevance if they fought today.

  • cromen says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Wome Zisu]
    #3789 cromen (2012-02-26th)

    These are two different eras, Foreman had much harder and stronger opponents, Klitschko is now the strongest but the competition is weak, Foreman was a better boxer

    • Admin says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Suva Mywo]
      #3791 Admin (2012-02-26th)

      Don't make me laugh. One can have a point somewhere that CLAY/ALI had better opponents, but Foreman? No way.

      • Tommo says:
        flag
        [ip2username: Puga Lyxo]
        #5633 Tommo (2013-03-24th)

        Ron Lyle, Muhammad Ali, Joe Frazier and Ken Norton and George Chuvalo were tough fighters of his day. Not a single one of them would punch their way above journeyman or tomato can status today. Real tough lol.

  • Honza says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Gapy Xoze]
    #3794 Honza (2012-02-28th)

    The Ring Mag is as biased as all the other sources. They have no clue how to assess a worthiness of a fighter and judge by sample fights alone.
    Of course everybody is wrong and you are right. You must by some kind of boxing genius or even more. No true is that you are nothing more than big time fan of Wladimir Klitschko. End of story

  • Honza says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Bote Kitu]
    #3796 Honza (2012-02-29th)

    And by the way George is not head smaller than Wlad.

  • Phil says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Bypo Pebi]
    #3804 Phil (2012-03-04th)

    Neither Klitschko (aside from being injured) would ever lose to Jimmy Young.
    Vitali could probably beat him with one functional hand.

  • Cap'nCharisma says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Zisu Vady]
    #3821 Cap'nCharisma (2012-03-09th)

    Best article I have read in a while about boxing, the best part is that, unlike the old timers' opinions, it's backed up by facts.

  • Big Ted says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Miu Basy]
    #3984 Big Ted (2012-05-17th)

    In his prime Tyson hit harder than both of these guys. Tua also has a lot of power. Good logic though on your comparison. Also check out Heavyweight John Guthrie from the early 90's. Alex Vargas had his jaw broke by Guthrie.

  • Tevfik says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Beki Guda]
    #4053 Tevfik (2012-07-19th)

    Since you present your case in statistics, I just want to know how you define "bum" and "non-bum".

    And people; the comments on Wlad's chin, who would beat who, who is greater/better, etc. are irrelevant because the article is titled "who is the harder puncher".

  • Honza says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Dibu Waby]
    #5045 Honza (2012-10-23rd)

    Here is comment about georges and wlads power and I think is pretty accurate: Different types of power. Foreman's power comes from his brute strength and heavy hands, Wlad's from his speed and explosive technique. Foreman could club you a glancing blow and still stun you. Wlad doesn't tend to do this, but his extreme precision and excellent timing often have a devastating effect on his opponents (as well as the height and leverage he gets on his shots). Let's put it this way, Foreman could knock out opponents Wlad couldn't, Wlad could knock out opponents Foreman couldn't. It all comes down to the style of the fighter they're facing. Fast technical fighters are more likely to come a cropper at the hands of Wlad, whilst big sturdy Sam Peter types would probably succumb to Foreman's power.:)

  • Jason says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Sidu Dany]
    #5047 Jason (2012-10-26th)

    Corrie Sanders knocked Wlad senseless, and Sanders was a flabby, middle-aged, part-time golfer. He was what, an inch taller than George, but far less physically strong and durable. A Klitschko victory over Foreman is anything but a sure thing! If Wlad ever got hurt against George, GAME OVER!

  • Big Ted says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Moe Jimu]
    #5332 Big Ted (2012-11-23rd)

    Lots of stats. Very interesting. In my opinion Wlad would have would have trouble with shorter more powerful punchers like Mike Tyson, David Tua and John Guthrie. He hasn't faced anyone that is that compact and balanced. Those shorter boxers I mentioned all have ridiculous one hit power. And in his prime Tyson had some of the best defense even seen.

    • Tommo says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Puga Lyxo]
      #5634 Tommo (2013-03-24th)

      The styles makes fights notion is a thing of the past now. That implied that a swarmer was stylistically made to defeat an outside fighter. However when do you ever see a pure boxer employing fast weak punches anymore? Never. Because at modern heavyweight all punches are dangerous now and most outside fighters are also big punchers that catch swarmers on the way in and can really hurt them. That is what happened to Tyson when he fought Lennox.

  • Alexander says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Kepi Wuza]
    #5460 Alexander (2013-01-01st)

    Which is also often underestimated is the mental strength of Boxers

    I see in today's boxers simply no mental strength to beat killers like sonny liston or foreman
    Liston give a sh*t about what or who would meet him in the ring

    (sparring with George in his late Age and Foreman ask that Liston is the only Men who push him back)

    by the way – Sonny Liston VS Wladimir Klitschko would be more interesting for me

    Wladimir´s best Weapon the Jap – Liston best Weapon the Jap who was the most powerful and
    best thing ever made in boxing.

    • Tommo says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Puga Lyxo]
      #5635 Tommo (2013-03-24th)

      Yeah I think Liston-Wladimir would be interesting as well. Kind of like Tyson Marvis Frazier was. I love watching ridiculously mismatched bums get sent flying lol get real.

  • Tommo says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Puga Lyxo]
    #5594 Tommo (2013-03-24th)

    You are very correct in asserting George as the top dog of the 70s ahead of Clay, you never hear of such an objective and honest assessment anywhere but this blog on THAT matter. His loss to Ali was the result of Georges arrogance at the time and abandonment of tactics altogether. If Foreman had simply "pumped his jab" and not continued to try land power shots when Ali was on the ropes until he was exhausted I believe that would have been enough to pull the KO everyone was expecting and history would have been different. As it was his later in life achievement was remarkable enough.

    Yeah when one claims George to be the hardest hitter they must remember times change, athletes naturally get larger and more powerful and he was never going to be the strongest forever. I always thought it interesting to compare Foreman to Tyson and Morrison with regards to power. Even though there're the claims Mike ducked foreman and the like I find it hard to believe watching both their fights that the unrefined, slower George could have caught Mike the same way he did Frazier. And once on the inside George could have found it a little harder to shove Tyson away as he did to Joe. Also because they used their legs more to generate power I feel that Tommy Morrison and Iron Mike could have hit harder than George (the 3 of them were of equal weight). But all that is speculative.

    Sometimes you read that Foreman didn't know proper punch technique and he does look somewhat uncoordinated. I think there is some truth to the matter and his power was of a different sort to other HW's. He had a forceful drive-through "push-punch" lacking the snap that leaves opponents unconscious and results in his slower punch recovery. His punches are "stronger" because of this in terms of knocking ppl off balance and down however and probably accounts for the fact that when Foreman knocks opponents down, they get back up until they are TKO'd where as a fighter who throws more explosive punches from the floor more frequently puts the lights out.

    But good on Big George, the greatest of the "golden age"!! =P

  • gary adams says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Kamy Rone]
    #6367 gary adams (2013-07-27th)

    A lot of people on this thread are saying that Klitschko's oponents are bums, nobody's and sorts.
    I think this is a mistake. Six of the fighters that he has beat since 2004 when he became champion were undefeated when he fought them. Most of them were in their prime, 25 to 30 years of age. Also, David Haye was 25 and 1 and Eddie Chambers was 35 and 1. Klitschko has hardly been tested since 2005. The reason is that he is well coached and is using his brains. If you look at his fights over the last several years you will notice that he hardly ever gets hit. (The real skill of being a fighter is being able to hit the opponent and not get hit, which he is proving to be the best there ever was in that respect, at least in the heavyweight division.) Like Ali he does not waste effort on throwing body shots very often. You never see an once of fat on the man. He looks like a copy of Rocky Marciano when he was champion and fought at 187 lbs.(Chisled) He is always in tremendous shape. Ten years ago he fought at 240-244 lbs and he still is fighting at that weight. That is a mark of a man who's condition is unsurpassed. He does not look tired in his fights especially since he became champion in 2004. Most of his opponents after 6 or 7 rounds look beat up and tired because of taking so many of his very powerful jabs. He patiently waits for an opening and connects with a very strong straight right after a jab and that usually starts the finish of the match. I will agree that his fights are not as exciting to watch as Tyson's or Forman's because they came out and wanted to end the fight as fast as they could and went right after their opponent come hell or high water. They got hit to, Klitschko on the other hand takes his time and it is proving to be very effective. He fights like Ali, not a fast, but definitely a more powerful puncher, with both hands.

  • John says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Zoe Gidu]
    #6394 John (2013-07-28th)

    I'll donate money towards your education in boxing. You klitschko fanboy

  • Jamie says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Dazy Mome]
    #6401 Jamie (2013-07-29th)

    This is one of the funniest sites I've come across in ages!
    Great effort. :)

  • gary adams says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Kamy Rone]
    #6411 gary adams (2013-07-30th)

    Folks talk about Klitschko losing 3 fights prior to 2005. Fighters do get better. Some people seem to have forgotten that! A fighter by the name of James Broddock lost 25 professional fights before he became the heavyweight champion of the world in the mid 1930s. One fighter that he had lost to earlier in his career and fought again told his manager during the fight that he is not the same fighter. "DA" HE GOT BETTER. The same can be said about Klitschko! Klitschko is much better than he was 10 years ago. Larry Homes in his prime probably would have defeated Mike Tyson. Iron Mike defended his title 6 times and was defeated by Buster Douglas and twice by Evander Holyfield. George Forman defended his title to total of 2 times before he lost it. Ron Lyle knocked George down and almost beat him. People say Klitschko has fought nobody's. Well lets look at some of the men that Larry Homes fought defending his title. Randall Tex Cobb, Leon Spinks, Scott Frank, Marvis Frazier, James Smith, Luoien Rodriquez, David Bey, Ossie Ocasio, Lorenzo Zannon, Alfredo Evangelista, and an aging Ali. Gerry Cooney and Mike Weaver were top five legitimate heavyweight contenders and would have been so in any age. So what are we supposed to say, that Homes was not good because he fought a lot of nobodys? Most of these fighters had lost fights before facing Holmes where as I mentioned in my last post, that five guys that Klitschko beat had undefeated records, in their prime and were bigger guys with better knock our records than the fighters that Holmes fought defending his title. What is impressive to me about Klitschko is how he gets away from a punch as quick as he does, especially being as big as he is! Bigger men are getting quicker than they used to be. A good example is LeBron James. In the sixties and seventies, no 6 foot eight 260 lb man could move that quick with the ball. What kind of a chance would a mid 1950s pro football team, where the average weight of the line was 260 lbs stand against a team of today with a line that averages 300+ lbs.

  • Tommo says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Loze Xivu]
    #6413 Tommo (2013-07-30th)

    "Wladimir Klitschko would probably KO Foreman inside of 6 rounds due to Foreman's small size, lack of footwork, somewhat mediocre championship performance and a doubtful chin (Foreman was wobbled, genuinely knocked down and knocked out by featherfists)."

    Admin, I have to say I very much disagree with this statement. You have painted a clear picture of the Wladimir KO losses to great effect which completely removes chin as a reason for all but 1 which involved the anvil punch and still I would describe Wlad's chin as decent but not great.

    However I would venture that Foreman did INDEED have great chin. His Power and Chin combined were the absolute mainstays of his success.

    First of all, he has only suffered 1… ONE! single KO in his career at the hands of Ali and as any sane and non-biased person will see it, this was definitely not chin related. He gassed HARD!

    I didn't actually see the Young fight but I did see the Moorer affair and I gotta tell ya, whatever Moorers stats are, he was only a little heavy and never gonna rate as a power hitter but he could still bang pretty hard and was regarded as such. But come on! Moorer beat the absolute sh*t out of Foreman round after round after round. OF COURSE he's gonna be wobbled after such an accumulated beating! This was no chin issue.

    I have never ONCE seen Foreman dropped with a single shot as I have Lewis or Klitschko. He dedinitely has better chin than them. Tommy Morrison is both regarded as one of the hardest punchers and even backed up with your stats. Yet George took bomb after bomb from this man who was his hardest hitting opponent and survived the fight!

    I don't think Foreman stands anything more than punchers chance against Wlad either but to say he has a doubtful chin against Wlad is not that credible. Imo he has one of the hardest chins all time at HW, up there with Holyfield, Puritty, McCall and Wilson. (I would venture Chuvalo as well but I'm not sure how his chin would rate at modern HW).

    • Tommo says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Loze Xivu]
      #6414 Tommo (2013-07-30th)

      I do think that old man George of the 90's had much better chin than his prime 70's self.

      • Honza says:
        flag
        [ip2username: Nisu Wagy]
        #6458 Honza (2013-08-10th)

        I don't think Foreman stands anything more than punchers chance against Wlad either but to say he has a doubtful chin against Wlad is not that credible. Imo he has one of the hardest chins all time at HW, up there with Holyfield, Puritty, McCall and Wilson. (I would venture Chuvalo as well but I'm not sure how his chin would rate at modern HW).
        Again I agree completely with you. And I really hate how admin is defending Wlad loss and claiming that George had bad one because he was koed by featherfisted Ali. Alos his judgment of Larry Holmes era as featherfisted because his ONE ko by MIKE TYSON is ridicilous. Hoiw many great fighters survived match with Mike and took same amount of punches as Larry? Very little.

  • gary adams says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Kamy Rone]
    #6427 gary adams (2013-08-01st)

    George Forman defended his title only twice. Mike Tyson defended it just 6 times. Joe Lewis got beat when he was young by Max Schmeling and also by Ezzard Charles who weighed about 185 lbs at the time. Joe Frazier got beat four times, twice by Ali and two times by George Forman. Rocky Marciano the only undefeated heavyweight fighter retired after only six title defenses and at 32 years of age. If he continued to fight he could have gotten beat by Floyd Patterson and for sure by Sonny Liston. So what if Klitschko got beat 3 times when he was younger. He is fighting much more effective now and has not been defeated in nearly 10 years. James Braddock lost 25 times as a professional fighter before becoming heavyweight champion of the world when he beat Max Bear in the mid 1930s. One man who he fought and lost too said to his manager the second time while losing "he is not the same fighter" DA-HE GOT BETTER! Some say Klitschko fights nobodys. Larry Homes defended his heavyweight title against the following fighters: Alfredo Evangelista-Lorenzo Zanon–Ossie Ocasio-James Smith–David Bey-Lucien Rodriquez–Marvis Frazier–Scott Frank–Leon Spinks–Randall Cobb–and an aging Ali. Mike Wever and Gerry Cooney were top rate contenders and could have become champion if not for Larry Homes. Cooney took out Ken Norton and Ron Lyle before the end of the second round. Forman and Tyson would have had their hands full against Larry Holmes in his prime. When Klitschko looses the title or retires is when an objective view of just how he ranks with the all time greats can be made.

  • Honza says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Revi Guta]
    #6484 Honza (2013-08-18th)

    Forman and Tyson would have had their hands full against Larry Holmes in his prime. When Klitschko looses the title or retires is when an objective view of just how he ranks with the all time greats can be made.
    Good points. I also agree that Wlads ability to move away from oponents punches are impressive.

  • Allen Wilson says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Mymo Vemi]
    #7607 Allen Wilson (2014-10-18th)

    This is pretty hilarious. When Foreman fought Mark Young, Everett Martin and Alex Schulz he was way older. Also he fought this guys first and Wladimir fought them years later. Also in the first fight with Martin Wlad went the distance with him.

    And none bums? Every fighter Wlad fights is a bum. He hand picks his opponents so he can keep the title longer.

    And because you come in to the ring fat like Same Peter that means you are naturally that weight?

    Clearly this guy is a Klitschko nutt hugger trying to build up a fighter he likes.

    • Tommo says:
      flag
      [ip2username: Luxa Xyso]
      #7728 Tommo (2014-11-30th)

      When Foreman fought these common opponents he was far heftier+stronger than his younger self and heftier and probably stronger than any version of Klitschko. He was also TWICE as experienced as Wladimir Klitschko was when he fought them!

      Wladimir Klitschko has not fought a single bum opponent since he won the title I can remember! Wladimir Klitschko IS NOT ALLOWED to fight bums! Unlike previous eras where bum were allowed in title fights! Nobody beat more quality HW opponents than Klitschko and counting.

      Wladimir Klitschko has fought the most diversified opponents of any boxer.

      Wladimir actively seeks out the more difficult opponents (such as undefeated opponents, southpaws which some boxers duck altogether.

      He fights mostly the best availabe opponent every time and the only forays from this have been to fight an unbeaten contender, a guy with some form of physical advantage,and once a stay busy fight against a former CW who stepped straight up who objectively was as good or better than any past HW boxer anyway!

      Samuel Peter came to fight Klitschko with a massive 6 pack bulging from his stomach if I remember rightly! Samuel Peter is built like a bull and has been ripped in many of his fights. Yes, Peter was at times chubby, of course. That's of no consequence! A HW boxer can be fat OR athletic, depending on style on other factors and is neither good nor bad so long as they are conditioned enough to win. Peter has an excellent record, it obviously didn't detract from him career wise!

      But the main reason your point here was dumb was because Peter would most likely smash out every single pre-80's ATG and any other boxer imaginable from that history.

      And even more important- There were chubby champs+contenders in every era (Frazier, Ali, Holmes and so on. In fact, through the whole history of boxing, there were MORE successful chubby HW boxers/champs than there were ATHLETIC ones!

      It's in limited weight divisions where athletic boxers are present exclusively because they all need to be about the same size and have to make weight!

      Your entire post was entire rubbish and utterly worthless! :roll:

      • Honza says:
        flag
        [ip2username: Nasy Voke]
        #7780 Honza (2014-12-29th)

        I have to say that Wlad hits extremely hard. That is true. George was never able to make his punches effectiveness to its fullest. He also does not have speed of Wlad. But he was always tougher I think. Took a lot of punishment in his career.
        And no Carl I am not retard if I think that George punching power is comperable to Wlads. And Vitali does not hit as hard as any of them. Just opinion. Opinion is better then trashing old timers because you dont like them.

  • Gary Adams says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Divu Pamy]
    #7797 Gary Adams (2015-01-13th)

    12 of Wladimir's opponents, when they fought him for the championship had, 305 wins and 4 losses for a 99% win loss record. 8 were undefeated and the other 4, had 1 loss each. They also had plenty of knockouts to their credit. Ali, Forman, Tyson, Holmes and L. Lewis do not even come close to matching a record like that. PERIOD What you Klitschko bashers do not seem to realize is that with his determination to improve, along with Emanual Stewards coaching, is that he kept on improving and he is STILL improving. He has hardly lost a round as well as not getting knocked down in nearly 10 years of championship fights. Along with his size and strength, his training and
    preparation is probably superior than any of the past heavyweight fighters mentioned in this article. Until recently he was never known to have a great left hook, just a excellent jab and a straight right. Well, look what he did to Pulev, with a powerful left hook. Some say he fights bums, well Joe Louis had the bum of the month club. The man Joe took the championship from (Jimmy Braddock had "25" losses and the rest of the men Joe fought in championship fights had between them 176 losses. As far as I am concerned, the record at the top of my article says it all!

  • Raymond says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Kose Kimu]
    #7856 Raymond (2015-03-29th)

    :-) Consider the fact that Wladimir Klitschko is 6'6, 246lbs and he fought in a different era than George Foreman, which means that todays fighters on average are more heavier and have more muscle definition than the fighters in George's era. You should consider making a more accurate data set which consist of 240lb+ fighters for Wladimir Klitschko. You can leave it the way it is for George Foreman considering that he was around 220lbs in his prime so 215lb+ opponents is fine.

  • Will says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Piwu Laky]
    #7899 Will (2015-06-17th)

    Damn you admin, for using math and statistics to make my heros of the 70s look like weak sparring partners! One thing I have to say about George is I don't think he ever ducked anyone. This is a very rare thing for a fighter. The only ATG fighter in the last half century that has a proven record of not ducking anyone is Ali. He took many fights that were clearly dangerous for him – most when he was passed his prime. Even ATGs like Holyfield ducked Lewis (along with many other fighters). I believe Mayweather ducked Pacquiao for years. And I would even argue Lewis ducked the Klitschkos after being shocked by being destroyed by Vitali (winning only on a technicality) -I say this because he retired the same night, fearing a rematch. My question is when another big skilled fighter comes along, will Klitschko ducked duck him?

    Klitschko's best asset is his size (height, reach, weight). He uses it 100% of the time. If he fights Tyson Fury, then he can't use his size to push him around in the ring, like he did Povetkin. BTW, Ali was criticized for grabbing and holding his opponents, but for the Wlad vs Povetkin fight, a lot of forums don't mention Wlad did the same thing. Tyson Fury, though, is a bit of an unknown at this stage, because he hasn't fought any great fighter yet (I wish he fought Haye). Time will tell. I'm looking forward to the Klitschko vs Fury fight, if Wlad doesn't retire or "duck" before then.

  • David says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Rode Lilu]
    #7901 David (2015-06-26th)

    I thought I would write out an objective assessment of George Foreman's first career, before he got slow, far and had a much lower work rate. I am then going to compare Foreman's first career to Wladimir's career, and see who is the hardest puncher. First I will present Foreman's stats.
    Foreman
    Sub 200 pound opponents 13/16 81% KO rate.
    200-214 pound opponents 12/14 86% KO rate.
    215-229 pound opponents 8/9 89% KO rate.
    230+ pound opponents 3/3 100% KO rate

    Foreman's KO rate in championship fights.
    3/4 75% KO rate.

    215+ KO rate against non-bums.
    6/7 86% KO rate.

    As you can see the heavier George Foreman's opponents the higher his KO rate. Which is contrary to what we are lead to believe on this site(it should be noted that Sonny Liston, and Wladimir himself preform better the heavier their opponents). Foreman unfortunately has a lack of championship fights, probably down to how he was treated on the lead up to the Ali fight, and how he was avoided after.

    Wladimir
    200-214 pound opponents 6/8 75%
    215-229 pound opponents 14/19 74%
    230+. Pound opponents 34/38 89%

    Wladimir's KO rate in championship fights.
    19/27 70% KO rate

    215+ KO rate against none-bums.
    36/42 86% KO rate.

    As you can see from these stats George Foreman clearly punches harder than Wladimir. Wladimir and Foreman both have a higher KO rate against heavier opponents. Also oddly they both preform better against non-bums than they do against their lighter opponents. Maybe the preformance and ability of the boxer have more to do with the quality of the fighter, than sheer mass as this site leads us to believe.

  • David Keir says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Zinu Zagy]
    #7904 David Keir (2015-07-02nd)

    I thought I would write out an objective assessment of George Foreman's first career, before he got slow, far and had a much lower work rate. I am then going to compare Foreman's first career to Wladimir's career, and see who is the hardest puncher. First I will present Foreman's stats.
    Foreman
    Sub 200 pound opponents 13/16 81% KO rate.
    200-214 pound opponents 12/14 86% KO rate.
    215-229 pound opponents 8/9 89% KO rate.
    230+ pound opponents 3/3 100% KO rate

    Foreman's KO rate in championship fights.
    3/4 75% KO rate.

    215+ KO rate against non-bums.
    6/7 86% KO rate.

    As you can see the heavier George Foreman's opponents the higher his KO rate. Which is contrary to what we are lead to believe on this site(it should be noted that Sonny Liston, and Wladimir himself preform better the heavier their opponents). Foreman unfortunately has a lack of championship fights, probably down to how he was treated on the lead up to the Ali fight, and how he was avoided after.

    Wladimir
    200-214 pound opponents 6/8 75%
    215-229 pound opponents 14/19 74%
    230+. Pound opponents 34/38 89%

    Wladimir's KO rate in championship fights.
    19/27 70% KO rate

    215+ KO rate against none-bums.
    36/42 86% KO rate.

    As you can see from these stats George Foreman clearly punches harder than Wladimir. Wladimir and Foreman both have a higher KO rate against heavier opponents. Also oddly they both preform better against non-bums than they do against their lighter opponents. Maybe the preformance and ability of the boxer have more to do with the quality of the fighter, than sheer mass as this site leads us to believe.
    You deleted facts from you site? Not very objective is it.

  • Call it analisis says:
    flag
    [ip2username: Rybo Gexi]
    #7905 Call it analisis (2015-07-04th)

    A Classic example of how manipolate data to have a long and totally inaccurate analysis.

    I stop reading to the second table, where is it clearly shown the opposite of the reality: the data suggest than wladimir had fought more no tomato can opponent than tyson and foreman.

    That was enought for me. Sorry that a 38 yrs old lennox lewis beat a prime vitali (stronger than wladimir). Sorry that in the last decade the HW DIVISION IS RIDICOLOUS when at the time of foreman was the most competitive of all time. But looking to your number it seems the


  • Write a comment

    :wink: :twisted: :roll: :oops: :mrgreen: :lol: :idea: :evil: :cry: :arrow: :?: :-| :-x :-o :-P :-D :-? :-) :( :!: 8-O 8-)
    Terms of Service, Privacy Policy, Cookies