Question.....Who hits harder, Bruno, Ruddock. or Wladimir??????

So I guess as fan's perspective is better than someone that was actually in the ring with both guys twice.(?$%#@) It's true, shots affect different fighters differently. It would be interesting what someone like Marcus Rhode, or someone who fought a lot of these guys would say. I'd think their opinions would have merit. They'd be at least as good as a fans. No, that's my point its all open to conjecture, isn't it? Tyson may have though Ruddock hit harder whilst Lewis may have felt Bruno did, however that's interesting considering Tyson was seriously wobbled by Bruno in their first fight. A fan can only observe, my observation was that Bruno had the harder shots. Tyson m

Tyson didn't really get hit by Bruno though. Ruddock was much more skilled and accurate and he was able to hit Tyson unlike Bruno. Bruno didn't have a good uppercut to catch Tyson with. Those looping right hand bombs just won't hit someone like Tyson. Ruddock's uppercut is destructive. But Bruno had power in his jabs, hooks, everything. Too bad he was slow as smoke. Bruno hits Tyson at 2:40 but Tyson keeps swinging. Agreed, Bruno was that fearful that he came in tight on both occasions, Tyson as he did with many won the fight even before a punch was thrown. Plus you cannot really compare what one fighter against another based on what an opponent said, I mean Bruno pushed Lewis all over the ring with his jabs whilst Lewis destroyed Ruddock. Each fighter/style is different.

Not only do you think you're a Boxing Historian, now you're telling me you're more mature than a grown man like me? Please, for the love of God cut the nonsense for once and stop thinking you're something you aren't. All you have to look at is the way you post. Remember when you "went out of character" and posted a dozen childish "owned" smileys thinking you accomplished something against me?(And right after that were completely outdebated as the other posters confirmed, not your fantasy world) and how you tried to piss me off lately with more of your smileys and failed. Also, when I responded to everything you claimed about Tyson you gave a brilliant comeback like "Ahh you're just another Tyson nuthugger" as an excuse every time. THAT is what's immature son. The only reason i'm bothering with you is because 1- You dissrespected me from the beginning thinking i'm nothing more than just another Tyson homer(Even though the credible people that aren't newbies like you know i'm an objective unbiasd Tyson fan and respect me) and 2- Your idiotic arguments filled with contradicting, biased rants and lastly 3- You think you are the most knowledgeable and mature poster here when frankly you've been exposed a lot of times already, so you are not what you think you are. Sorry to say it, but I can't deal with people like you. PS-I never directly insulted you personally. I look at your posts here and judge on that, my posts about you have been accurate. You think they're insults because again, you think you're so smart. Again, its not that serious man, really. We come on here to discuss boxing, not insult each other. Also, give me a link to a debate where i did not give back details and spported the facts that i gave. I have never repeatedly called you a nuthugger in a debate. :ugh: When i asked you to give me a great fighter that Tyson beat, you give me Larry Holmes (past his prime) Toney Tucker (not great at all) and Tyrell Biggs. (not great at all). Come on, tell me how that is being a knowledgeable poster? Instead of admitting that he has never beaten a great fighter in his prime, you just continue desperatley posting and repeating yourself instead of admitting that he has not beat anyone great. None of my post ridiculous at all. I say that Tua and Byrd was on the level of prime Tyson and you reply by calling me an idiot? That just sounds like a frustrated poster. Just look at Tysons resume, its no better than Byrds or Tua's. Chris Byrd= a two time heavyweight champ. David Tua= has knocked out about 5 world champions. Sooooooooooo how is Tyson on a different level than either of them? With a fighter like Tyson that has not had any set backs and has had a full career, there is no excuses for him. He is only as good as what his resume shows. He simply did not have the heart to be a dominate champion. A great fighter to watch in his prime no doubt. Great skill, power, speed, and brilliant combinations, especially when he was with Cus. He just has those problems.

Mike Tyson, who fought both Bruno and Ruddock said the Ruddock was the hardest puncher he faced. He fought them both TWICE now that you mention it.

Tyson didn't really get hit by Bruno though. Ruddock was much more skilled and accurate and he was able to hit Tyson unlike Bruno. Bruno didn't have a good uppercut to catch Tyson with. Those looping right hand bombs just won't hit someone like Tyson. Ruddock's uppercut is destructive. But Bruno had power in his jabs, hooks, everything. Too bad he was slow as smoke. Bruno hits Tyson at 2:40 but Tyson keeps swinging.

Watched more fights? The dude seriously needs to go look at my posted collection in Video Trading Black LOL! Notice, Yaman, how he dodged my refutation and made the same discredited claim that I don't like today's fighters. I think that narrows things down a bit more: By "today's fighters" he really means the Klitschko's and no others. Is there a better example of a closet nuthugger than Southpaw? Yaman an I the same person? LOL! While we have a mutual respect for one another we dissagree on certain things: I'm not a Tyson fan and he is. The difference? I don't demean him and call him stupid for being a Tyson fan and he doesn't me for not being one. Who's the mature ones here? The truth is Southpaw we're laughing at you now because the contortions you go through in every post is truly hysterical. Poet Exactly, this kid doesn't know how to debate. Especially with established knowledgable posters. The key to a friendly debate is 1-Respect for ALL fighters. So no bias against classic or modern fighters, and 2-Respect to the fellow poster. No name calling like "nuthugger" when he's defending an old fighter. This kid doesn't know how to do any of these and has posted things beyond redicilous.

And you claim to be an adult? man seriously, grow up. Its really not that serious. Im half your age and alot more mature than you are. Also, why would i take anything from your posts when its all BS? Thats actually just laughable. I might welcome you to my ignore list but i shouldn't even waste that much time on you. With the time that i waste trading insults with your no knowledge having self, i could be dicussing the upcoming fights with knowledgeable boxing fans who actually knows how to dicuss boxing without giving childish insults and acting like a child. Its laughable the way you act like this because i expose you in every debate we ever had, just get over it.:nonono: :nonono: :nonono: Not only do you think you're a Boxing Historian, now you're telling me you're more mature than a grown man like me? Please, for the love of God cut the nonsense for once and stop thinking you're something you aren't. All you have to look at is the way you post. Remember when you "went out of character" and posted a dozen childish "owned" smileys thinking you accomplished something against me?(And right after that were completely outdebated as the other posters confirmed, not your fantasy world) and how you tried to piss me off lately with more of your smileys and failed. Also, when I responded to everything you claimed about Tyson you gave a brilliant comeback like "Ahh you're just another Tyson nuthugger" as an excuse every time. THAT is what's immature son. The only reason i'm bothering with you is because 1- You dissrespected me from the beginning thinking i'm nothing more than just another Tyson homer(Even though the credible people that aren't newbies like you know i'm an objective unbiasd Tyson fan and respect me) and 2- Your idiotic arguments filled with contradicting, biased rants and lastly 3- You think you are the most knowledgeable and mature poster here when frankly you've been exposed a lot of times already, so you are not what you think you are. Sorry to say it, but I can't deal with people like you. PS-I never directly insulted you personally. I look at your posts here and judge on that, my posts about you have been accurate. You think they're insults because again, you think you're so smart.

Agreed Frank Bruno is the most powerful. Bruno could send his opponents flying out of their shoes.

Big Frank Bruno. Technique wasn't the best but sheer power nicks it against these two.

Bruno then Ruddock then Wlad.

If we are talking about single punch power than in my opinion it has to be Bruno. The guy didn't have the technique of some or speed of others but he had thunderous power, he would almost drive his opponents into the canvas. Wlad and Ruddock are obviously huge hitters but I look at Bruno and put him beside Foreman and Shavers for raw power.

Right, and as you were saying before, when these clowns are being put in their place they'll try to switch their argument and call YOU biased, a fanboy etc. And when he is put in his place and exposed yet again he'll become even more desperate and he'll call YOU a troll, threathen to put YOU on ignore lol. I'll tell you what, southpaw should be someone's parrot, because the kid repeats anything he picks up from my posts. And slicksouthpaw, you can do whatever the hell you want in this situation. I don't care. But you won't get away with your same old bullshit as well as trying to put dirt on my name behind my back. Nothing slips by for me. And you claim to be an adult? man seriously, grow up. Its really not that serious. Im half your age and alot more mature than you are. Also, why would i take anything from your posts when its all BS? Thats actually just laughable. I might welcome you to my ignore list but i shouldn't even waste that much time on you. With the time that i waste trading insults with your no knowledge having self, i could be dicussing the upcoming fights with knowledgeable boxing fans who actually knows how to dicuss boxing without giving childish insults and acting like a child. Its laughable the way you act like this because i expose you in every debate we ever had, just get over it.:nonono: :nonono: :nonono:

Although I agree that wlad would have a good chance against marciano due to his height and reach, Sam Peter would not beat marciano. Marciano was a great champion but he was lucky to come around when the division was weak and filled with blown up light heavyweights and good fighters that were past thier prime. Peter would overwelme the smaller and slower marciano with his power and size. Marciano only weighed about 190 to 200 at his best and when two trucks colide, the bigger truck always win unless the smaller trucks knows how to box and move.lol Had he stayed a little while longer, he would have been beaten badly by Ali and stopped on cuts, or he would have been beaten and possibly stopped by Liston.

Oh I've heard quite a bit of his speel from my encounter with him (that was on his "Klitschko would cream a prime Foreman" thread). Somehow I seriously doubt this dude is 25 or older. More like 18 to 20 would be accurate. In anycase not even I came out of the womb watching the fights so I think his "25 years of boxing knowledge" can be safely put down as yet another Southpaw inaccuracy. His biggest problem is that I seriously doubt he's even WATCHED fighters form more than 10 years ago. Considering the cornacopia of fight film available in the Video Trading Block forum that makes such a state no more than a case of willfull ignornance or inexcusable laziness. Poet Right, and as you were saying before, when these clowns are being put in their place they'll try to switch their argument and call YOU biased, a fanboy etc. And when he is put in his place and exposed yet again he'll become even more desperate I have watched more fights and knows alot more about boxing than the both of you, although i really think that this is the same person talking to themselves. The Poet version is biased and not open to todays fighters at all. The Yaman version is a Tyson junkie and thinks hes the greatest fighter of all time, its simply laughable. I dont even waste my time on posters like you. I am really considering not ever responding to you again. :fing02: and he'll call YOU a troll, threathen to put YOU on ignore lol. I'll tell you what, southpaw should be someone's parrot, because the kid repeats anything he picks up from my posts. And slicksouthpaw, you can do whatever the hell you want in this situation. I don't care. But you won't get away with your same old bullshit as well as trying to put dirt on my name behind my back. Nothing slips by for me.

Indeed, you're right about them being biased about fighters in general. Perhaps these guys lack so much knowledge on the sport they just judge everything as a fanboy(One that has only watched Boxing for a year or 1-3). There's so much hypocricy, hate, bias etc in their arguments it becomes virtually impossible to have a sane discussion with these clowns. It's best to put them on ignore, they might even be trolls too. This kid southpaw in particular is a desperate case. You know he actually told me has knowledge worth of 25 years? LOL. You don't even want to know about some of the other stuff he said, but perhaps you'll have a good laugh so i'll leave it at that. Oh I've heard quite a bit of his speel from my encounter with him (that was on his "Klitschko would cream a prime Foreman" thread). Somehow I seriously doubt this dude is 25 or older. More like 18 to 20 would be accurate. In anycase not even I came out of the womb watching the fights so I think his "25 years of boxing knowledge" can be safely put down as yet another Southpaw inaccuracy. His biggest problem is that I seriously doubt he's even WATCHED fighters form more than 10 years ago. Considering the cornacopia of fight film available in the Video Trading Block forum that makes such a state no more than a case of willfull ignornance or inexcusable laziness. Poet I have watched more fights and knows alot more about boxing than the both of you, although i really think that this is the same person talking to themselves. The Poet version is biased and not open to todays fighters at all. The Yaman version is a Tyson junkie and thinks hes the greatest fighter of all time, its simply laughable. I dont even waste my time on posters like you. I am really considering not ever responding to you again. :fing02:

You see, Yaman, they're shifty because you can't pin them down as having bias toward specific fighters. Their bias is MUCH more general than that: They're biased toward today's fighters in general. Their dislike of older fighters is palpable as well (see them_apples). Dispute their claims and they turn around and accuse YOU of bias. Witness the comments that I hate all modern fighters. I suppose that being a fan of Hopkins, Jones, Lewis, Mosely, Calzage, De La Hoya, Castillo, and Tszyu is showing my "hatred" of modern fighters. Unless, of course, by there definition modern starts with the Klitschkos. Like you I answered every claim this joker made and he simply ignored my answers because he didn't like them. Who's the poor debater here? I know of no rules of debate where people like him are allowed to cherry pick what he has to respond to. If you're dodging the counter-arguments you're LOSING. Then again, after all, it's all Southpaw's opinions isn't it? Well, opinions are like toilet paper: You can wipe your ass with most people's. At this point Southpaw must be pretty brown don't you think? Poet Indeed, you're right about them being biased about fighters in general. Perhaps these guys lack so much knowledge on the sport they just judge everything as a fanboy(One that has only watched Boxing for a year or 1-3). There's so much hypocricy, hate, bias etc in their arguments it becomes virtually impossible to have a sane discussion with these clowns. It's best to put them on ignore, they might even be trolls too. This kid southpaw in particular is a desperate case. You know he actually told me has knowledge worth of 25 years? LOL. You don't even want to know about some of the other stuff he said, but perhaps you'll have a good laugh so i'll leave it at that.

Rocky would roid himself up to 260 pounds these days. He would be a beast.

I agree, Marciano would get ate up by the likes of Wladimir, Peter, and Vitali. Rocky was a small heavyweight to begin with so matching well against a 6'6 recking ball is something that i dont see happening. Absolutely. If people could see what Rocky would actually look like in a ring facing these guys they would back off their predictions pretty quickly. The first thing that would come to mind is "gross mismatch".

Say what you want about Tommy's chin but he had one of the best left hooks in boxing history. I would say power wise they were all about equal including Morrison...

Are you saying that someone like 5'10 188 lb Marciano would dominate todays heavyweights? I agree, Marciano would get ate up by the likes of Wladimir, Peter, and Vitali. Rocky was a small heavyweight to begin with so matching well against a 6'6 recking ball is something that i dont see happening. Today's division os garbage. Any top 20 heavyweight would dominate today's division. That's my point. I wouldn't call it garbage. care to name the top 20 heavyweights that would dominate today?