Is KO percentage overrated when it comes to evaluating a boxer's punching power?

[Mr Objecitivity]

I don't feel like you read my post.

Are you sure this was meant for me? Didn't click the wrong fella with a similar message?

I'll give you an example:


So you see....not much for me to say really. I could ask you what you think you're arguing about but outside of that....this is semantics and what you take issue with can be attributed to word choice because my paragraph and your paragraph have the exact same point.


I'd say the last bit on the paragraph:



Is very silly. It's irrelevant to how they deliver their power not the existence of or potential of the power....silly boy.



I'm surprised you're unaware. It's a very famous study done by the US Army.



Basic physics and kinesiology? Bubba that's about equal to a .44 or low end .50 at the muzzle. Ask your doctor how much energy it takes to break bones and he'll waffle with some piss poor explanation about different people having different densities. That's true, but the variances are from like 10 joules to 30 joules. If you ask him ok, but is 1254 joules of energy enough to consider deadly for all men? He will tell you yes. There is variance and so answers to questions like "how much energy to kill a man" are not easy to give, but, there are limits and 925ft-lbs or 1254 Joules far exceeds them. When finding out Marciano had a 925ft-lbs punch the question is not can men take that energy it is how does Marciano deliver that energy without injuring himself? Kinematic chains is the answer but that's another tale.



Seems in support of the first paragraph. Even with more details I do not see how or why you think this is in anyway counter intuitive to my point.

Raw maximum punching power is irrelevant ALONE when judging a boxer's knockout ability. Power, combined with offensive skills are what is relevant. Offensive skills such as speed, accuracy, timing, angles, positioning and etc.

So yes, raw power is ONLY relevant if combined with the complete offensive skill set.


Yes, I'm aware of those studies. But where is the actual proof that Marciano can punch with that much force? What measuring instrument was used? How many times did he punch with that much force? Were there any faulty readings? These are the questions that have to be asked to determine the reliability of that study.

You're speculating heavily here! It's entirely possible that the most durable boxers like Mariusz Wach and Oliver McCall possess the durability to take Marciano's best punches (he can possibly deliver safely and practically).

My point was, the boxer who outperforms another boxer in MORE stats in a particular area, that boxer is better in that area.

For example, if boxer A has a higher KO percentage than boxer B, but boxer b has knocked out more top 10 ranked opponents, more previously undefeated opponents, more previously UN-KO'ed opponents and etc. Then I'd infer boxer B to be the better knockout puncher / knockout artist. Since he outperforms boxer A in more stats whilst boxer A only outperforms boxer B in only one stat (knockout percentage).

If you agree with this argument of mine, then that's good! It mean we're both in the same page! I just mentioned that argument again to further elaborate my point for clarity purposes.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

Yes. Look at Vitali Klitschko. He wasn't a 1 punch KO artist.

I definitely agree with this.