View Single Post
#8
Old 11-30-2012, 02:48 PM
Exciterx30
El Intocable Bass Machine
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Puerto Rico
Age: 31
Posts: 3,998
Rep Power: 38 Exciterx30 has a reputation beyond reputeExciterx30 has a reputation beyond reputeExciterx30 has a reputation beyond reputeExciterx30 has a reputation beyond reputeExciterx30 has a reputation beyond reputeExciterx30 has a reputation beyond reputeExciterx30 has a reputation beyond reputeExciterx30 has a reputation beyond reputeExciterx30 has a reputation beyond reputeExciterx30 has a reputation beyond reputeExciterx30 has a reputation beyond repute
Points: 44,630.30
Bank: 360,167,668,210.18
Total Points: 360,167,712,840.48
For being an objective poster! - TintaBoricua 
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by raskat View Post
no, it didnt bother me. but it triggered something. Cause I been reading the same stuff here for a long long time. Hearns would be the one to beat Pacquiao. Or "Hearns would beat Mayweather."
Or Hearns would beat everybody.
So many people don't even understand that Hearns lost almost all his big fights in his own era. And now suddenly Hearns would beat everybody from OTHER ERAS? this is crazy. If the opponents of his own era could overcome Hearns' skills and everything he brought to the table, then what makes you think people from other eras couldn't do that?
Okay, I'll give it another shot and, by the way, I'm not a fanboy of any fighter. I just call it like I see it and I could be wrong. I just mentioned Hearns and Jones, any other fighters are not relevant to the original discussion. I think that, based on styles, Hearns vs. Jones would a be a competitive fight that could go either way. I also mentioned that Hagler, stylistically speaking, is the toughest matchup for Jones. I could be wrong, but that's how I see it.
Reply With Quote
Exciterx30 is offline