I love how everybody says "Tommy Hearns would beat this guy and that guy blablabla"

[raskat]

Originally Posted by onetwopunch

Iran Barkley, Hearns was past his prime loosing to Hagler and Leonard?...so he lost to possibly 2 of the best middleweights to ever lace them up..thats nothing to be ashamed about. He beat Benitez and Duran thats enough to rank him up there with the best...He is not overated at all..

okay. so how is Leonard " one of best middleweights of all times"? He only had a few fights at middleweight.

Originally Posted by Mato o Muero

I kind of agree with you. His height and length would give any welterweight problems, but I think sometimes people just assume he'd beat everybody because of it. He did lose to shorter guys he wasn't unbeatable. Hearns was great though.

exactly. Hearns was not unbeatable at all. So you can't just look at his reach and size and say he would beat everybody. cause he wouldnt. and he didnt.

[Jel]

Originally Posted by raskat

I just read again how a guy said "the only guy I can see give Roy Jones trouble is Tommy Hearns". I see it all the time here: nobody could beat Mayweather, but Tommy Hearns maybe.
Or: Hearns would kill Pacquiao. Hearns would beat this guy, and that guy and blablablabala.
listen guys: Hearns was a good fighter. but. he lost all his big fights. against Hagler and against Ray Leonard. and Iran Barkley iced him twice. So pleeaaassseee stop overrating Hearns. thank you.
Do I think he can give a lot of guys big troubles? Yes. Do I think he would beat everybody from other eras? hell no. He lost the big fights in his own era. Knocking out a Duran who moved up in weight doesn't do it for me. Hearns is wayyyy overrated here on this site.

You are a absolute ****ing moron.
Not one person said Hearns was unbeatable past 154.

What everyone do say is that
Hearns at 147-154 was ALMOST unbeatable. His stats prove it.
He lost once from 147-154 and had a 98% ko ratio.

After 154. he was very beatable and everyone knew it.

But nobody outside of Leonard/Robinson can beat Hearns at 147-154.

He was a 6'2 freak of nature at 147-154 towering over people who came up to his chest. He will literally destroy Pacquaio and he will hit Floyd so hard Floyd goes into instant 'make it to final bell=victory' mode.

He was not a 6'2 Paul Williams though. He was a 6'2 fighter who had great boxing skills,great power,movement.speed,jab,and heart.

He lost once at his true weight division and that was to Leonard.
He was never down on the cards from 147-154. In 34+ fights.

He was almost untouchable at his prime weight classes. After 154.. Of course he's beatable.
That's like saying Roy was 'beatable' at CW.

[Jel]

Floyd at 5'8 against a Prime Hearns will stand face to chest at the weight in and literally regress on the spot because he will feel like a midget.

Once again , Hearns only lost once from 147-154. That was his true weight class.

The fuking retarded TS bringing up 160+ is pathetic. He was just a good fighter 160+. He was a supreme ATG from 147-154 and will beat Pacquaio to death.


Pacquaio is a GREAT very little man
Floyd is a GREAT little man
Hearns was a GREAT Big man.
When everything else is the same or roughly the same
(power,skills,etc) The great big man usually comes out on top, with the exception of pure stylistic mismatches (ala tyson-wlad)>

[raskat]

okay so you guys say Hearns was unbeatable at welterweight. so then tell me who did Hearns beat at welterweight? normal fighters with normal records (no disrespect to them, but thats how it is). Cuevas was the only one he beat who was well known, then Hearns lost to the first real big name which is Leonard. end of story. period.

[JDezi4]

First of all, Hearns' era was the GREATEST ERA IN ALL OF BOXING HISTORY

So for him to lose to fighters in his own era, is by no means an indication that he would lose to fighters in other eras

Anybody that says he would beat Robinson isn't very smart, Robinson KO'd some of the toughest chins in boxing, so he would knock Hearns head off

But to sit there and act like 5'6" Manny Pacquiao could even land on Hearns? U think Floyd could make Hearns miss enough times to win a UD (or even make it to a decision)

U, sir, have just embarrassed yourself

[JDezi4]

He's the only guy to make Duran piss his pants, and he's the only guy Pryor ever ducked...

[Jel]

Originally Posted by raskat

okay so you guys say Hearns was unbeatable at welterweight. so then tell me who did Hearns beat at welterweight? normal fighters with normal records (no disrespect to them, but thats how it is). Cuevas was the only one he beat who was well known, then Hearns lost to the first real big name which is Leonard. end of story. period.

Are you ****ing serious? What is it you are trying to say?
The first real big name just happens to be the 2nd greatest WW of all times.

So what are you trying to say ******?

That Hearns will lose to Pacquaio and Floyd? Grow some balls .Make a poll.
You discrediting Hearns seem to be you spewing out your agenda on either Pac or Floyd.

Who the **** did Floyd beat at ww? Who the **** did Floyd beat from 147-154 that indicate he could even survive 12 against Hearns? Much less win the fight.

Who the **** did Pacquaio beat at WW?

[A.K.A]

Manny gets Ko'd, Mayweather could lose a UD if he makes it a point to stay away from Hearns early and Roy knocks him out.

[Harry Balls]

Pac and Floyd won't even fight Martinez what make you think they would've fought Hearns?

[raskat]

here we go. hearns is the best. hearns would kill pacquiao. hearns would kill floyd. Just as I said. everybody here thinks hearns is the greatest welterweight of all time. based on WHAT?? based on losing to a top 15 welterweight all time? okay.
btw some guy just said Leonard is the 2nd greatest welterweight of all time. hahahahaha. he is not. Leonard is so great cause of his overall resumè, not "just" or BECAUSE of his welterweight reign.