Why do people think Thomas Hearns would beat Floyd so easily?

Well hearns had lots of his best tools nullified vs Benitez, but still came out clear winner. He didnt get flustered or frustrated because he wasnt landing much (like a lot of Floyds opposition did) he just went about his business winning rounds. Thats the mental fortitude that i am talking about Need to see more Benitez fights, but Floyd's arguably got a deeper tool bag to work with than Benitez did. Genaro Hernandez had a 72" reach, Oscar De La Hoya had a 73" reach, yet Floyd was able to find different ways to neutralize both fighters. 78" reach is definitely a lot of reach, but cutting off a long-range fighter generally utilizes the same tactics, whether that fighter be coming from 73" of longer.

I'm not calling Hearns the underdog in the fight; it'd be a 50/50 fight, with Hearns likely the slight favorite with the bookies. Personally, I think you're overstating the resolve of some ATG fighters; not sure if there's a Hearns to show this, but how would Hearns react if he's unable to get that big right hand home? How would he react if Floyd was able to consistently cut his jab short? Diego Corralles isn't an all-time great, but once Floyd took his primary weapons away, he had no idea what else to do and fell apart. Hearns likely has more fortitude than that, but I don't think that there's a fight to point to, where the tools weren't effective, yet he still found a way to get to the W fighting differently. Floyd is going to come to the table, for any fight, with three or four different styles to use, with extra little tricks in the pocket if certain little things don't work in the styles. Well hearns had lots of his best tools nullified vs Benitez, but still came out clear winner. He didnt get flustered or frustrated because he wasnt landing much (like a lot of Floyds opposition did) he just went about his business winning rounds. Thats the mental fortitude that i am talking about

I'm a huge, huge Floyd fan and would give Floyd the benefit of the doubt in any fight where him and his opponent are of similar height, and even those who are 10-15lbs bigger than him. But unfortunately for Floyd in this fantasy fight, Tommy Hearns never lost to such relatively small fighter. Hagler was the shortest one he lost to, at 5'9"-5'10" and he was a true Middleweight, and had the MW size. SRL was long, and he was not a short guy at 5'10", and big enough to go up to 168 and beat a top 10 ranked contender there. Iran Barkely was pretty much identical in height and probably bigger than Hearns. Hearns never lost to anyone he had the significant height AND weight/reach advantage to in his career. At 5'8" vs 6'1" and 150lbs vs IDK what weight Hearns was in the ring but I imagine he was not a small guy in there. Much longer reach as well at almost 80". A win over Hearns would have made Floyd the greatest fighter in the history of combat sport, an even bigger icon than Ali or Bruce Lee. It would have just been too much to overcome.

Hearrns had that reach and could thump, but he never fought anyone like Floyd.

Floyd matches up well with lots of great welterweights. Hearns isn't one of them. He doesn't punch enough, or hard enough, to overcome the physical elements of the fight. Might avoid getting stopped. Wouldn't avoid the L. I think Floyd is clever and skilled enough to go the distance. Especially after he realizes that's the best possible outcome for him.

Floyd matches up well with lots of great welterweights. Hearns isn't one of them. He doesn't punch enough, or hard enough, to overcome the physical elements of the fight. Might avoid getting stopped. Wouldn't avoid the L.

Tough fight considering size, power and style. Hearns had an underrated jab and power. It would be a truly great fight but the edge goes to Hearns but I would never count Mayweather out!

Hearns is one of the hardest punchers P4P. Factor that in with a size advantage and he'd pressure Floyd way too much.

You don't see the lack of logic in your own statement? No. All my opinions are based on logic.

Lil Floyd didn't want nothing to do with Paul williams and he was no tommy hearns... floyd whole career will be labeled as the fighter who only fought who he wanted and not who he should,ve. They'll even throw in the accusations of the ped use as well. Tommy beats lil Floyd with only the left jab for 12 rounds.

I think this is true, and a good point. But where some (not all) Floyd fans come unstuck is they seem to think that this isnt the same for all ATG's throughout history. Some of them came up against multiple opponents who all had that same attitude too. Hearns would not go into the Mayweather fight thinking he was an underdog, or that he might lose. He would go in fully prepared, thinking he would win. If he fell behind he would try to do whatever he could to dig out the W, just like you say floyd would. I'm not calling Hearns the underdog in the fight; it'd be a 50/50 fight, with Hearns likely the slight favorite with the bookies. Personally, I think you're overstating the resolve of some ATG fighters; not sure if there's a Hearns to show this, but how would Hearns react if he's unable to get that big right hand home? How would he react if Floyd was able to consistently cut his jab short? Diego Corralles isn't an all-time great, but once Floyd took his primary weapons away, he had no idea what else to do and fell apart. Hearns likely has more fortitude than that, but I don't think that there's a fight to point to, where the tools weren't effective, yet he still found a way to get to the W fighting differently. Floyd is going to come to the table, for any fight, with three or four different styles to use, with extra little tricks in the pocket if certain little things don't work in the styles.

If you're happy to dismiss his actions, that's fine. But they're relevant to this thread. Because it's completely illogic(al) to think that Floyd would have fought Tommy in the manner Ray did, when he wouldn't even fight Manny in 2010. If Floyd had been around in the 80's, he'd have taken more vacations than Clark Griswold. You don't see the lack of logic in your own statement?

I'll just repeat what I said before: If you're happy to dismiss his actions, that's fine. But they're relevant to this thread. Because it's completely illogic to think that Floyd would have fought Tommy in the manner Ray did, when he wouldn't even fight Manny in 2010. If Floyd had been around in the 80's, he'd have taken more vacations than Clark Griswold.

I dont take that kind of thing into consideration with fantasy fights :dunno: Fair enough.

I've heard people say, hypothetically, if Floyd and Hearns had met in their prime that Hearns would have destroyed him via knockout. I get Hearns has the height advantage and could potentially out jab him but why do people think it would be such an easy win for Hearns. Floyd is crafty, I think he would figure Hearns out and avoid his right hand, plus putting some lead rights himself. The only guy I could see beat Floyd out of the fab 4 is Sugar Ray Leonard. Have you even watched Hearns? Go watch Hearns-SRL and you will see why people say that. Hearns jab is way better than mayweathers, theres no way youve ever watched hearns. Hearns was outboxing SRL for the majority of their fight and his handspeed is very good, didnt have any trouble keeping up with SRL.

If the short armed PAC was able to connect a few shots on Floyd, hearns world have blasted Floyd out. 6 ft 1 inch height, long arms and ver fast. He would have smashed Floyd. If Floyd was hurt by Mosley.....

I've taken into account what you've said. Where I've said to you "I don't care..." it's not because I'm not willing to read your opinions because I'm being rude, it's because there's a world of difference between fighting a young Canelo and a faded Shane, to fighting the freak of nature which was a peak Tommy Hearns. If you think he'd have signed for the fight and put everything on the line like Ray did, then that's fine. Personally, after taking into account how he's behaved over the years, I think there'd be more chance of me winning the lottery over the weekend. He wouldn't fight Manny when it mattered, he wouldn't rematch Oscar for huge money, he couldn't stick to his agreement with JMM, he wouldn't fight Canelo at JMW, and he expects us to believe that he was so dehydrated in May, that he needed an enormous amount of saline at home? You think that same man would have put himself on the line like Ray did against a peak Tommy Hearns at WW? You really think that's realistic? How are you going to ignore all of the above? Are those the actions of a guy who'd have fought Tommy Hearns? It just makes me laugh. I'll just repeat what I said before: And that's the difference between us when discussing how PBF would respond: my 'opinion' is based on in-ring observable actions under similar situations over the course of a 20 year career, and your 'opinion' ignores all that and appears to be driven by emotions due to feeling some kind of way based on alleged out-of-ring stuff. But hey, you're entitled to your opinion too.

Hearns is tall, very long reach, great jab and power. He would have killed Floyd.

What makes anyone think that Floyd would have taken a Hearns fight? I dont take that kind of thing into consideration with fantasy fights :dunno:

I think this is true, and a good point. But where some (not all) Floyd fans come unstuck is they seem to think that this isnt the same for all ATG's throughout history. Some of them came up against multiple opponents who all had that same attitude too. Hearns would not go into the Mayweather fight thinking he was an underdog, or that he might lose. He would go in fully prepared, thinking he would win. If he fell behind he would try to do whatever he could to dig out the W, just like you say floyd would. What makes anyone think that Floyd would have taken a Hearns fight?