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

[NChristo]

He cracked the SHEYIT outta Hagler and thought he could finish him early....instead he broke his hand trying to brawl and was a little too light in the ass for one of the 3 greatest MW of all time. If he boxed he woulda beat him.

He didn't choose to brawl him, Hagler made him fight, if Hearns had 'boxed' the outcome would of been exactly the same.

[BigStereotype]

He suffered brutal knockout losses to two top 20 fighters before he fought Barkley, I wouldn't hold those fights against him too much. And his length, speed, height, boxing ability and POWER present a lot of matchup problems for most fighters who aren't Marvin Hagler and Sugar Ray Leonard. Could he beat Ray Robinson? I wouldn't pick it, but he'd have as good a shot as anyone. And he WOULD beat guys like Pacquiao and Mayweather. Pacquiao is too open to the right hand (yeah, that wouldn't bite him against Tommy Hearns) and I can't see Mayweather being able to close distance enough to make any significant contact. To get to Hearns, you had to be willing to walk through hell and it's not that Mayweather isn't willing to od that, it's just not how he has the best chance to beat you. He'd have to counter over the top of Hearns' jab, which is next to impossible. I don't know why, but something about the rhythm of his jab just seems to hypnotize people. Leonard himself was having an immense amount of difficulty figuring it out.

[crold1]

Ihe lost all his big fights

except Cuevas, Duran, Benitez, Andries, Hill and the Leonard rematch.

Sure.

Whatever.

I'll disagree on the Floyd/Benitez comparison in thread. Mayweather doesn't quite match the Benitez output and Benitez was much younger than a Jr. Middle Floyd would have been. I think Hearns is just the 1000% wrong match for Floyd or Manny. Manny would get starched. Mayweather would lose by a wide decision. So did Benitez for the most part...just think it would look different.

[rightsideup]

this thread has inspired alot of passion. I just think tommy is a very good fighter. It comes down to eras. Sure tommy has some losses
but he was a physical freak combining speed reach and power. He was also very dedicated to his craft which I mean is he was usally in top physical and mental shape prior to his match. He also recieved top notch coaching from manny stewart. Losing to hagler and leonard is no disgrace. Knocking out duran even though roberto was a built up lightweight he had a hell of a chin and carried enough power to go the distance with hagler and leonard is a feat that can not be over looked. He followed a excellent fight plan to a perfection.

His one weakness was the strength in his legs which made him tire and he may not have had the ability of some his excellent rivals like leonard and hagler to take a punch. The barkley losses are something that is hard for me explain. Thats why I call tommy very good not great. He was no sugar ray robinson but he was entertaining and fought the best of a strong era in boxing history.

[Japanese Boxing]

You don't think Hearns would kill Pac? If Hearns was around today Floyd and Pac would not be messing around at 154 or even 147.

Nobody knows how Hearns vs Pac would go. I realllllllllly dislike Pacquaio but Hearns couldn't take a lot of hits. If Pac got in a few times who's to say Hearns would be alright?

I would favor Hearns, but that's based off of their skill sets. If everything each fighter wanted to happen did in the fight then I can't say whether or not his his line would be reflective of the fight itself.

[Capaedia]

Nobody knows how Hearns vs Pac would go. I realllllllllly dislike Pacquaio but Hearns couldn't take a lot of hits. If Pac got in a few times who's to say Hearns would be alright?

I would favor Hearns, but that's based off of their skill sets. If everything each fighter wanted to happen did in the fight then I can't say whether or not his his line would be reflective of the fight itself.

It took Ray Leonard 14 rounds to get in enough hits to take down Hearns. Up until then he was being outboxed.

Leonard was smarter, stronger, bigger (with longer range), a harder puncher and just as fast. Just overall better.

[crold1]

Nobody knows how Hearns vs Pac would go. I realllllllllly dislike Pacquaio but Hearns couldn't take a lot of hits. If Pac got in a few times who's to say Hearns would be alright?

I would favor Hearns, but that's based off of their skill sets. If everything each fighter wanted to happen did in the fight then I can't say whether or not his his line would be reflective of the fight itself.

Everybody who stopped Hearns was at least three inches taller than Pac and started their career at Welter or higher. He took plenty of hits in his career and, while hurtable, was not easy to get around. His jab was faster than hell and he'd literally be about seven inches taller than Pac. what's Pac going to do...fight in stilts? There aren't a lot of guys his size who could ever have dealt with Hearns. Ross, McLarnin, Napoles...they'd all have the same problem.

He was just a freak of nature and he wasn't like Williams...he didn't make himself small and just wing a million shots.

[onetwopunch]

Everybody who stopped Hearns was at least three inches taller than Pac and started their career at Welter or higher. He took plenty of hits in his career and, while hurtable, was not easy to get around. His jab was faster than hell and he'd literally be about seven inches taller than Pac. what's Pac going to do...fight in stilts? There aren't a lot of guys his size who could ever have dealt with Hearns. Ross, McLarnin, Napoles...they'd all have the same problem.

He was just a freak of nature and he wasn't like Williams...he didn't make himself small and just wing a million shots.

A million shots all with bad intentions unlike P will, I dont think people realize how hard this dude hit..Duran had a incredible chin and he got laid out by Hearns, Pac has been wobbled by lesser guys, Just imagine Pac walking into a Hears right hand..lol..and Floyd wont be able to do anything againts Hearns,

[Salardo]

It took Ray Leonard 14 rounds to get in enough hits to take down Hearns. Up until then he was being outboxed.

Leonard was smarter, stronger, bigger (with longer range), a harder puncher and just as fast. Just overall better.

actually I disagree. I havent seen Hearns vs Leonard 1 in a long time but I remember that Leonard was not being outboxed. It was a close fight and I am not even sure if I had Hearns ahead on the scorecards at the time of the stoppage.

[T.Horton]

actually I disagree. I havent seen Hearns vs Leonard 1 in a long time but I remember that Leonard was not being outboxed. It was a close fight and I am not even sure if I had Hearns ahead on the scorecards at the time of the stoppage.

Hearns was winning by at least four rounds the last time that I watched it.