Thomas Hearns vs. Pernell Whitaker @ 147

[dansweeney]

Who wins in this fantasy matchup?

Hearns folds him rather easily...

[boliodogs]

I am sure Hearns would win this fight by KO without any problems in 6 rounds or less. Lightweight was Whitaker's best weight. Hearns is 6 ft. 2 inches and Whitaker is about 5 ft. 6 inches.Whitaker was a great defensive boxer but Hearns was also a great boxer on offense or defense.Hearns had a long, accurate, fast, hard left jab to go with his famous straight right and hard left hook and deadly combinations. He would have been more than Whitaker could handle. Whitaker did not hit hard enough to bother Hearns and Hearns would use his hand and foot speed, reach and power to swarm Whitaker.

[uncle pauly]

Prime Hearns(1980-1982); Prime Whitaker(WW versio)-1992-1994

This Hearns had some serious handspeed!!
His handspeed was actually just as good,..if not better than sweet peas,....at this weight(not lightweight/jr. ww)

Hearns would catch him at some point....too much size advantage.
I know Benitez lasted the distance. But Benitez was bigger than Pea

[AntonTheMeh]

Hearns hits him so hard ******* fly's out of sweet pea's ears.

.........

[Exciterx30]

The thread starter has been lucky so far that trolls have not flooded his thread saying the typical "ridiculous mismatch", "crap matchup", blah, blah, blah. I did one about Trinidad vs. Chįvez and got a few undesirable ignorants doing so.

Let's go back to the topic now. While I think Whitaker could be the most skilled boxer of the last 20-25 years, Hearns has too many advantages that can't be overlooked. Hearns has one the best jabs ever in the welterweight division, he had unusual height, reach, was well schooled, and had, possibly, the greatest right hand you ever saw. He was 6'1", although he looked more like 6'3", while Whitaker was 5'6" tops.

I just don't see how Whitaker could get past that rangy, snappy jab and, sooner or later, Hearns was going to land that right hand bomb. Whitaker could make him miss here and there but he would not be able to counter him consistently. I say that Hearns wins by TKO or KO.

[kiDynamite92]

Outboxing Hearns is impossible and Whitaker doesn't have the power to stop him. Hearns easy

[RichCCFC]

Hearns wins wide decision.

Whitaker would be backed up from the size and power of Hearns (not standing on inside and slipping punches) and Hearns beckoned by Emmanuel Steward in his corner will keep throwing enough punches to land and out point Whitaker rather easily.

[Light_Speed]

Hearns by decision. Might drop Whitaker once or twice. He would look bad at times though.

[samouraļ]

Pernell would not be the one to outbox Hearns. He is dwarfed in every dimension and probably even the slower man.

Hearns was not only a massive puncher, but was a good enough boxer to embarass Leonard (albeit not long enough to win) and Benitez.

There arent any WW short-arses that id pick over Hearns. Much less one lacking the strength and power to be forceful with his gameplan

Come to think of it, Hearns may fold him rather easily.


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

This here. Other than a questionable chin, Hearns at WW was a freak of nature: tall, incredible reach, enormous 1-punch KO power, and excellent boxing skills. Pernell might not get stopped but he certainly couldn't win.

[Mercury_Jones]

I watched more of Hearns.. but I think Sweet Pea is more versatile from what I saw.