Re: Why was Hearns so inconsistent after the Hagler fight
Roldan, Kinchen and Barkley are under-rated.
Tough awkward mofos all three of 'em, but not too crude as to negate their advantages completely.
Hearns was a bit shaky in the chin and legs all his career.
Big middleweights would get to him. The Hearns of 1980 or 1984 was fighting no big strong middles/super-middles.
Hearns took a lot of tough fights, you got to credit him that.
Andries was far too crude at the time, but still a risk. Hill was highly-regarded but proved inferior as a boxer, and had no other way.
Schuler was iced, pure and simple.
Maybe Hearns was on the slide from 1988 on, people were saying so. But that doesn't give his opponents quite enough credit, or him enough for tackling them. He fought some rough ones.