boxing
Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-03-2012, 08:06 AM   #76
Bollox
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 745
vCash: 500
Default Re: Hearns right on Hagler instead of Duran

Moving up is so over-rated these days, it's not even funny. So often both fighters have moved up, therefore they're not fighting and beating naturally bigger men. Pacquaio has titles in a billion weight classes yet nobody in their right mind would compare his achievements to a Henry Armstrong with his 'mere' 3 titles

Hearns was a 6'1 welterweight. He grew out of the division and became a natural lightmiddle then middleweight. After that he was fighting out of his natural weight class IMO. Besides a still good Hill which proven topflight fighters did he beat at the top level above 160? Andries was crude as crude gets. Who else? Leonard? in '89 at 168 pounds Leonard was nothing special

p.s could you ever imagine Hearns having moved up to fight a Michael Spinks at 175? (this was not even a possibility due to timelines, but it would have been a non competitive massacre after about round 2, with Tommy on the receiving end)

At the end of the day...the merit in moving up in weight has progressively diminished in the past 25 years
Bollox is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 11-03-2012, 08:31 AM   #77
Waynegrade
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,297
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Hearns right on Hagler instead of Duran

I agree, thats why I alwasy said Carlos Monzon was a bum, he never moved up ! Or why Carlos Palomino was a hprrible champ. he never moved up ! I completely disagree with you abou the `moving` up. How does Hearns add to his legacy by beating andries ??? Or do you think SRL became a ring immortal by beating the legendary Don Lalonde ? I think greatness can be neasured by getting the title, then cleaning up your division. As for fighting Spinks, he would have destroyed Hearns and we both know that there would have been no discussion about Hearns moving up if spinks or Foster were the belt holder. It would have been an idiotic move for Hagler giving Spinks size for Hagle. Hearns never even held the TRUE belt in any didvision. Hagler had em all ! Your lack of respect for Hagler is obvious. You keep looking for ways to prove Hearns better than him Since he obvioulsy could never prove sharing the ring, now its about moving up. Quite comical actually...
Waynegrade is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 11:07 AM   #78
Waynegrade
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,297
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Hearns right on Hagler instead of Duran

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAG1965 View Post
I didn't mention the walk the walk comment. You said Hearns talked the talk and Hagler walked the walk, but when it comes to careers. Hearns moved up and walked the walk and took on big challengers more than Hagler did in his own comfort zone. Marvin was great and dominant and all that, but that is one thing he didn't do is move up. He did not do with Spinks what Hearns,Leonard, Duran all did with him, Move up and fight the guy in the higher division.

I am just comparing Hagler and Hearns and the walking the walk comment. Since regardless of Antuofermo or Minter or his middleweight reign, Marvin spoke about Hearns saying he wouldn't fight because of his baby pinkie back in 1982-the year Hearns later beat WIlfred Benitez for the 154 pound title. Marvin's comments were "he was gonna earn two millions dollars but he turned it down because of his little baby pinkie. Marvin said he would cut his pinkie off for two million dollars. Many people remember that comment because then Spinks would have given him probably 10 million and he didn't do it. Yet Hearns is supposed to compromise himself for 2 because that is a fight Marvin wanted, and Spinks he did not for more. And let me be honest, I am a Hagler fan. I always rate him as the best middleweight ever. A great fighter, but compared to Hearns is what I am talking and walking the walk. I don't think anyone whoever fought Hearns could say Hearns did anything less than walking the walk.
To me moving up in weight adds to a fighters legacy if he can show the top rated skills at higher weights. That is why Spinks to me was rated so high. He outboxed Holmes and beat him 2 times. That helped his legacy more than most things he did at 175
Hate to burst your bubble, but ... While Hearns was winning alphabet titles in different weight classes. Hagler won (arguably) the most coveted and respected belt in all boxing and kept it, unified. Watered down so called `championship` belts, don`t truly carry the weight of linear and true champion.

Last edited by Waynegrade; 11-03-2012 at 03:49 PM.
Waynegrade is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 11-03-2012, 12:40 PM   #79
RockyJim
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 1,462
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Hearns right on Hagler instead of Duran

Hagler was not to be denied that night in 1985...
RockyJim is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump






All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:35 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2015