it is now 33-12 in favor of Hearns. That is a lot considering most guys in here are young guys who love Floyd. Floyd is going to have to fight and beat Pacman to get over Hearns for many of you. Tommy is easily better. His opposition was so much better, but he was lucky he had the best to fight.
Hearns, fought the best of his era and has wins over some truly elite fighters at or close to their primes, and gave everyone who beat him hell in defeat. We can revisit this if Floyd fights Pacquiao and Martinez and wins.
Hearns fought Leonard, Duran, Hagler & Benitez..... floyd & pac cannot be compared to Hearns, they won`t even fight each other. Comparing floyd to Hearns is an insult until floyd does the right thing, then & only then can we entertain the idea that he can be compared to Thomas Hearns.
Hearns fought the better opponents so hard to go against him Floyd is the more talented of the two Both ATGs :good
Both are great of course. It is hard to judge.. One thing what comes to my mind of Hearns is FEARLESS(I know that is not a proper way to measure greatness). I go for Thomas "Hööörns".
The thread starter..... maybe he never seen the full fight & assumed it was close because the dumb**** judges had it a lot closer than it should have been, who knows.
Yeah, pretty clear UD imo. Benitez had all the skill in the world to hang (and then some) with the best, but he was just physically outgunned by both Hearns and SRL. Hearns had too much size, reach, power to respect and approach with utmost caution; SRL's hands were simply too fast and his punches had greater effect when they landed than those of Wilfred. It's for a lot of the same reasons Floyd would lose to both. These guys were Big, Fast, Dangerous natural 147/154 lb phenoms.
When people say Hearns lost those two big fights, people are ignoring that Mayweather has never faced a fighter nearly on the level of a prime Sugar Ray Leonard, or prime Marvin Hagler. Floyd won his big fights against Castillo and Oscar, but both of those guys aren't nearly on Leonard or Hagler's level. I just think Hearns faced a significantly higher quality level of opposition throughout his career, that even with the two losses in his prime, I can rank him above Floyd.
Hard to say because Hearns lost the biggest fights of his career while Floyd is undefeated though he has never fought a Leonard or Hagler.
Im as big a Mayflower hater on this site, but in no way shape or form has the Hitman achieved more that Fraud. As to the OP.......you rate Hernandez and Mosely ahead of DLH and Cotto Cotto beat prime Mosely and DLH is a h2h nightmare in his prime for any LW-LMW.:rofl
So what?When Duran fought Hearns,he'd had almost twice as many fights as Floyd has now against much better competition.And so what he was a champ at 154?Duran was NOT a GREAT 154 pounder.He was past prime and on the top side of 30,plus just looking at his performances against ANYONE from 154 and up,he just wasn't as good.Anyone with 2 eyes can see that.Anything he did past 147 is just gravy.He lost to Kirkland Laing at 154.You are completely avoiding the question that I put forth to you on other threads.Does the Kirkland Laing that Duran fought beat the Montreal version of Duran?