Hearns vs Jones Jr

Hearns also weighed in at 145 with a same day weighin. I wonder if Leonard would have the same success if the fight was at 154.

 

Just answer me this:

Why couldn't Roy have roughed him up?

 

An interesting question.

I think he could have had the same success though.

 

The james toney he fought was woefully out of shape

 

Maybe but I doubt it. Leonard himself said that Hearns at the weighin looked like one of those hungry kids from Africa. There were rumors in Detroit that Hearns was overtrained before the fight. At any rate , Leonard won and, to me, it's one of the best wins ever at 147.

 

He may have over trained. I don't know. But I think it's unfair for anyone to suggest that Ray only won because Tommy gassed.

 

154-160 I'd call a toss up favoring Hearns. 168-175 I'd have to give to Jones Jr.

 

The size difference is being understated here. Hearns was a welterweight who eventually moved up. Same with Leonard, and of course Hagler was a career middleweight who was at absolute best 5'9" and never moved up in weight. Hagler, as a middleweight and no more, had a size and strength advantage over Leonard and Hearns.

Roy Jones by contrast started out as a middleweight and then fought a big part of his career, relatively close to prime, as a light-heavy.

Then take into account that Hearns was making 147 with same day weigh-ins! That means that the welterweight Hearns was about the same fighting weight as a modern day lightweight.

Jones was at LEAST 2 divisions bigger than Hearns in terms of natural/peak fighting weight. Arguably he was 2 divisions bigger PLUS the difference between previous day and same day weigh-ins. It would be a bit of a mismatch.

 

Tommy was 6'2 with an 78inch wingspan his shoulders were huge. He looked pretty big at 160-175.

 

Great points.

Let's even things up:

Let's say that they both weighed the same on fight night.

 

Hearns was no more than 6'1". But yes, I understand this perception that Hearns had crazy measurements for a welterweight and therefore could fight bigger guys.

We have to deal with the facts though. Hearns at or near prime was around 147-160 (WW-MW) in ring. Jones, even assuming he wasn't much of a weight cutter, was 165-185 (MW-LHW with rehydration). Just a naturally bigger guy who fought against other, bigger guys at his prime.

Hearns had a frame that could be (and later in his career, was) bulked up to look good at higher weights, but Jones was a 20lb bigger guy naturally.

 

Hearns was closer to 6'3" then he was to 6'1". I used to see him in the clubs in Detroit and he was clearly over 6'1".

 

I don't think it would make a great deal of difference. Often fighters moving up in weight will actually weigh the same as or more than an opponent who remains in their "natural" class.

Just as an example off the top of my head, Robert Guerrero was probably 10lbs heavier than Floyd Mayweather when they fought but I don't think the ex-featherweight Guerrero was really the "bigger guy".

Let's say Hearns and Jones were both 170lb in ring- I'd say that was a lean, mean version of Jones versus a version of Hearns carrying 20lb of extra weight.

That absolutely DOES NOT mean that 170lb Hearns would be out of shape- it just means that he (like basically anyone) was most dominant at the lightest weight he could comfortably make and lost his advantages the further he moved up.

Hearns was certainly still a fine fighter above 160 but I think it would be nonsense to suggest that a LHW or CW Hearns retained all of the advantages he had at WW or that these were his best weights.

Sorry, that's just sort of a long-winded way of making the original point, that RJJ is approximately a 20lb bigger guy in terms of his ideal range of fighting weights.

 

I respectfully disagree although I appreciate the first-hand evidence. Almost all boxers heights are exaggerated in the first place and from watching Hearns alongside his contemporaries he doesn't look anything over 6'1".

 

Great points.

I agree with everything you've written.

I just asked for an opinion if they weighed the same, just to stop people saying it wouldn't have been a fair fight.

A young version of Roy at JMW, probably weighed about the same as Hearns at MW.

The T/S is under the impression that Roy couldn't have emulated what Ray and Marvin did. But I don't see why not. I don't see why Roy couldn't have fought him aggressively instead of trying to outbox him.