What a $hitty fanboy blanket startement. You're too emotionally stunted to be taken serious. Of course he doesn't lose to all those guys. But the mere fact that you got all hot and bothered over it, to the point of making a silly thread says it all. What are you, like 10?
All the fighters in the fab 4 proved their worth after losing to the other except for Hagler who retired after Leonard refused to give him a rematch. Hearns who was knocked out by both Leonard and Hagler goes on to thoroughly outbox pretty damn good lightheavyweight in his own right Virgil Hill. You don't do that if you're not an ATG, and that victory by Hearns over Virgil Hill magnifies the quality of the other fab 4 members. Did Mayweather ever face a great fighter who was quicker, taller, and had a reach on him? Leonard did. Leonard had great difficulty in dealing with Hearns but his skillset, quality, and will to win perservered. There isn't anyone on Mayweather's resume that comes close to matching Leonards victory of Tommy Hearns, not even close. The quality if Mayweather's opposition doesn't compare. It doesn't take away from my opinion that Mayweather is a great fighter that competes in any era, but that has to factor in in evaluating Mayweather with fighters from stronger era's. Again as you didn't answer my question the first time, who of Mayweather's opponents would you say is a great fighter who would be competitive with Chavez, Whitaker, or any of the fab 4? DLH on his way out? Canelo on his way up? Pacquiao after KTFO6? Its really a slam dunk, nobody! Only a complete moron would argue that Mayweather's quality of opposition was better than what was out there during the 80's and 90's.
That's cool, apart from the fact it was at SMW/LHW, and Kinchen fought nothing like Floyd does. Again, it's styles and attributes. We both know that Iran Barkley and Floyd were levels apart. But Floyd could never have caused Tommy the same problems that Barkley did.
If you've read the other things he's posted in this thread, you'll know not to expect anything with substance. Just video-game an.alysis type comparisons that don't make lick of sense in the ring. Same ol fvckin ESB!!! Nothings changes since I was last here. :dead EDIT.... You can't even spell an.alysis on this board? atsch
There have been many fighters to give Hearns trouble, for some reason you think Floyd can't, Hearns is a front-runner, get the fight to the middle-late rounds and Tommy is target practice
How would he do it? Floyd doesn't have the pop to keep Hearns honest. Doesn't have the output to keep Hearns on the defensive. Speed is arguably the same, yet Hitman has the stiff jab to keep Floyd out of his rhythm.
I've stated numerous times why lesser fighters than Floyd gave Tommy trouble, and why I believe Floyd wouldn't have troubled him due to his size and his style. If I asked you to name me in order, the best fighters who Floyd ever fought, I know for a fact that a guy like Marcos Maidana would be way down your list. You'd have had guys like Manny, Cotto, Canelo, Shane, Oscar and Hatton etc all in front. And rightly so. Because they were all better than Maidana. Yet if I asked you who gave Floyd the most trouble in his career, Maidana would be near the top of your list. The reason for that is because of the clash of styles. How many more ways can I explain it to you? Forget Ray, Marvin, Barkley and Kinchen at the higher weights. Floyd was too small to have been able to have outboxed Tommy for a decision win. He didn't possess the power or the aggression to have taken him out. That means he couldn't have beaten him, even though a lesser guy like Barkley could. This is getting tedious. You have no understanding of styles and attributes.
We are talking welterweight Hearns right? Certainly you not thinking junior middle, light heavyweight Hearns are we? Go back and look at Tommy at 147, he's not the biggest or strongest dude in the world. As a matter of fact he's underweight and fragile
Why they fvck would we be talking about any other Hearns? atsch So...going to try and answer the question, or going to skirt around it with semantics and weak anecdotes? :roll:
He can't answer you. All he can say is that Floyd was never troubled by bigger fighters, and that lesser fighters than Floyd beat Tommy.
Exactly! The types to give Hearns trouble were rough and tumble fighters with size. What boxer type ever gave Hearns trouble? Only Leonard, and he had to turn brawler, take the fight to the inside and roughhouse Hearns. Throw punches in bunches when he'd stun Hearns. Not the pot shotting Mayweather's forte. 12-0 Hearns over Mayweather and I'm being serious. Mayweather just doesn't have the offensive ****nal to even compete with Tommy Hearns. Thats not dissing Mayweather, Hearns is just a stylistic nightmare for any defensive type boxer. If you don't get inside Hearns reach and rumble with him, and that requires severe risk as Hearns is such a devastating puncher, you're just not going to beat him.