James Toney vs Thomas Hearns

Hearns still had a good height and reach advantage.
Tony had issues of his own. He was fighting a little lazy at 175. The fire wasn' there.

 

Close fight. Toney surely would have been in shape for this one.

 

I know the slipping would be there not sure about the countering.

 

James Toney had become my favorite fighter in the early `90s. His fire and bravado along with a unique skillset. Thinking back though Toney never should have been at `175 lbs. He was only about 5-9. At least not that early in his career. Hell he had not even been at `68 very long. He lost the commitment to stay at middleweight. James had that meltdown after losing to Jones and this was not a good time in his career. Hearns on the other hand was chasing belts pure and simple. Leonard was off the radar and he was doing the next best thing. When your 6-2 it makes it alot easier.

 

Bad fight for Hearns....hitmans legs would not hold up for 12 avoiding Toney and he ain't knocking James out I see a close fight until late and Toney catches him while Hearns is attacking on the ropes and Toney wears him down around 9-10....his favorite post 160 tactic was waiting fighters on the ropes and Hearns would not resist trying to stop him.....Toney

 

Thomas hearns was 6'1 not 6'2 .And you are saying that toney was too small for the lhw class because he was 5'9? Lmao stupidest reason ever. Tua was around 5'9 too and he was a hw... Height has nothing to do with your natural weight. Toney had the frame to.fight at 175 perfectly

 

Toney destroys hearns it would not go.to the distance

 

James was more like 5-10. In my view, he was no different at lightheavy, just got a couple bad calls from the judges.