ATG: Who Ranks Higher? Tommy Hearns or Floyd Mayweather Jr.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EbcCrcyWsAEYcaE?format=jpg&name=medium

 

It's always strange how certain fighters get passes for fights not happening and certain fighters don't.

I see Jones Jr getting a pass for failing to fight Dariusz Michalczewski

I see Hearns getting a pass for failing to fight McCallum

I do not see Mayweather getting a pass for failing to fight Pacquaio (even though he did eventually fight Pacquiao)

Interesting.

 

Killer Pic !!!!!

 

Just look at the circumstances.

 

I tend to agree with you here.. But I will defend May that this was a non fight in 2010 because of BOTH of their egos. Pac was very adamant in getting equal money even though he wasn't the bigger draw. Although he was close ... And May had wanted to implement Olympic style drug testing on Pac. It was a big mess, but equal of their faults , imo

 

Replace "circumstances" with "biases" and your spot on.

 

Not in my book.

 

Floyd beat all top dogs in his division, there was no Sugar Ray Leonard or Marvin Hagler in that era, Mayweather beat all the top dogs plus a bunch of contenders to ad to the collection

 

I know he did mate. But what I’m saying, is that if he’d have fought those kinds of guys, he may not have been undefeated.

Tommy fought better guys and took more risks.

One guy tried to drain a fellow JMW, whereas the other guy fought Marvin Hagler.

 

He’s struggling on this thread.

 

He may well have lost fights if he fought them, but my point is that Mayweather should be rated higher than Hearns

 

I think it’s debatable.

Like I said, there’s an awful lot to take into account.

We can’t just give it Floyd because he was 50-0.

 

I know. I never saw that Thomas Hearns shirt with the snake making the S.

 

I can understand questions being asked about RRJ not facing Michalczewski, but do you honestly believe Hearns dodged McCallum?

And, were either of the above cases, as brazen as Mayweather's publicly elaborate efforts in thwarting a match with his arch rival - at the time when it would have carried the most sporting relevance?

 

He did not dodge him and Manny wasn't going to match them. And Hearns was making a lot more money fighting the others because of the draw factor. Mike wasn't the draw. But Mike deserved a fight , he was 50 - 50 against them all. Mike is sort of like Burley. He deserved a fight but there wasn't enough money in it, and Burley has acknowledged this