Harold Johnson vs Thomas Hearns 175lbs primes

Harold.

 

Hard to imagine Tommy going 15 hard rounds with a very good Lt heavy ,,,Johnson stops Hearns.

 

What if Harold was very hairy?

 

That makes 3 of us. I spoke with Harold a few times when he was in his 70's. He still somehow retained alot of muscle mass!

 

Harold wins a decision. At 175 Hearns is giving away his size advantages. A great counterpuncher and ring technician, Johnson knows exactly how he wants to fight Hearns, beginning with his footwork and how he'll slip, block and duck Tommy's jab. It's an interesting matchup for fight aficionados.

 

Is Hearns really giving away his size advantage? He has a height and reach advantage over Johnson…the same advantage he had over Sugar Ray Leonard

 

Harold Johnson would beat the hell out of Hearns

 

I think Johnson was about 5 feet 10 and a half. So yes, Hearns was about two inches taller. Hearns will try to fight him from the outside. Johnson is an accurate puncher, and in combinations, later in a fight, he can stiffen a guy. He's got a solid, statuesque frame. He's tough enough to beat name heavyweights going back to Arturo Godoy in 1949. He also beat 183-pound Ezzard Charles the year BEFORE Charles fought Marciano. Johnson had a long career but his prime might have been before he won the light heavyweight title. Let's say 1950-53. But then a much older Johnson beat Eddie Machen in 1961. He beat young Doug Jones in 1962, the year before the famous Jones-Clay match in Madison Square Garden.

Harold Johnson was respected as a fighter by everybody. A filled-out Thomas Hearns would be a significant underdog. I'd pick Harold to win easily, whether by knockout or decision. A terrible match for Tommy.

 

He did have a fair amount of pop, enough to do damage to hearns if need be I think:

This content is protected

However, he also had a bit of a tendency to get tagged as he backed/pulled away from long range punches, which would open up some opportunities for Hearns as well IMO. I don't see this match as being the surefire walkover for Johnson that others are predicting.

This content is protected

This content is protected

 

I think Johnson may have actually peaked in the mid-late '50s (around the time of the footage below), but by that time he couldn't get another shot @ Moore & he was blacklisted from big fights in general after the "tainted orange" debacle.

This content is protected

 

I believe this assessment of Johnson to be true based on a brilliant line from AJ Liebling's masterpiece The Sweet Science.

In his bout with Archie Moore, Johnson was ahead on the cards and barring being knocked down or out, was a good bet to win.

Liebling tells of how Johnson's corner sent him out for the final round with the final exhortation.

"Don't go mad, Harold."

'Apprehension seldom had less basis' was how Liebling reacted to that. Poetry.

 

Not a good fight for Tommy at.

 

The key to beating Thomas Hearns was taking away the center of
the boxing ring, and forcing him to use his legs, keep him from
getting max leverage on his jab, and especially that right hand.
Even at Lt. heavy , boxing Hearns from long distance was proven
a fool's game, as talented as Virgil Hill was he couldn't pull that
off, though he was much closer to Hearns in speed, height and reach
than Johnson.
So many on this post favor Johnson. Understandable, he
was an excellent technician. But I haven't seen the boxer
yet that I'd pick to beat Hearns with finesse, and long distance
from welterweight to Lt.heavy.
Honestly, I'd be more worried about Hearns against lesser
talents like Victor Galindez, or Marvin Johnson because of
there aggression, physicality, and awkwardness than I would
be about him against Johnson.
Styles make fights, Hearns wins a UD his best against Johnson's
best at Lt.heavy.

 

If my memory serves me, I remember a few years back when you said you used to visit him and watch some old tapes of his fights. what a cool experience that musta been