Rank Ray Leonard Thomas Hearns Floyd Mayweather Terence Crawford

Crawford
Leonard
Mayweather
Hearns

 

Ray
Floyd
Tommy
Bud

Paper accomplishments are great, but great opponents are greater.

 

1. Leonard
2. Crawford
3. Hearns
4. Mayweather

 

1. SRL
2. Hearns
3. Mayweather
4. Crawford

 

Leonard is number 1 and Crawford simply based off legacy is number 4.

I'm looking for reasons to put Hearns 2nd ahead of Mayweather but the head is saying probably not. So I'll go with John Thomas and George Crowcrofts list of:

1.SRL
2.Floyd
3.Hearns
4.Bud

 

Leonard
Mayweather
Bud
Hearns

 

I see plenty of arguments for Bud above Hearns. In fact, Bud is probably above for me. I think an argument can be made for Floyd above Leonrad as well. Not sure I would agree, but I can see the argument.

 

Is that based on skill, your assessment of H2H ability, achievements or a combination of all of these?

When it comes to résumé, Bud is clearly below Hearns IMO. The quality of fighters that Hearns faced over the course of his career trumps Bud - of course, Bud was never sparked like against Hagler or Barkley, but then given starting weight and Bud likely being a natural SMW for the longest, Bud doesn't have a win over the likes of Hill in terms of climbing through the divisions and not expected to win.

I think Bud is one of those guys whose ability far outweighs his résumé, which is altogether quite unremarkable given the achievement that he's just had in beating Canelo.

 

1) Leonard
2) Hearns
3) Mayweather
4) Crawford

 

It's resume, and the losses makes the difference for me. As for Leonard and Hagler, yes, Bud didn't face that quality, but the Barkley losses set him back in comparison.

And Canelo is every bit as Hill, actully better. That was 33 lbs above his first division, 28 for Hearns against Hill, and against a p4p ranked fighter.

 

I hear the losses - that will always be a genuine detractor for Hearns but some will say Tommy avoided nobody and was ready to face prime ATGs at their very best available selves, rather than wait it out.

Tommy's destruction over Duran and beating of Benitez is way up there for me.

I completely disagree with the weight climbing assessment of Bud. He has never been a 140/147 fighter - only today's weight limit standards allow him to get down so low, to a unnatural weight, given his background and What I would consider to be normal walk around weight. So yes, on paper, it's a better feat than Tommy's weight climb but in true reality, Bud would likely have never got below 154 lbs 40 years ago.

Canelo is a huge win and Barkley is a huge loss - Duran is a huge win and certainly better than the win over Spence, who I'm not sure should have been in the ring that night given the impact of the car crash.

I see Tommy just having more credible wins, match ups and top performances against very good to elite competition. Bud was more dominant but his average competition is lower than Tommy's - not a hill I would die on though, so all respect due.

 

Same back to you. No hill worth dying on here, not even whether Hill was a better win than Canelo or not.

I disagree about the weight climb, though. Hearns had the frame of a LHW, not only tall but broad shoulders. I remember Cosell when sitting beside him at ringside for a fight live on TV in the early 80's saying that he had the upper body of a HW.

He also looked chiseled and well proportioned at LHW. Not just a bit softer like Duran did for every weight above LW. Hearns actually looked better physically at LHW than at WW, imo.

 

I am a good shadow boxer. Does that count as skill?

Ridiculous ways to promote Floyd who ducked all of his real tests and got A-side gifts in most of the rest.

• Antonio Margarito
• Paul Williams
• Kostya Tszyu
• Sergio Martinez
• Manny Pacquiao (in prime)
• Miguel Cotto (140 before Margarito took his soul)
• Ricky Hatton (at 140 his best weight by far)
• Shane Mosley (prime)
• Vernon Forrest (prime)
• Erik Morales

Performance wise, clearly lost to JLC, got a gift against old ODLH, punches Ortiz when his hands were down, gift against old Pac, and was caught for PEDs. There is no way he could compete with Hearns and SRL, but he wouldn't have fought them.

Crawford has a weak resume. His win against Spence was his best, but unfortunately Spence was shot, which wasn't Crawford’s fault, but still undeniable. The Canelo win was glorified sparring. His struggles in certain fights, in particular against Madrimov are th le reason for his placing.

Given SRL beat Hearns, you have to give it to him, although I prefer the Hitman as a fighter.

1. SRL
2. Hearns
3. Floyd
4. Crawford

 

Hearns was making weight comfortably at WW, SWW and MW. Whilst he had the frame for it, he was slender built, similar to Arguello but more explosive.

He grew into his body cos the natural frame was there and time allowed him to do so but Bud was always a larger man than what he campaigned at.

Hearns weighed 145/146 for WW fights and likely came into the ring around 150 lbs, whereas I recall reading that Bud made weight and came into ring around 160 and higher for fights. To me, this is cheating - not in the strict practical terms, but morally and definitely for me, who sticks by the original 8 weight classes and same day weigh in mindset. Virtually everyone does it these days so it's not necessarily against him, moreso at today's fighter boasting 5 weight class champion when really they were always a natural MW fighter but today's ruleset allowed them to start at 135 lbs, so 140, 147, 154 and 160 lbs, but they walk around 168 - 170 lbs naturally.

 

Is this a serious question you asked me? You can criticize any fighters career. When I'm talking about skills, I'm talking about the eye test. What they can and can't do in the ring. Hearns has a major technical flaw of dropping his hands every time he punches. Drops his lead hand every time. He got away with it because he fought from distance and guys either wouldn't risk or get knocked out trying to risk but when fighters were able to close distance, Hearns got tagged and tagged hard. You didn't need to respond to me to say your opinion on who you think is more skilled.