Rank Ray Leonard Thomas Hearns Floyd Mayweather Terence Crawford

26 year old Hill would beat the current version of Canelo hence I believe he's a better H2H opponent that's always been my point.

 

Different weight classes, but maybe, maybe not. We can only speculate.

But we do know that Canelo had been on top of the division for years and was p4p ranked. Hill had beaten one ranked opponent and was not p4p ranked.

Maybe Canelo's decline had off set that status so much that Hill was a better p4p figher in 1991 than Canelo in 2025.. Maybe, but calls for a fair bit of of speculation.

His standing in 1991 was lesser than Canelo's in 2025. Even though every one was aware of Canelo's decline. That much we do know.

 

Canelo was top of the division of a pretty shallow division and was picking and choosing fights in the last 3 or 4 years whilst clearly ducking Benavidez.

Hill to be fair wasn't in an overly strong division himself at the time.

But I'm also including the hindsight of what Hill achieved after the Hearns loss which adds to Hearns's win.

I can understand why people may think I'm talking nonsense because Canelo had a better career and was more well known than Hill at the time.

But for me the context of Hill being in his prime add to the fact of what he achieved after the loss staying relevant at world level for another 9 years.

Compared to Canelo who was winding down in his career and people could see the writing was on the wall for Canelo in regards to being at the end of his career.

It's not as clear cut as people may believe IMO.

 

Crawford went for the biggest payday. Boxers do that. It also corresponded to fighting a great champion at a higher weight. Canelo pretty much washed everyone he fought in the last couple of years including Munguia and Charlo. He was fighting a higher standard of opponent than Hill was. Scull, Berlanga, and Charlo all shelled up and just tried to survive.

What Crawford did was enough to lock him in at pfp 1.

 

I'm not knocking Crawford for taking the Canelo fight it made the most sense for him money wise and legacy wise at that time.

But I also feel like Crawford had seen Canelo slowing down in the last few years and definitely thought it was the right time to take on Canelo.

But Canelo also probably thought the same way in regards to being the bigger man and that Crawford had struggled at 154 so in fairness that works both ways aswell.

 

Crawford just went for the biggest money fight that he finally was offered.

It’s better than huge welterweight eventually moving up to beat Virgil Hill, who wasn’t a guy who imposed his size on opponents.

 

I certainly don't think you're talking nonsense. I see where you're coming from and you might be right, but I don't think it's clear cut. My default position is to go with the one who's regarded highest at the time, but that is likely not always correct.

 

Crawford beat Canelo 9-3 in real life

Hearns and Hill was a 7-5 type of fight

 

9-3 is a stretch it wasn't that wide.

I scored it 116-112 Crawford but I could see 115-113.

 

SRL
Hearns
May
Crawford

 

Nah 9-3 maybe 8-4 think 7-5 is really generous to Canelo

 

It wasn't 9-3 none of the 3 judges had that scorecard and the most common fan scorecards were 116-112, 115-113.

The scorecards were similar to Hearns/Hill as evident of the judges having the exact same scorecards for both fights.

 

Canelo has a lot of influence

He got a draw on one of the scorecards vs Mayweather

 

They were fair scorecards they were in line with the average fan scorecards.

Even the AI judge scored it 114-114 which I don't agree with but it was closer than what you're making out.

The bottom line is both Hearns & Crawford both clearly won in competitive fights.

 

The similarities are simply the tough stylistic match ups.

Of course, age can absolutely matter in many fights. Age can be very relevant. But not in this case.

Terence has just proven against Canelo, that he’s still in great form. Still extremely sharpe.

So it doesn’t matter about him being 37.


He didn’t struggle with Madrimov because he was 37.

He struggled with Madrimov, because of the stylistic match up.

Because Madramov was a JMW pressure fighter.


Terence would have struggled with him at any age, at any stage of his career.

Now if you’re a knowledgeable fan, you would know that had Terence fought more guys like Madramov, at JMW and SMW, then he’d have had more tough fights.


No, it was not a bad look for Tommy.

Look, if you roll the dice, and you keep on moving up in weight, taking on all comers, all with different styles, then you’re going to lose. And there is nothing wrong with that at all.


Now, Benn, Nunn and Kalambay, were all very good-great fighters.

And as great as Terence is, he hasn’t fought those kinds of fighters.


Now you can criticise/mock Tommy, for having lost to Iran Barkley.

But you do not know if Terence could have beaten him. Simply because, he’s never faced such an opponent, and at that weight before.

Also, as I previously mentioned, you do not know if he could have beaten him, had he have lost a few fights previously, which could have had a huge psychological effect on him.