As one-dimensional as Tito was, I'd probably agree. Hearns likely blasts him out of there early, but if Trinidad can somehow survive the early onslaught, he is a big chance to take Hearns out imo. Walker and Basilio are good shouts also. Griffith too if he can withstand Hearn's power. The number is definitely small though. If we're talking about who I FAVOUR to do it, I can't really say anyone.
Well if your point is that all these men had off nights, you are indisputibly correct. But if you are saying these guys would lose to Hearns because they had off nights, I think that is unfair. Of course top fighters COULD lose to other top fighters if they do less than their best work. I think it's only fair to dig out these fighter's best performances and nights when comparing them. I agree with you that favouring fighters entirely due to experience is silly, but my point is that it is hugely underated on the board. Hearns mashed Cuevas, of course, and then got sparked by Leonard. I think that's his level. I think he'd beat fighters at the Cuevas type of level all day long, but I think the divisions true elites would beat him. I don't think he can make great adjustments, I don't think he is all the way comfortable at the weight, I don't think he would beat the best.
Like I said earlier. I regard Hearns as a daunting prospect for anybody. I do however agree with your point about experience being underated. Some of those fighters from the past were hugely experienced due to the quality of their opposition on the way up. Youv'e only got to look at fighters like Duran and Hopkins to see what experience can do for you when your not even at your physical prime. These fellas had that experience when they were at their prime.
Yeah, that's exactly it. Sugar Ray Robinson last made 147 in 1950, I think. He was 109-1. He had beaten Kid Gavlian, Jake LaMotta as well as a host of top contenders. Imagine how many styles and tricks he is familiar with? Imagine how much experience he has in terms of what works and what doesn't against various styles? Imagine how good he has become at making angles and escaping traps? Imagine how sophisticated his own traps are? Imagine how good his timing has become? Imagine how good he has become at reading tells and hiding his own? 110 fights, many of these at the very highest level. But people, because of Hearns's pyhsical attributes, want to make him a favourite over Sugar? I'm not talking about people in this thread right now, as I don't think anybody has claimed this, but there are some guys who appear to really know boxing who think this is a reasonable pick. I make Sugar a BIG favourite. Styles takes a second place this equation to perfection of art. They say there is **** that you don't learn in books? Well there is **** you don't learn in sparring. Hell, there is **** that you just don't learn unless you are boxing at the very highest level. Hearns is a novice next to the best welterweight version of Sugar. He would get bombed out. And I think a lot of the other top men would beat him up because of similair reasoning. It takes more than bombing out one really good fighter and losing in a spirited fashion to the best welter you've faced to convince me to see it otherwise, regardless of style advantages.
Hearns would dismantle Tito. Hearns had a jab and right hand which were superior to Titos. Tito's chin was not great and what got him through was hand speed and a great left hook. But Hearns did it all better than Tito. I think he would stop Tito early and in stunning fashion.
Two punchers, two questionable chins at the highest level, i think it's fair to say that the cash would be staying in the pocket for this one. It could definitely happen like you say, but it could sure as **** happen the other way too. Certainly Tito has the better record of coming off the canvas to win, which may matter.
I do as well, Tito was a slow starter and could be caught and knocked down early in fights. I can see a James Schuler type of performance here. On the other hand, if he gets back up........haha. Am I sitting on the fence here?
A left field suggestion, but what do people think about Jose Luis Lopez? Cuevas all over again you say? Maybe... But Jose had a ROCK chin and decent power to boot. He could get lucky. I'm not sure he could last a repeated bombing (which he would undoubtedly take) but if he can land on Hearns within 3 or so rounds, he might just be able to take him out. Bit of a dark horse for me.
Tito was hardly ever hurt at 147, and once he was reasonably experienced he wasn't at all if i remember right. People who call him glass jawed only read stats and don't watch his fights. Hearns can definitely outbox him, and can stop him, but Tito can stop Hearns also. People forget that Hearns was primariliy a fighter, and when people come to fight with Trinidad it is a problem, a big problem, and not for Tito. I'm not trying to pass Tito off as invincible in a slug-fest, but i won't have him passed off as glass jawed either. And there is no chance anyone's convincing me Tommy Hearns is a great defensive boxer who doesn't get caught by a murderous hitter and likely the best finisher in the division's history (possibly on par with Robinson). Either man can win this by clean ko.
While Hearns may well be favourate over some of these fighters the following all stand a chance in 1 shape or form: Napoles (fave) Burley (fave) Holman WIlliams (slight underdog) Paul Williams (tough style but underdog) Whitaker (slight underdog) Mayweather (slight underdog) Cerdan (50-50? haven't seen Cerdan at WW but he was there for 10years and may well drag HEarns deep and sink him) WW Duran (not as big underdog as some may think) Griffith (punchers chance) Shane Mosley (punchers chance) Don Curry (amazing talent) Tito (punchers chance) Lloyd Honeyghan (may drag him into deep waters, especially if HEarns is drained) Delahoya (small chance but not in the same class) I would expect him to lose half of those, just too many elite tough styles that are either tricky or physically imposing. Hearns was a great great fighter but WW is stacked DEEP