Tommy Hearns not many can beat him at 147

Well, we were actually discussing Kid Gavilan winning without knocking Hearns out. Leonard was losing to Hearns before knocking him out. I want to know what Gavilan has that Leonard lacks that is likely to help him outpoint Hearns. Leonard certainly wasn't outboxing him. So I take it Gavilan brings something else, something more, to the table.

Here's the thing: we SAW Hearns in with an aggressive, sly, tough, experienced, probably unknockoutable at the weight fighter who was trying to drag Hearns into a fight that he was uncomfortable with, AND HE COULD NOT OUTPOINT HIM. HE WAS SAVED BY HIS POWER.

So I want to know, what does Kid possess that Leonard doesn't that is going to allow him to outbox Hearns?

I think Hearns had about as much chance of KO'ing Hagler as he did of outboxing him and winning a decision: none. He didn't lose because he chose the wrong strategy. He could however have survived a few more rounds if he ran.

 

:good:good:good Hagler-Hearns is just a bad matchup for Tommy. The writing was on the wall when all Hearns' famed right hand did to Hagler was break against his iron head

Seriously though, Hearns never beats Hagler in my book. Hagler would always catch up to him.

But that's at MW, so no shame there.

At WW, a weight-drained and very ill Marvin Hagler gets taken out in the first

 

Barbados Demon Joe Walcott would demolish Hearns.

Yes, he was 5 foot 2, but he had heavyweight power in both hands and Hearns' height wouldn't be effective against him as Walcott would swarm him on the inside and KO Hearns with one shot from either hand. Hearns never had the greatest chin, while Walcott withstood beatings that would finish most men.

 

Depending on his style, being 5'2'' would be a huge advantage against Hearns, especially if he has a heavyweights punch.

 

Yes, I agree, his style was said to be that of a swarmer - think of Aaron Pryor only smaller and much, much more powerful - the guy beat the stuffing out Fred Russell, who was 6 foot 6 inches tall and weighed 260 pounds. He KO'd Joe Choyisnki and many other heavyweights.

Walcott KO 2 Hearns in my opinion.

 

Barbadoes Joe Walcott is a good shout; how do the more history-orientated classic posters (I know Sweet Pea for instance is big on BJW) think about Barbadoes' chances against Hearns. We all know he often faced much bigger guys and withstood all kind of punishment whilst being a Demon of a puncher; I guess if Hearns boxed from the outset he'd stand a better decision.

Did Walcott hit as hard as say, Sam Langford in a P4P sense? Did he hit as Hard as Hearns?

 

I know that you mean. Another reason why I only usually do Post-War lists or hypothetical matchups is the lack of footage available, but Sweet Pea knows his stuff and really rates Barbadoes Joe Walcott, and from what I've read the guy was a machine.

 

That sounds reasonable. I'm assuming he doesn't fight like today's fighters who don't know how to box, and he had the right stance, which means that Hearns would have a hell of a time landing cleanly on Walcott, and at the expense of leaning in and putting his chin out there.

 

Thanks, I'm sure Pea will find his way to this thread again soon, surprised he didn't think it was good to make Walcott a mooted hypothetical opponent for Hearns earlier.

I don't take what Pea says as gospel but you know he's always going to give you insightful and well-researched info :good

 

Gavialn does have more experience than Leonard but I have a massively hard time seeing how that is going to make his boxing performance much better than Ray's, and it will have to be much better, because he wasn't really close to outpointing him. I'd like to know some specifics about the knowledge he'd have that Ray lacked that is going to help him out here. Saying that he all but held his own with Ray Robinson doesn't really strike me as a good omen for Kid, for Tommy was a better boxer than even Ray.

And I could of course mention all the guys that Gavilan struggled with, guys like Ike Williams for instance that had some similarities with Hearns, but I don't need to go there.

What did he learn in the Hearns fight that aided him against Hagler? He was fighting two totally different fighters in Hagler and Hearns.

I've said my piece here. Sure it was stupid to brawl with Hagler, but imo it was stupid to even sign the fight, period.

 

Precisely.