I see what you're saying but it doesn't make too much sense given weights and eras. If we go by the exact fights they had and how they performed, which is all we could do without admitting complete fantasy speculation, I could say no way Hearns has enough energy in his body boiling down to 135 or 130 pounds to beat the guys Mayweather beat there.
Brother is all about your body....because hearns body he made 147 but we all knew he could be a light heavyweight easily. same with mayweather and de la hoya...they put them in low classes because they knew they could have an advantage....thats a boxing law. i love mayweather...but i couldnt never see him beat duran at 135, benitez at 140...leonard and hearns at 147.....hagler at 160 murders him. its all about styles....but will never know...because this are fantasy dream matchs. what we know is that non of mayweathers opposition is has goos has hearns. i dont think he can beat chavez at 135. i dont think he cant beat whitaker at 140. i dont think he can beat de jesus at 135. but he is great.....but not better than hearns. hearns style is all wrong for him...did you saw leonard vs hearns 1 ?
Hearns deserved a decision over Leonard in their rematch (top 20 ATG and top 3 at Welterweight) destroyed Duran (top 20 ATG, possible GOAT at lightweight) dominated Wilfredo Benitez, (defensive master, ATG) and outboxed master boxer Virgil Hill at light heavyweight. (Hill is a HOFer and very solid light heavyweight titlist) On top of that he beat Cuevas for his first title when Cuevas seemed unstoppable and made it look easy, defeated solid perennial contenders like Roldan (always a contender for middleweight, lost 5 times in his career, once by DQ, the others came to Hagler, HEarns, and the very impressive Michael Nunn) and Randy Shields, former Welterweight champ Angel Espada, lightheavyweight champ Dennis Andries, (who later went on to win the title again and challenge for the cruiserweight title) etc. No, resume wise Floyd doesn't have the wins to stack up. If Oscar and Shane had been in their primes he'd have a much better argument.
Floyd's best wins are Corrales, and old DLH and maybe Canelo. This does not compare in any way to Hearn's resume.
I can see why people would pick Hearns, his opposition was better, his wins more impressive and so on. But you can't give him so much credit just for facing guys, it doesn't make any sense. Being bombed out by Hagler in 3 should not improve your legacy, neither should loosing to Barkley.
Rematch Castillo, moved up in weight and agreed to every demand DLH had, Moved up vs Alvarez. All with styles that according to many are bothersome to Mayweather. Problem is, there is no styles that bother him unduly, he adapts.
fairly close resume if you judge on the fact hearns lost a few against ATG's. id go hearns though. in floyds era he is unbeatable, in the 80s there would atleast be a few fights that be a loss or at the very least be toss ups (hearns for example)
This is truth. He does adapt well. No question. Which is why he is a great fighter. But, honestly he has not proven how great he is against tons of fighters that would honestly test his adaptablity. When he gets around to fighting the harder guys they are usually way past it.
Hearns has better wins but his losses bring him down a bit. Sadly, that's why he's always been ranked lower than the other big three in his era.
No he wasn't, peps wanted Hearns to face Duran but he ducked left and right. He said his health come first when facing Duran.