Would you pick any Lightweights to beat Tommy Hearns?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by BitPlayerVesti, Nov 11, 2019.



  1. christpuncher

    christpuncher Active Member banned Full Member

    699
    525
    Jul 31, 2019
    Hearns - Duran that we saw is really little indicator of a prime welter Duran - welter Hearns. If Duran can get past the first four rounds he should win.
    Duran got destroyed by junior middle Hearns yeah so what, broken record.
    Hearns was really twice the fighter at junior middleweight, he had his legs under him. At welter he was a much weaker physical specimen. He could not take a punch and recover well at all.
    Duran on the other hand was a different fighter up to welter than after his loss to Leonard. So much faster and better conditioned.
    There's a huge difference between a Montreal or Palomino Duran v welter Hearns, than the Hearns - Duran we did get to see.
    If you give Duran no chance at all you either have an agenda against him or you need to follow a different sport, you obviously have no clue about this one.
     
    Jackomano, ETM and The Morlocks like this.
  2. ETM

    ETM I thought I did enough to win. Full Member

    12,608
    10,370
    Mar 19, 2012
    This is true.

    Tommy Hearns had more confidence and experience by that time in his career. He was at his best at that time. He was able to take the fight to Duran in a way he wouldn't have even tried at Welter around 1979-80.
    The quickness disparity would have been negated. Hearns would have been back on his heels from the opening bell. I wouldn't be surprised if Duran broke his ribs and cut his legs down to silly puddy.
     
  3. PernellSweetPea

    PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,853
    5,365
    Feb 26, 2009
    I don't buy this. Hearns always had confidence in his power. He took apart the champion Cuevas very systematically and quickly with combinations in a very similar way as he did in 1984 with Duran. In both cases he landed in round one and ended it in round 2. If it makes the fans of Duran feel better to think Duran would improve on that, I guess so but how much can you improve on what happened in June of 1984? Lasting to rounds 3 and 4?
     
  4. PernellSweetPea

    PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,853
    5,365
    Feb 26, 2009
    Duran is going to get hit over and over and he has to absorb that. This is Hearns punching not Leonard and not Benitez. I don't think Duran was as different at 154 as he was at 147... I don't think Hearns was that different. It is not night and day. Hearns was more experienced in 1984, but I don't think experience had a lot to do with what he did to Duran. He landed over and over again. He couldn't miss. Do I give Duran a chance? Sure, he landed a few rights on Hearns in 1984, but he would have to take punches and a lot of them and they would not miss.
     
  5. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member Full Member

    47,914
    34,367
    Apr 27, 2005
    I'd solidly favor Hearns over Duran at 147. Duran would have a punchers chance. He was still an extremely solid fighter when Hearns erased him, coming off two super performances against Moore and Hagler. You could say three because boy did he look great against Cuevas. Fair chance they both turned back the clock. Quite a few fine observers consider Hearns better at 147 than anywhere, tho i disagree. His power to weight ratio may have been even more incredible at 147. His combination of speeder, power and length would be something that would give Duran fits, just like it did in the real world. There's every chance Duran can't get past it. Hearns is an absolute rarity - a terrible terrible stylistic matchup for Duran.
     
    George Crowcroft likes this.
  6. christpuncher

    christpuncher Active Member banned Full Member

    699
    525
    Jul 31, 2019
    Hearns was absolutely better at 154. I would certainly favour him over Leonard at 154 which is saying something. He might have been a bad style match up for Duran but he did fight him his absolute peak in my opinion.
    Duran did well against Hagler and was still in good shape, but he'd peaked in 1980. Hearns had improved quite a bit and Duran had faded quite a lot since 1980/81.
    I will say Leonard was faster than Hearns, Hearns' longer jab aside. Duran of 84 doesn't have a chance against Leonard either. Duran of 1980 dealt pretty comfortably with his speed.
     
  7. PernellSweetPea

    PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,853
    5,365
    Feb 26, 2009
    I always thought Duran had a chance against anyone who fought him. He let him get the range and work his magic. You had to take Duran out of his rhythm and dictate the pace, which meant you had to be really good and you had to have speed. If you didn't have speed I don't think you can beat Duran. The guys who beat Duran even up to the late 1980s were quick enough.
     
  8. ribtickler68

    ribtickler68 Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,985
    128
    Apr 27, 2013
  9. PernellSweetPea

    PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,853
    5,365
    Feb 26, 2009
    Anyone who says Hearns Duran that we saw is little indicator to what would happen any other time has an agenda in favor of Duran. That is a style matchup and it was very very significant. The reason people would think a lightweight does not have a chance is because of the Hearns vs. Duran matchup. The style which Emanuel and Tommy had or the plan was for Duran to fight the arms. When he would try to get past Hearns arms then Hearns would counter him and it worked. And that would work at any weight. The arm length of 78 1/2 inches would not change from weights.
     
    JohnThomas1 likes this.
  10. christpuncher

    christpuncher Active Member banned Full Member

    699
    525
    Jul 31, 2019
    The fact remains Duran was a different class of fighter in 1980, Hearns was not yet in his prime.
    Leonard - Duran 2 and 3 went just the same as Montreal too? Duran was just no match for Ray?
    It was Hearns' speed vs Duran's lack of speed which caused Hearns to dominate, not his power.
    Duran would have been able to handle Hearns speed in 1980, the Leonard fight proved that.
    Hearns' reach would have been the main problem for Duran at any time, but that doesn't mean it would have been a carbon copy of their actual fight.
    Styles makes fights but it's not the be all and end all that you seem to think it is, Duran was good enough to get inside and beat any welter on his best night.
     
  11. George Crowcroft

    George Crowcroft Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    26,101
    41,915
    Mar 3, 2019
    I'd be in awe if Armstrong had his head by the end of 6
     
    mrkoolkevin and ribtickler68 like this.
  12. PernellSweetPea

    PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,853
    5,365
    Feb 26, 2009
    It was Hearns speed and arm reach which made it hard for Duran to do anything. Anytime he leaned in Hearns countered. Speed from Ray on the inside where Duran was in range is different than Hearns on the outside, and remember when Ray moved in the second fight Duran could not do anything. Not a carbon copy of the fight, but what happened to Cuevas shows that Hearns probably had the number of Cuevas and Duran. He was that quick.
     
    George Crowcroft likes this.
  13. Mendoza

    Mendoza Hrgovic = Next Heavyweight champion of the world. banned Full Member

    55,255
    10,264
    Jun 29, 2007
    I don't see many welters beating Hearns. He's too rangy, powerful and skilled for any light weight.
     
  14. Rock0052

    Rock0052 VIP Member Full Member

    34,223
    5,843
    Apr 30, 2006
    Sam Langford been mentioned yet?
     
  15. hdog

    hdog Member Full Member

    473
    118
    Jun 12, 2005
    I must have missed the rematch where Duran knocked out Hearns.