Good stuff Flash. Both those guys got thru quite a bit of work at 147 contender wise. They were great days. The public clamored for the clash for some time but management played it smart and let them built the match up even further.
Interesting take on OdlH vs Tito. Oscar and his corner made a significant tactical error, in turning the last two or three rounds into a bit of a ballet. However, I was then and remain so today, firmly in the 'I think Oscar beat Trinidad' camp. Through rounds 1-9, there were times it looked to me like Oscar was pretty much mugging Trinidad. But to base a late, in-play tactic on a sureness that the judges are seeing/scoring the rounds of the fight in the same way you and your corner are, is just plain unprofessional. In effect, Oscar gave the fight away. Nonetheless, whether one appreciated the more evasive Oscar or not, for the first three-quarters of the bout, his approach was working well. Trinidad was being out-boxed; frustrated and redirected by Oscar's movement, whilst eating a fair few jabs and right-hands, along the way. That said, Trinidad, like any puncher, is not to be taken lightly - even by Hearns - but, based on what I saw, in the OdlH fight (perhaps Trinidad's best result, on paper), I just don't see that it's likely he breaks through the Hearns defense with a fight-defining moment. Trinidad is not defensively minded or evasive enough, either. Again, I find it difficult to envisage him avoiding the Hearns armory (which is quite superior to Oscar's, IMO), being continually peppered by the Hearns jab - and, though he wasn't the easiest guy to stop, how many Hearns right-hands do you think Trinidad could eat? Hearns would also have the advantages in height and reach which, combined with what was, in the main, his economic movement and fast-reflexes, would afford him more time positioned at a distance he was happy with. All-in-all, this match-up looks pretty much like bad news for Trinidad. He's probably getting beaten up here.
I agree but was just following top on your mentioning those matches .. Hearns looked at his absolute best vs Cuevas, a style he excelled against .. he did not look unbeatable vs Weston and the much smaller Shield's managed to survive Tommy's speed and power and extent him .. we saw Hearn's have to box more as his stamina was severely tested and his power faded and Shields was a clever fighter but no woprkld champion .. for the record, I like Hearns as much as most but Tommy always, always had vulnerabilities: stamina, chin and ability to absorb body shots .. Hearns left the division at the age of 22, an unfinished fighter .. Tito flourished at 147, defended the title about fifteen times, beat high caliber opposition of many styles and never lost at 147.
Hearns had some vulnerabilities for sure and while a little unfinished at 147 his assets were booming......booming enough to get him past almost everyone to ever fight at welterweight. A good many high level posters have him as high as #3 H2H there and he could well be, or not. He's certainly in the mix. A peak SRL went to hell and back to get past him and he's by far the consensus #2. I don't normally thrust losses forward as the be all and end all unless the fighter has some solid substance in the W column and Tommy certainly has that. It was an historic night and performance by both. History is littered with lesser fighters surprisingly extending champions. Holmes - Weaver, Louis had a few, SRL - Kalule, Ali - Cooper, Arguello - Ramirez/Fernandez, Holyfield - Cooper, Spinks - Davis and thousands of others. The greatest of the welters himself was in sizable trouble himself with Tommy Bell and struggled to get thru a match against Arty Levine over the weights. These fights don't define any of them or limit how high they could rise as all had much better showings and excepting perhaps Holmes beat much better opposition. You talk of Tito's 15 defenses and beating higher caliber opposition while never losing but i wouldn't overstate it. It was a good run in an average era but lets not make it into something it isn't.. He held just one of the part titles through 14 of them. It was only when he fought Oscar in defense 15 that he won the other segments. He only became lineal after he won this fight and it was his last at 147. Whitaker was the big player at 147 for the majority of Tito's reign and was rated above Tito for about 5 years in a row after which ODLH took over and then Tito finally assumed the mantle just as he left. Mind you this was shrouded in controversy and the comfortable majority of people score it for Oscar and some by quite a bit. His only other truly notable opponent was Whitaker who was a shell of himself and addicted to cocaine at that point. He was well declined when Oscar beat him 2 years prior in a close one. Digging deeper Whitaker was by far at his best at 135 and so was Oscar. There's really not much on Tito's 147 resume even if it can be put impressively on paper. He's an excellent fighters and would have a punchers chance but Hearns holds the cards.
Tito's reign at 147 was nothing special but your building up Hearn's ? Seriously ? One big win, one, Cuevas. I simply disagree with you .. I see Hearns as too light, vulnerable and inexperienced at 147 to be rated above Tito . To me unless Hearns landed huge early like he did at times he'd be chipped to pieces after a few rounds .. I simply find it fascinating how underrated Tito has become ... the man never lost at 147, devastated a very strong group of fighters, gave an exceptional Oscar his first career loss by out guttng and out lasting him , moved up and ruined an extremely tough Vargas and talented David Reid and then destroyed a very tough and talented Joppy ... so he lost to top five all time great middleweight Hopkins .. Hopkins would have diced up Hearns as well .. I just don't see it .. to me Tito was a much more complete lighter than Hearns, a better two handed puncher, better stamina, a better chin, better recovery powers ... Hearns was super courageous and a devastating puncher early but very flawed ..
Tito's habitual slow starts would spell doom against the "Hitman" Hearns. You have to remember, Tito sometimes would get caught by lesser punchers and fighters than Hearns and go down. Against Hearns, this would prove to be a fatal mistake. Hearns's big right hand would not only put Tito down, but it would also seriously hurt him. Tito's will to fight would make him get up and that would be the beginning of the end for him. Hearns would not let him off the hook and I can see Hearns brutally stopping Tito. Scenario B would be Tito going low on Hearns several times in order to survive. Factor in his "special" wraps and it might level the playing field a bit. I would still favor Hearns over Tito's willingness to go low and illegally wrap his hands.
You are downplaying Hearns while building Tito up. Tito doesn't even have one big win at 147. In the real world he didn't beat Oscar and Whitaker was shot not to mention a natural lightweight (as was Oscar in reality). Most of his defenses were against spuds. Hearns outboxed just about everyone he fought. He outboxed Wilfredo Benitez. He outboxed SRL. When he wasn't outboxing guys he was pole axing them. Hearns did not need to land early. The guy lost four fights (excepting his injured ankle) in his entire career which was 1/3 longer than Tito's and included a much much stronger array of opponent. Again the majority believe Tito lost to Oscar and the group of fighters he beat at 147 was not "very strong". As for Tito out-gutting Oscar well Oscar mainly boxed and moved and countered. He slowed late as he thought he had the fight safely in the bag and most agreed he did. Vargas and Reid were at 154 and if we want to talk 154 Hearns OBLITERATED the great Duran and outboxed the great Benitez. It's not remotely comparable. Completely different stratosphere. Hearns beat very good fighters all the way up to 175 titles included. His resume shits on Tito's. Joppy would be no better than Roldan if as good. James Schuler would probably beat him. I don't think Tito would handle Roldan's pressure personally. Hagler would have belted Tito with far less drama than the Hearns fight. Hearns is a level or two or even three above Tito overall. It doesn't guarantee him the win H2H but the smart money is obviously on Tommy. Sorry Hg but i can't agree with a lot of what you are putting forward.
Oscar was on the border of boxing/running from the opening bell. He was stealing some rounds with flurries the last 10 seconds. Neither guy looked good. I had DelaHoya ahead after 8 rounds but not by the margin many others seemed to. That was a big fight. DelaHoya had never moved/run in his career up to that point. It was a disappointment overall. I think of a boxing lesson there would be at some boxing mixed in there.
You are floating the idea that Trinidad has become underrated and Hearns overrated, whilst using what reads like hyperbole to describe the former's bout with Oscar de la Hoya. What do you mean that Trinidad beat OdlH by "gutting and out lasting him"? OdlH saw the bell, along with Trinidad, after having thoroughly demonstrated Tito's limitations. That Oscar made a tactical decision - a choice - to rely on an assumed lead, for the last three rounds, doesn't equate to a plus for Trinidad, it's an indictment on Oscar's judgement. Can you imagine Oscar reducing Hearns to a one-punch-at-a-time stalker? How do you think Trinidad would have fared against Ray Leonard? Do you think Trinidad's win over Vargas at 154 is more noteworthy than Hearns' win over Benitez, in the same weight class?
Ah - well - We aren't going to agree on this one then Oscar did the unexpected, with most anticipating more fireworks, I think. Had he not been landing anything significant, whilst still being evasive, I'd probably tend towards your point of view, but Oscar was out-landing Trinidad, with Trinidad's own aggression being largely ineffective. I had Oscar winning at least seven of the first nine rounds. So, on my card, he still won; even if he did cruise through rounds ten-to-twelve. But, those last few rounds are what exposed him to the varying viewpoints of the judges and so, the loss sits with him, and I am sure he fully admits that he threw the fight away. It was an unimpressive finish to what had been shown, up until round-10, to be a solid, working strategy. Trinidad had been made to look ordinary (Not something we can say about Hearns - Vulnerable, at times? Yes - but, ordinary? No) and it's a look, which has lasted long in my memory. But, that's just me.
Guys, I disagree,. Hearns left the division at twenty two years of age with one big win and one huge loss .. the loss showed a vulnerability to body punches, questionable stamina, a questionable chin and the inability to clinch when hurt .. If the question I believe is ay 147 , I see nothing that tells me that 22 year ild Hearns, years out of his own prime, beats a prime Tito .. if it is prime for prime, say the 1984 , 154 pound Hearns vs a 147 Tito it is a different fight ...
