Tommy Hearns goes back in time, finds himself in the ring with 1951 Sugar Ray Robinson, 15 rounds.

340 wins: Len Wickwar. What about it though?

Let's do a bias check. Did any of Hearns' losses come past his best weight and prime...? Let's start with that question and see what happens from there.

 

Shocked there are some boxing "experts" on here that even entertain the idea of Hearns having any kind of a chance. Tommy Hearns had a chin and stamina problem that was well demonstrated. He was unreliable and never came through in big fights. He could be boxing fine one second, then get tagged, and be in severe trouble. Robinson could dish it out, but also could take it. This fight ends with Tommy on his back staring up at the ceiling.

 

Where's the bias? Everything I wrote is facts, easily researchable.

 

I said let's do a bias check and asked you a question. You replied by ignoring that I asked a question and pretended that the explanation of the question was in fact a statement which also negated the aforementioned question. Now, I don't know where you come from but where I come from we call that impolite, Flash. Why, it is almost as if you met me for tea and then reached out and yanked my wife's tiddy so she would pass you the salt shaker. It's like, if you can reach over there and do that, you could've just reached for the salt shaker instead. You're causing a scene.

 

My response were to your 20 losses comment.
It wasn't about Hearns losses, it was a direct
answer to your comment about Robinson.
Hearns greatness is without question, he's
also one of my favorite fighters, I certainly
wouldn't have any bias towards him.
Yes I do know other than the 1st Leonard fight. all of Hearns's
losses came above welter. Was he past prime when he fought
Hagler? Very doubtful in my opinion. Was he as effective as
he was at welter/ jr middle ? Maybe or maybe not, especially
when considering he carried his power and speed all the way up to cruiserweight
though he was clearly past his best years at that weight (Cruiser)
The nonsense about "yanking your wife's tiddy over tea". is simply
that nonsense, and doesn't in any way have anything to do with the topic.

 

Of course Hearns a chance - does that mean I'm a boxing expert?

 

I’ve always liked Hearns but it fascinated me how he shrunk that 6ft1 inch frame down to WW. I believed back in the day that he should have fought at MW, and there was no way anybody was beating him at that weight.
Then he met Hagler…

So onto Hearns vs 1951 SRR at MW. Hmm. I can regretfully see Hearns being dismantled…not quite as brutally as Hagler did in the end…but I think the end will come around Round 8-10. Robinson would be too fast, too cute. He’s Sugar Ray Leonard with an extra gear!

 

Ok fellas, there was a guy similar to Tommy Hearns who fought during Robinson reign at Welterweight. His name was George Costner. He was tall, rangy and powerful. He had enough speed and built enough of a following that some writers tagged him George "Sugar" Costner.
Hearns "might be" better than Costner but it would end the same..SRR was pissed off about the jacking of his nickname. Still Costner was game. He almost made it through the 1st round.

 

Fifteen of those losses came after the age of 35 ten of them after the age of 40.
His record is sensational.

 

Hearns wins.

 

There, I said it.

 

Make it at 154 lbs and it's pick 'em.

At 160, Ray's performance level is higher than Tommy's