Who is the greater figther: RJJ or Thomas Hearns

Gianfranco Rosi defend his title about the same amount of times so i guess he is a sure fire Hof'er as well...Cuevas fought crap comp, and its not hard to hold a belt if your fighting nobodies, and talk about a guy losing everytime he stepped up??? Dude are you serious???atsch

If Cuevas was going to get in he would be there by now he hasnt fought in 20 years. Dude wasnt even top 25 of his era.

Well at any rate it appears that the vast majority of people here agree with me by 2-1.

Look man Im a Hearns fan, however Hearns didnt win vs the best fighters that he faced, and that means something to me. Too many people tend to rank favorites higher then they should be because they like them.

And if were talking about losing fights past your prime then Hearns did a shitload of that as well....Im not going to go into that.

 

John Ruiz is a mulitple time HW champion and has been in the ring with big punchers ... much bigger punchers than Roy Jones.

I think that victory is a great victory considering the natural weight that Jones walks around in. He had to put on muscle to get ready for the Ruiz fight and he had to worry about taking a punch from a much bigger man.

 

You are not understanding me here.

I think Hearns's win over Duran was a brilliant win, the best win Hearns ever had. The fact that Tommy blasted him out when Hagler couldn't over 15 rounds is testimony to that.

But, that doesn't change the fact that this statement is true:

Duran was a natural lightweight who first won the world lightweight title in 1972. He fought Hearns at light-middleweight in 1984 the day before his 34th birthday, and coming off a defeat.

If someone said that, then it is discrediting the win to a degree. Hearns beat a 34-year-old lightweight (135) up at light-middleweight (154).

Now, that does not tell the true story of the fight, does it? Well, I feel the same about someone saying Jones Jr's win over Toney was worth nothing by just saying bluntly "Toney was weight-drained". That does not tell the true story either.

And this statement is also true:

Toney's last fight before Jones was a KO win over Prince Charles Williams 4 months earlier at 168lbs where he wasn't said to be weight-drained.


I think Jones Jr's win over Toney is better than any win on Hearns's resume except Duran and maybe Benitez. I think Hearns's resume is better, narrowly but clearly. But I think Jones Jr was the greater fighter all-round.

 

I find it difficult to fully asses Jones' resume because of his dominance. How many fighters were kept to a limited status because they fought in Roy Jones' era? Who would Hagler have been if he had fought at middleweight in 1994? I don't like Jones' cockiness, but his statement "it's not that I fight nobodies, I make them look like they are nobody" has some merit. Big difference between Hearns and Jones: Hearns lost the two biggest fights in his prime, Jones was utterly dominant in his prime. I cannot imagine anyone in a fantasy matchup beating a prime Jones from 160 - 175. Hearns got beaten in his prime at good weights for him. One can easily imagine a select few between 147 - 160 to beat a prime Hearns. Both great fighters, Hearns with some more spectacular names, but Jones clearly more dominant.

 

Good post. I think there are some middleweights who could've beaten Jones, but not many. I just think RJJ was better all-round in his prime than Hearns was in his prime. Simple as that.

 

Ability does come into it as well and Jones was very talented but so was Hearns he had amazing power, accuracy, hand speed, timing and was one of the best pure boxers ever and all time great jab too.

 

If Jones's win over Toney is downgraded because of Toney's gluttony (I think the weight-drained thing is exaggerated anyway), then you should do the same for Hearns's win over an aging Duran for being a lazy drunk.

 

Exactly. Both wins could be discredited in this way, but neither win should be. Toney's last fight before Jones was a KO win at 168 over a good opponent (Prince Charles Williams). He was still making the weight at that time and winning.

 

RJJ had the speed, Hearns the right, and neither have dreat chins = toss up

 

can you imagine what would happen if Hearns landed on Roy's Glass Jaw? :yikes

 

Prime Roy did'nt have a glass jaw, but prime Hearns defitnaly had a suspect beard.

 

:nono Roy has ALWAYS had a Glass Jaw. You just don't develop one out of thin air. He was knocked down by Lou De Valle one of the few guys to land a solid punch on Roy.

If you want to go down that route, look who Hearns was KOed by and look who Glass Jaw Roy was starched by. There is no comparison. :good

 

Hopkins landed flush punches on Jones in their fight and he never wobbled Jones, James Toney also landed some punches on Jones, if Jones really had a Glass Chin he would have at least been wobbled, no?

 

So? How does that negate anything I wrote?