Light - Heavyweight History Hd 2 Hd debate

Maxim vs Harold Johnson

you want to go first? Or me?

 

OKay-

Styles breakdown-

Maxim- A good counterpuncher, not in a flashy kind of way, but could lure his man onto shots by pawing with the jab etc, not bad at feinting and had a bit of an all-roundedness about him. Footwork was not great but he was a decent mid-ring general. Moore was too good for him, too active with things that Maxim couldn;t defend, too unpredictable and too quick off the mark. But he did have quite a good defense in general. Also, the likes of Ezzard Charles were too good, but he was usually too good for everyone at this poundage.

Johnson- well we have a pure boxer here, and one that was well schooled in just about every department that his fighting style was concerned with. His jab was accurate and strong. He had top quality when it came to pulling the trigger for the right cross, as in, when the jab landed the right would be thrown the pipe right away. His footwork was quality and he could mix up his work with hooks off the jab etc. In short he's a real boxing technician. Moore again was too good for him, but not on every occasion, and of course he outpointed Ezzard Charles though i hear it could have went either way (and it was really not a light-heavy contest and maybe not a prime Ezzard).

Johnson is a better boxer imo and could excel in a boxing match like this. Maxim won't hurt him enough to stop him either imo, i favour Harold.

Go ahead

 

Okay thanks. Well i don;t really see Maxim winning, but he had a good resume himself and i don't want to give him a raw deal. Johnson is beatable but to the best of my knowledge i can only really remember the bulk of such losses coming by virtue of some kind of heavy hitting that threw him off his game. I just don't see that happening here.

Johnson would win on points wouldn't he?

 

Well that's that!

Let's have an action fight-

Glencoffe Johnson vs light heavy Thomas Hearns

 

Yeah, you'd think Tommy even at 175 is of a different class, but Barkely was able to constantly pound away on this not prime version of Tommy. Of course Barkley is big and more wild in his approach but it's not too dissimilar from Johnson at all. At the higher weights Tommy was a quality boxer and more composed than at welter i always felt, but on the flipside i don't think all his elitness as it was, carried all the way up with him. Hearns doesn't have a great defense for me, but he is a great boxer. His jab and hook will score here, and even if he engages Johnson he's better than him. He only needs to watchh is chin imo.

Like i say, it's only the unpredictability factor that is inherent in a past prime Hearns that worries me.

Any additional thoughts mate?

 

Yeah i'm on your wavelength here. It's basically just a good fight that Hearns should win imo. Johnson has lost to lesser light-heavies, though he always thinks he's been robbed even though he wasn't! I reckon Hearns takes it comfortably on points but Johnson has a couple of big rounds that scare Tommy's fans.

 

I've got to be honest i reckon Roy is capable of doing it.

It's a definite that Moore can ko him though, stonewall definite.

What's your thoughts on how it goes if you're forced to pick on an ultimatum type one-off occasion then?