At 147 who should be favored over Tommy Hearns?

I'll watch Walker's welterweight fights right after you do Let me know what he looks like, I'll lend you my time machine if you want because you've got **** all chance of seeing him otherwise at welterweight :good

In any case, calling Walker pretty much a Cuevas without power is totally absurd. Walker had one of the very best chins EVER. The fact you wash over that little fact when discussing a match up with Hearns shows your utter irrelevance to the discussion. I won't even get to the issue of skill which is itself a contentious claim of yours.

And I quote:

"Part of the reason hes hated is because hes the figurehead of the sport and is held to a higher standard, Cocky and Black (YES - the most hated of combinations), and talks dumb **** without first engaging his brain."

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=207792

Quite clearly you are saying there, amongst other things, that Floyd is hated because he's black. Where's your proof for that by the way?

 

Trinidad has zero chance vs Hearns, he`d be outboxed & stopped brutally in 5 rds.

At least you said controversial I suppose.

 

Against Hearns a clear favourite?? Only Robinson for me. He shouldn't have lost the Leonard fight, what he was thinking coming in at 145 I dont know. Alot of people also seem to be picking Burley.. but I dont think that anybody other than Ray Robinson could do that; Ray Leonard couldnt do it, Benitez couldnt do it and Virgil Hill couldnt do it.

I'd make Hearns a favourite over Burley and I think he might just be too big for Napoles; the guy is a H2H monster.

 

From all the fighters Ive seen & not just read about, only the 2 sugar`s should be favoured over Hearns & in 15 rd bouts too, 12 rds could see these fights go either way on points IMO but both sugar`s catch him late on, maybe very late on... Hearns was THAT good.

 

Based upon the one fight of footage against Oakland Billy Smith? Burley was a v good puncher with a great chin but I think he'd need to take the role of agressor to beat him and by all accounts that isnt his style.

 

Watch Burley's resume at welter and Hearns. It's not particular close. Add to that the articles on him and you get a good image of how good he was.

 

Well based on resume then Burley woops Leonard too. He'd also beat Duran at welter to. Whats your point exactly, it's also a fact that Hearns wiped out Cuevas in two rounds and beat a master boxer in Benitez 7 pounds north of welter with a broken right hand.

If you can point to an opponent beaten by Burley who was 6 foot 1, a huge hitter and possessing of a tremendously long and snapping jab then i'll concede the arguement.

 

Well, actually I think he would beat Duran and should be a slight favourite over Leonard. Cueveas is not in the same league as Burley and like you said, Benitez was at a higher weight at which Hearns was more durable, experienced, seasoned and comfortable.

Hm, he beat Moore, didn't he?

 

Duran vs Burley is a great fight and style match up where I cant pick a winner. But what exactly can Burley do to beat Tommy? Staying on the outside basically guarentees defeat and did Burley have it in him stylistically to march forward take those bombs and duke it out?

One last comment, Hearns beat Benitez so comfortably that it's hard to envisige him losing to him at any weight.

 

That's a myth imo. Even Hearns could be outboxed and Burley was one of the few man able to do so.

 

The only guy who could do it is Ray Robinson IMO. Burley is the man to do so based on conjecture? He was a great fighter but how is he supposed to do it? Hearns showed in the Benitez fight that he could be patient and work solely off the jab.

Maybe Burley was a better pure boxer than Leonard, but he was also a smaller man. To beat Hearns you need to take risks, it took Leonard 14 rounds to figure that one out. Duran was too tentative when they fought and I think he'd have a good chance against a welterweight Hearns.

Im going to ask again how Burley would 'outbox' hearns? Slip the jab and counter with right hands? All I can say is that Thomas Hearns despite being a boxer puncher was never outboxed in his entire career. Leonard took a risk and won, Hagler absorbed some huge punishment and benifited from Tommy breaking his hand and Barkley landed a miracle blow.

Burley is at a styles disadvantage IMO and loses a decision.

 

What did Hearns do at welterweight to make him favourite over most of the all-time greats ?

 

I feel you bro...At least you putting forth some good argus...Gotta disagree tho'...Tito's biggest problem would be to get to Tommy's chin to begin with...Most of the cats who beat Tommy did it by being able to take those big right hands and laying hard on him once inside...Somehow I don't see Tito taking those shots and staying up..no offence,but I just don't see it...

Plus add the fact that Tito was slow with his feet....not too bad with his hands at 147...and he is mid-range type fighter...add it all up and it spells KO for Trinidad..Tommy's single shot for a so-so defence like Tridad's is sure gonna lead to a blow-out at some stage in this fight.

 

He wouldn't get into a jabcontest with Hearns. I suppose he would use his defensive ability and superior handspeed to slip Hearns jab and work those exposed rips of his with the left on his way in and throw a right on his way out. He would expose Hearns defensive flaws, use his footwork and lateral movement to avoid most of Hearns' bombs. He would eat some punches from Tommy no doubt. But he has the chin to take them and the speed, power and skill to get Hearns' respect, make him cautious and knock him out.

 

Ray Robinson is a clear favorite. Hearns is a genuine threat to everyone else.