:good I wouldn't call Hearns a 'choker' but the bottom line is he lost the two biggest fights of his career.:huh
Which is only said because he lost them. The facts are if he lost to Duran that too would be in your category, same with Benitez. You'd hear more about the Leonard rematch too if Tommy lost. We'd hear all about how he waited 7 years then still couldn't do it etc. It's a very narrow view. The biggest fights of Tommy's are Cuevas, Leonard, Benitez, Duran, Hagler, Leonard II and Hill. He won 5. Unbeknownst to many he was the minor underdog vs Benitez and Benitez was being spoke of as the man to possibly dethrone Hagler, and many thought he could beat Leonard at 154, a weight many thought he had grown into and was his finest. Hearns gets a bit ripped off historically actually. His wins over any and all, Cuevas, Benitez, Duran and Leonard II are commonly downplayed and fobbed off. Cuevas, a feared assassin at the time is now not much chop (even tho Hearns destroyed him) Benitez is now pushed back to minor status, Duran was soft or needed a poo or whatever other excuses his fans can clutch at on the day, Leonard was old etc. The fact is that Hearns was anything but a choker and Marvin and Ray were just too good on the day.Big shame that, losing to a guy many see as the second greatest 147 of all time and a guy proclaimed by all and sundrey to be top 2 160 ever. Sorry for the rant, but this is a pet topic (hate) this one. :good
................I'd just like to say I agree with Johnthomas' avatar. I mean...........I agree with John. Yes, that's right. No seriously, I do agree. Just because he lost to two fighters who were frankly probably just a hair better and all-time greats themselves doesn't mean the reason for Hearns' losses was a choke job. He acquitted himself very well in both fights and fought his heart out in both of them. He just lost, that's all. It happens. The Duane Bobick pick earlier was a terrific one.
Thanks Sal, your opinon is much respected. Oh and get ready for lots lots more of her in the coming weeks. :smoke
Thats cool mate! I've got a 'thing' about crap that goes around about Leonard having ducked Pryor...I know where you're coming from.
.............Who is that, John? That might be the most ridiculously good-looking woman I have ever seen. :shock:
Have a close look and you will see me ridiculing this more than anyone. I found the solid claim that the Pryor fight was tentatively set for right after Leonard - Stafford.
Before Tommy dethroned Cuevas, it was expected that he could win titles right up to the light heavyweight division. Burdened with that awesome anticipation, the only way he could have avoided getting short shrift historically would have been to win at least a share of the heavyweight title. However, many succumb to the pressures of meeting such high standards. (Greg Page, Gerry Cooney, Tony Ayala, etc.....) In the final analysis, Tommy measured up to what was projected for him, and he rebounded from his devastating losses to Hagler and Barkley, just as Duran rebounded from his devastaing loss to Hearns. (Cuevas never recovered from what Tommy did to him.) He did not overachieve or underachieve, but fullfilled his potential, and that's a very excellent realization. He outslugged Duran and Cuevas, and outboxed Benitez and SRL. Tommy was good enough, and we should all be satisfied with that. Surely a first ballot hall of famer.
The thing that has always been so aggravating to me about Duane Bobick is that he was such a notoriously slow starter, and kept his left hand so low that John Tate knew to roar out of his corner, and deliver four right hand leads to get him out quickly. How could anybody perform well enough in three round amateur competition to win the 1971 Pan-American Games HW Championship (over Teo Stevenson), the 1971 National AAU and 1972 Golden Gloves HW Championships, and the 1972 Olympic HW Bronze Medal, then be a slow starter as a professional? (Maybe if he had taken home the Gold, he wouldn't have been such a head case, but still...)