Bigger robbery: Whitaker D12 Chavez or Hearns D12 Leonard

PernellSweetPea · Dec 31, 2018

Saintpat said: ↑

Both were robberies, but I have found upon rewatch that Leonard-Hearns II was an extremely entertaining battle.

Two men with pride laying it on the line.
Click to expand...

It was a very good fight. Ray underestimated Hearns in that fight. He saw the Kinchen fight 7 months beforeand thought he could have a win easily over his fellow legend and that would cap his domination over him. Ray would not have fought him again had he known how hard the fight would have been. There was a look in Ray's eyes at the end of round 4 after Hearns ducks a punch which Ray realized, this Hearns was defensively solid and a tougher guy than he thought. What did Ray think he could retire for years and Hearns fight top guy after top guy in those years, and Hearns would be a push over? Tommy out experienced Ray in that fight. Everything Ray dished out Tommy had an answer for, much different than 1981 when Ray was a little more experience to Hearns being relatively less as far as going 15 rounds. I loved the fight and I wish Tommy would have gotten the decision. Either way Ray would not have fought him again and that point or two win would have meant Hearns fights Duran in a rematch of 1984.. Although Duran and Ray might have fought again, since I don't think Duran wanted Hearns again either.

JohnThomas1 · Jan 1, 2019

PernellSweetPea said: ↑

Have I watched the fight? This is why we have opinions, not everyone's is the same. I don't think there is another fight I have seen more in one year than that one in 1989. This might be a fight I watched the most ever. I love watching fights over and over again. I can memorize the moves and study them, especially that era. Today I don't study the fight as much. I might watch them once or a couple of times, but not like then. Every day that summer I watched the fight after I bought those videos this is the truth- a box set came out with both Leonard/Hearns fights. although I don't like how they put Gil Clancy and Tim Ryan doing commentary 8 years after acting like they were in 1981so they could sell it as a set-they did not do the original 81 fight yet they acted like they were commentating the action. Although Tim Ryan said between rounds, this is how the round was scored-so that gave it away. I know this fight in my head both HBO and PPV, and PPV is better with Marvin.

What did you not understand. I know I said he was not that hurt in that fight which means he was indeed hurt. He was hurt just not significantly and Tommy lasting to the last bell demonstrates this.. Saying not that hurt means he was not hurt ( in my mind which is the only one I can speak from) to the point in other fights where he get's stopped but it comes under the he was hurt meaning. Kinchen hurt him significantly. Hagler did. Barkley did obviously more with one punch than Ray did in that 1989 fight. Due to size or whatever, Tommy took his punch very well. Ray liked to hit on the breaks like with Lalonde.. Ray in the first fight hurt him more than in 1989 that is for sure. . If I said he was hurt at the end of round 9 that would obviously encompass the fight which comes under the comment not that hurt -also. Thomas was hurt at the end of round 9 In round 5 everyone thought he was hurt, but to me is questionable rather stunned a little. He was off balance and fell back into the ropes and Ray poured it on again and knocked from area to area and Tommy had to regroup and start hitting Ray to the body and landing some nice right hands and Tommy was not really too hurt-not in my mind if anything more stunned by when Ray backed him up and hit him than the initial punch in round 5,, I think near 1:45 of the round , similar to how Tommy poured it on at the beginning of round 7, yet Ray was hurt there with a left hand and Tommy poured it on and backed up Ray and worked him over, but to Ray's credit he survived it.. , In that fight Ray did not really hurt Tommy too badly. If he had he would have stopped him probably. Ray did not have the power he thought he had in that fight. It is easy to see when Hearns was hurt in fights.. Against Roldan there were times Roldan hurt Hearns and the announcers didn't even notice which is when you probably say someone is hurt. I watch the fights and figure it out myself. There is a difference between hurt and tired and backing up. And with Hearns if he was really hurt it would have been a different story in that round 12. It is about knowing Hearns and seeing how he reacts to be hurt or just tired. With Tommy being tired was always something to be concerned about, but later in his career he could survive being tired.
Click to expand...

Hearns was genuinely "hurt" at more than one point. One doesn't have to be carried out of the ring or be laying flat on the canvas to be legitimately hurt. Hearns had plenty of energy in the first minute of the 12th - until he got tagged. It was then a battle of survival by clinch.

Log in or Sign up

Bigger robbery: Whitaker D12 Chavez or Hearns D12 Leonard

PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

JohnThomas1 VIP Member

Log in or Sign up

Forums

Bigger robbery: Whitaker D12 Chavez or Hearns D12 Leonard

PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

JohnThomas1 VIP Member