Do you regard Michael Spinks higher than Tommy Hearns?

While Hearns was never as dominant in any single weight class as Spinks was at Light heavy, I still might rate him higher p4p. He won titles in some 5 weight classes unless I've forgotten any. Beat guys like Duran, Benitez, Cueves, Hill and several other good fighters, along with having a lot more pro fights. The only set back was losing to Barkley but he's the better great in my opinion if even marginally.

 

I think I'd go for Hearns, whose best win (Duran) tops Spinks best win, especially if you consider how he beat Duran.
Went tooth and nail against Ray Leonard who is arguably a lock top 5 welter and was close to winning that fight. Spinks does have the dominance that is true, but Hearns consistently sought new challenges.
Had Tommy elected to stay put at 154, he'd have ruled there for years...

 

he is asking peak vs peak who was better h2h.

 

i think that in legacy and pfp hearns is greater, but h2h in their respective weights and peaks spinks maybe could be above hearns, , nobody did beat him, but also hearns faced better rivals than michael did.. close h2h... in legacy hearns wins

 

In that case if its a head to head argument, Hearns gets KTFO.

 

no.. i meant in their respective weights, who was the greater force h2h in their primes.. of course that in a fight between them spinks stops hearns, but it was not i meant

 

I view Spinks higher.

 

So basically mean head to head AND p4p? I'll go with Hearns.

 

yes:good

 

Spinks all day long, without any doubt for me...:deal

Too bad Spinks is most remembered for getting blastd out by Tyson, he most likely knew he was gonna lose that fight when he signed the contract, he wanted to make one big last payday before he retired....

Tyson was just to Big and strong for him, he looked like Hercules next to Spinks in that fight..

 

Hitman !!!!

 

Hearns

 

Hearns had more quality wins.

The Hitman

 

Spinks > Hearns @ 147
Hearns @ 154 > Spinks