Hearns at 185 vs Marciano

So Hearns gets to match Marciano's weight at around 185 but it's suddenly not fair

Rocco Siffredi thought it was fine matching Hearns as he was vs Marciano at full weight but now Tommy's still gotta give up 40 pounds

 

OK, I know you´re a big Hearns- fan, I have no problem with that. But honestly, don´t you think, that when he was stopped by not great punchers like SRL and Barkley, such a question is a bit, well, ridiculous? He was stopped by fighters 4 and 5 weight classes beneath, who were not even p4p the puncher Marciano was. And let´s not forget, Marciano had a at HW proven iron chin... how ycan Hearns win? Please don´t say something like "With his reach and size advantages he would..." or anything like that...

 

Forget Marciano, you're comment was his chin is mediocre at best. This i have a problem with. The man has 4 losses (in reality) of which 3 are stoppages. One is possibly the second greatest 147 to ever fight, and in the 14th round mind. The next he took 10 rounds of punishment inside 3 rounds vs Hagler. How many could have taken the numerous full blooded blows from Hagler Hearns took that night in such a short time? Tho stopped in 3 this fight is actually a prime case for his chin being "reasonable" or such. As for Barkley's punching power, well i think he carried some really good clout. He caught Hearns with a full blooded bomb Tommy didn't even see.

So we have those 3 pertinent stoppages vs so many notable wins, some over all time greats and certainly big hitters.

I agree Tommy's chin was not on the level of fighters like SRL, Hagler etc but it was quite reasonable while never being "strong". I would agree it was his one slight weakness (stamina at times too) when compared to his strengths. It isn't however "mediocre at best" by any stretch.

With the added natural size and weight surely Hearns chin improves right? Of course it improves proportionately.

Really tho how can one take this thread seriously. It's a tongue in cheek reaction and extreme fantasy at best.

Cheers mate, i feel better now

 

I dont see what's so confusing.
If Hearns speed was GOOD (above average) for a 147 pounder, why dont we just imagine his speed being good for a 185 pounder ?

Obviously he's not gonna be fast as a welterwight, just as a welter Hearns wasn't as fast as a bantamweight.

 

Rocco makes some pretty stupid and badly thought out threads.

 

Guys, what do you think would happen if Maricano was a 25' foot T-Rex and he fought Larry Holmes?

 

Hearns' speed was 'good (average average)' for a 147lb fighter? Nope, his speed was sublime for the weight. Only a cigarette paper between his handspeed and Leonard's.

Yes, thats all we can do, imagine. Because my imagination might well be vastly different from yours. Hearns as a bantamweight or you matching his welterweight speed against other bantamweights? No question Hearns' speed at welterweight is quicker than most bantamweights.

It's fantasy thinking and beyond reality.

 

I agree with your whole post, I just meant that when his chin gave him some problems at 147 and 154 lbs, how can he survive a proven world- class HW- puncher? :thumbsup

 

He's proportionally larger so his chins swollen to Eubank like proportions.

 

:rofl

 

:rofl

 

No, he wouldn't be able to, because the point of the thread was to have them at the same weight.

 

Why don't we make the match-up at 175 or even 168. Just because the Rock fought at 180+ doesn't mean to say he couldn't cut to 175 or below. If he stops eating the spaghetti I'm sure he could cut some weight. Tommy at 175 vs the Rock get any takers?

 

:good

 

**** yeah, the standard Hearns vs Rocky is gonna cave. Big hitter that Rock.