Hearns v Calzaghe at 168 or 175 in their respective eras who would win?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by mark ant, Mar 8, 2019.


  1. HerolGee

    HerolGee Loyal Member banned Full Member

    41,974
    4,029
    Sep 22, 2010
    COwardzage is a bit too big for a WW, though it never stopped him picking lower divisions guys during his wbo reign.

    Whereas Hearns was old by the time he moved up and could be outgassed.

    Joe wins messy on workrate after getting outboxed and dropped by hearns early on.

    However if Hearns had campaigned at SMW early on when young, pcking on beef, he'd end joe early.Zag would be petrified of him and fake injuries to escape the fight or move to another division.
     
    Last edited: Mar 9, 2019
    mark ant likes this.
  2. ray fritz

    ray fritz Active Member Full Member

    767
    271
    Nov 4, 2018
  3. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,562
    May 4, 2017
    Barkley was stoped by Benn because of the three knockdown rule and he was taking a hammering, Benn`s punches were far too quick for Barkley, there was nothing wrong with Barkley`s chin in that bout he just got hit with loads of power shots, he was wide open.
     
  4. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,562
    May 4, 2017
    You have a strong arguement but I feel an old Hokins would have scored far more shots on Tommy at 175 than he did on Calzaghe, he was still a high class operator even at that age.
     
  5. Beouche

    Beouche Juan Manuel Marquez Full Member

    23,723
    4,043
    Oct 13, 2010
    Lomachenko would stop Joe on his stool
     
    HerolGee and Jackstraw like this.
  6. HerolGee

    HerolGee Loyal Member banned Full Member

    41,974
    4,029
    Sep 22, 2010
    nomas is a tiny guy!
     
    mark ant and Beouche like this.
  7. PernellSweetPea

    PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,116
    5,732
    Feb 26, 2009
    I think without the 3 knockdown rule that fight would have been different or might have been. But Benn was landing so fast with those hooks.
     
  8. escudo

    escudo Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,298
    4,629
    May 13, 2014
    Who ever comes forward. Calzaghe has a lot more confidence in his chin than Hearns had any right to.
     
  9. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,562
    May 4, 2017
    Exciting fight but both men showed dire defensive skills in that bout, Benn was harder to hit v McClellan and Barkley went on to redeem himself and fight better in his rematch v Hearns. I feel a fight at super middle would have been completely different.
     
  10. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,562
    May 4, 2017
    Calzaghe couldn`t hit as hard as the guys that hurt or KO`d Hearns because of his damadged hands, most of his punches were slaps, Hearns took a lot of punishment in his rematch v Barkley but was not stopped, Ray was only a welter when he stopped Hearns but he didn`t knock him out cold and Ray stopped a light-heavy while fighting at a catchweight the punches Ray stopped Lalonde with were more powerful than most of Calzaghe`s fast point scoring shots, the hardest punch I ever saw Joe land was the punch that he floored Eubank with.
     
  11. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,562
    May 4, 2017
    lol! Loma would look funny if he made 175! I don`t think he could reach Joe`s chin at his tiny, little height!
     
    Beouche likes this.
  12. escudo

    escudo Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,298
    4,629
    May 13, 2014
    Aye but the pressure, chin and sheer volume of Zaghe would put a damper on Hearns offense. Joe was hard to keep on the outside. But getting inside would be dangerous but Joe was slick.
     
  13. PernellSweetPea

    PernellSweetPea Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,116
    5,732
    Feb 26, 2009
    Maybe, but Benn was always faster. Barkley did well against Hearns I think because Tommy was so declined by 1992. It was a very even fight and had Hearns won a round or two more he might have won or kept his title. But yeah neither guy had great defensive skills here. Benn was impressive. He actually looked worse against Dewitt.
     
  14. Beouche

    Beouche Juan Manuel Marquez Full Member

    23,723
    4,043
    Oct 13, 2010
    That's why he'd have to stop Joe on his stool!
     
  15. Wass1985

    Wass1985 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    14,436
    2,839
    Feb 18, 2012
    COwardzage? You learn those words at special school?