Hearns vs. Fitzsimmons at catchweight

I have looked into it.

The limit was 154 lbs for this fight which strengthens your position.

Bob Fitzsimmons as champion raised the limit to 158 lbs presumably because his making weight had been prety marginal at 154.

 

He is a bit of an enigma waiting to be uncovered.

He was thought of as a miracle of cleverness in his own time and those who saw him fight ranted about him well into the 1930s.

Just as Adam Pollack fleshed out John L Sullivan for the curent genaration there might be a writer out there who could flesh out the Nonpareil.

To answer the original question I think that he was basicaly a junior welter in todays money which puts him prety high pound for pound.

To tell you more with any conviction I would have to dig deeper.

 

Modern rules, Hearns KO within the first three rounds.

 

yeh i read that article. Im saying that littler gloves means your punches are more accurate and can land in places which cause more damage for example a solar plexus shot of the type Fitz landed on Corbett would be almost impossible to land with todays gloves

see above

thats truly amazing Fitzimmons has just gone up in my rankings. the more i learn about him the more im impressed what a fighter.

 

yeh i do realise this also but it is alot harder to really land in a good solar plexus shot with bigger gloves on, even shots to the throat and ears are alot harder and im sure the guys then would have used throat shots and ear shots to great effect.

Definitly underrated i dont do ratings but i dont think a Top 10 or even top 5 rating cant be justified. A truly great fighter, how did he slip through my net for so long

 

number 1 is pushing it IMO

but some people have Jack Johnson and sam langford in teh top 5, i think what Fitz has doen is comparable to them

i wouldnt personally rate him taht high though

 

Not at all. The more you look at Fitzsimmons, the closer you will have him to no 1.

Cross trainer posted a link to one of his boxing manuals last week. And it had Fitzsimmons stating that went he beat Jim Corbett he weighed in at 158 lbs. Others sources say 168 but to be honest, a direct quote from Fitzsimmons with no reason to lie, unless it was a typo, is probably the most believable of all.

Either way, for him to KO and beat the world's best fighter, and a fighter who at the time, must have been at worst one of the top 10 fighters that ever lived, is surely the greatest pound for pound performance of all time, bar none, and by a long way. Others like Tunney, Spinks , Charles, Langford etc have been competive against heavyweights, even though they are really much smaller, but they are all firstly, natural light heavys and not heavys and secondly they all did so, by going up in weight themselves. Fitz blasted the heavys while still under the Supermiddleweight limit. Absolutely unbelievable and never done before. The common pick is welterweight Sugar Ray Robinson. Great fighter, who was world class at light heavy, but again, when he fought this high in weight, he too went up in weight.

In so far as longevity, he was the best middleweight in the world for 20 years or more. When he lost his fight to Bill Lang in 1910, it was a performance that was as good as any other middleweight would have put up. The only reason he never held the belt until retirement was because he relinquished it early, although he still basically fought at the limit. He won the Light heavy championship when ridiculously past his prime, and only reason he didnt win it earlier, was because no such belt existed. He was the best light heavy for 20 years or so also.

Purely on record, there is no fighter which did what Fitz did and it is virtually assured that there will never be a fighter who even goes close to doing what he did. After the last couple of months, i am starting to rank him as the no 1 P for P fighter ever, and i am starting to clear him out from everyone else. I would be interested for anyone to give me a fighter and hear how or why their record stands up to fitz, and maybe an argument can be made, but i cant see many strong arguments at the moment.

And back to the original question. Anyone with the Hearns KO 1, KO2 and other early outclassing KOs is just being silly. I agree with Gaters comments about the small gloves, but either way, Hearns' power is not going to outclass Fitz so early when Jeffries power couldnt. If Hearns wins this he needs to dig deep, land a lot of punishment, take a lot of punishment, and most importanly, hope that his modern combination punching will overwhelm Fitz. Realistically, i think it would be a great competive fight, and he may even knock Fitz down and rattle him, but Fitz will fire him back. His best hope is a Hagler Hearns style shootout, with KDs both ways, but i cant see Tommy coming out on top to be honest. Fitz wins this by KO.

 

Not sure who would win if they time-machined each out of their prime; I might still go Fitzsimmons. If they came along at the same time, I'd be considerably suprised if Fitzsimmons didn't more or less decapitate Hearns.

 

Tracy Callis has Fitz at #1 pound for pound and for my money that is one of his less bizzare picks.