Hearns vs Hopkins

Hearns at middleweight would definitely beat the Hopkins who fought Taylor but that Hopkins wasn't prime, he was 40 years old, at least a couple of years past prime and based upon his later success at light heavy possibly drained at the weight.

You can't use the Hopkins who fought Taylor as an example of how Hearns would do with a prime Hopkins. That would be like using Hearns loss at 42 against Uriah Grant as an example for how Hopkins would beat a prime Hearns there is no valid correlation. We are talking prime for prime here at 160lbs.

 

There is some correlation with Hopkins, because he maintained his prime longer. Also against quicker fighters he's always struggled. I'm trying to think of the quickest fighter he has the W over. Maybe DLH or Vanderpool and both won several rounds, brought his output down. I'm actually watching the Vanderpool fight now, Vanderpool won the first 3 imo

 

At the end of the day, Hearns was the one losing to a lesser MW in his prime, though. He was also almost KO'd by an aging Leonard, not to mention what Hagler did to him.

That Hopkins had two close, disputed losses when 40 isn't very much compared to that. And I think he was several years past his prime by then.

 

Was Hearns prime against Barkley though? I'm not sure he was anymore. And losing to a lesser fighter doesn't mean you can't beat a better fighter that is stylistically suite to him. Hopkins is not a massive puncher, nor is he a great inside fighter

I wouldn't write Hopkins off BUT Hearns will outbox him early NO DOUBT. And if he starts aggressively as he often did he might knock Nard out. Or he could just hang onto a decision

Hopkins has never in his career beaten anyone with Hearns attributes, or on the level of Hearns for that matter. Hearns beat Leonard and I think Leonard beats Hopkins, actually I'd put money on that 1

 

He's not on the level of Toney, but still a very, very good one. In his prime his forté was to trap opponents on the ropes and destroy them in close.

I wouldn't. I think Hopkins was a clearly better MW than Leonard.

 

Yes, actually this COULD happen. I actually give Hopkins till the 8th but only because he was such a sturdy champion.

Picture the night Tommy stopped Duran with just a couple added pounds. We're talking PRIME Hearns, not the so so just moved up version from the days of Ernie Singletary & Jeff McKraken.

Remember, this was Hearns, a new breed of athlete. Bigger, better, faster. As I once in a publication "Tommy Hearns looks as tho he were produced in a lab"

Don;t know if Hopkins can stand up to this kind of athlete, this kind of speed. I picture Hop trying to move in on the faster Hitman, catching jabs N right hands flush. During exchanges when BH gets in, Tommy dominates 3-1 with his faster hands. But not only that, Hearns ALSO lands with more authority.

Oh sure, some will miss their mark but the ones that do will take their toll eventually.

The question is, how long can Hop take this?

Hard to imagine Hopkins coming out unscathed the moment Hearns unloads. Tommy with a sneaky fast lazer of a right hand catches Hopkins perfect and ruins him for the night. The finish just a formality

Hopkins puts up a valiant effort but takes too much battering to the face and eventually falls prey to an accumulation of punishment, much like Sibson against Hagler

Hearns by 8th round tko

 

I think Hopkins takes this with ease actually. For as great as Hearns was, he was a one dimensional fighter in his own right and as his career went along he struggled more because of it, he pretty much fought all his fights with his left arm by his waist and jabbing with it and right hand by his chest waiting for his opponent to be stationary enough to land the overhand right, in fight after fight that's all he did mostly......Hopkins would have that Hearns scenario timed by the end of the 2nd round or early in the 3rd and when that happens its over for Tommy.

Lesser fighters were able to avoid Tommy's big right hand long enough to extend the fight longer or take Tommy to a UD, this may shock some folks here but Tommy Hearns was offensively a limited fighter and his blazing hand speed is very much exaggerated due to the Duran win.

Hopkins wins either by very late stoppage of wide UD.

 

I think Hopkins takes this with ease actually.:conf

NO Chance does he!!!

 

If Hearns stays on the outside, keeps Hopkins on the end of his punches, he can overwhelm Hopkins with his speed.

If it goes to fighting on the inside, Hopkins would dissect Hearns.

 

I'd slightly favor Hearns. Hopkins does not have the two tools that troubled Hearns most--a big punch to capitalize on Hearns' weak chin and an aggressive, pressure style to exploit Hearns' frequent lack of conditioning. Most likely, I see a cautious fencing match, a bit like Jones v. Hopkins I. There Hearns is faster and a bit "longer." I would also not rule out a Hearns knockout, since Hopkins' chin, while good, is not at the level of Hagler's granite beard.

 

I think Hopkins could have actually beaten Jones if he fought a busier, more aggressive fight (think Mayweather v. Castillo I). But it seems like he's too deliberate a guy to fight that style and turn it into a Hagler v. Hearns type of a match. Is there an example of a prime Hopkins that really went after an elite fighter from the bell onward? I can't think of any. For instance, it was obvious after the first Taylor fight that the way to beat him is to be more aggressive; but Hopkins refused to do that. Sure he was old(er) at that time, but I think he's too set in his ways.

 

I'd take the 147-154 Leonard that beat Kalule/Hearns over any version of Hopkins.

 

At least two-dimensional, not one-dimensional Nobody ever out-boxed Hearns--not Leonard, not Benitez.

 

P4p or you actually think he'd beat Hopkins at MW even as a WW?

 

P4P there's no debate. And yes, I think the 154-pound version of Leonard can beat Hopkins at 160.