Hearns vs Jones Jr

Toney and Hopkins have nothing to do with my point.

Roy had similar abilities to Ray, as well as being bigger and more powerful.

If Ray employed a good strategy to beat Tommy, then there's no reason why Roy couldn't have replicated that.

 

Ray was dropped before by lesser fighters.

He didn't have an iron chin.

He couldn't have taken the shot that knocked out Duran, but Tommy couldn't land it on him in their fight.

 

he landed enough to get leonard out of there, leonard was just teaktough. :yep

great recovery abilities in his prime.

 

WTF kind of post is this? Are you alright kid?:think

 

It's easy to see Hagler was a great boxer/puncher... Look at the Duran fight... He boxed Marvelously in that fight... If he wanted to stay outside against Hearns he could do it easily as Hearns in most fights turned into the hunter, rather then hunted.

 

I think De La Hoya was a better pure boxer then Hearns was....

 

Roy knocks him out, mid rounds. Too much speed + power.

 

Sometimes a legendary older fighter doesn't beat a legendary modern day fighter... Just because you're a past great doesn't mean you beat the greats of today... you have to learn that.

You have to look at the attributes here.

 

Barkley beat hearns at light heavy with not even half the speed or ability as Roy at 175.. At 160 Roy was peaking...Truly amazing fighter in his prime.

 

Ray was tough.

The point is, he didn't beat Tommy because he had an iron chin and he was able to take his bombs, he beat him because he outfought him without getting caught by anything huge.

Now if Ray could outfight Tommy to a win, then there's no logical reason why Roy couldn't have done so too.

I'm not arguing that Tommy couldn't have beaten Roy. I'm arguing that Roy could have replicated what Ray, Marvin and Barkley did.

Tinman is saying that there's no way Roy could have beaten him, which in my opinion is just ridiculous.

 

You've completely missed the point I was making.