Hearns vs Mayweather

I ain't gunning you my man! :good Our opinions mean the same....very little in the grand scheme of things :thumbsup

Wicky Vs Leonard was more a reaffirmation that I felt this was a poor thread

 

I reckon tghe weight advantage for Barry and Eddie could be telling, especially as they have twice as many arms and legs as Mayweather alone.

Would it be a tag team sort of arrangement or both at the sametime?

I think Mayweathers defensive skills could be key as he'd be adept at avoiding aany simultaneous attack from the two of them.

I think he could KO them both with body shots.

 

Was on another board about a year or so back and this question arose. Figured I'd see a pretty dominant response in favour of Hearns but was shocked to see almost everybody picking Mayweather. Think it must be an age thing, can't pin it on anything else, other than blatant ignorance.

Hearns destroys Floyd. I can't think of a single way in which Floyd could defeat Tommy Hearns. It's an absolutely horrific match-up for Mayweather and one he would most definitely avoid if Hearns was around today.

 

This isn't the first time this mythical fight has been discussed on here. We may as well talk about how Floyd would get on against Jackson at 154lbs, Ray Robinson and Sam Langford because he would have had about as much chance against them as he would against Tommy. None.

Hearns is a lanky monster with a long reach for a heavyweight and lightning quick. He laid out middles with 1 punch all the time, Floyd is a 5'8 guy with ok power, not much of a work rate and was rocked by Mosley. His defence is great against Baldomir, Cotto, Hatton, but they aren't offering the type of problems HEarns would. Diego Corrales is not like Hearns either apart from being a tall puncher, Diego was a slow (by Hearns standard) inside fighter and not the long range sniper Hearns was. Its a styalist mismatch and legacy wise Hearns pisses that too. Mayweather isn't on the same level, he's a great Super Featherweight, Tommy is an ATG £4£.

 

Floyd goes out like Schuler.

 

I wish he would.

 

Meant in a fight

 

Duran has a one of the strongest cases as the best fighter since the retirement of Ray Robinson, Thomas Hearns is a lock for the 5 best welterweights in history, same for Hagler at middle.

Why would'nt they be close ?

 

floyd by decision

 

:rofl

 

I'm glad you share my love for Duran :good

In regard to your question: Ray is considered one of the best Welterweights who ever lived, as rightly so. In fact, I have him just behind Robinson. But he got his arse handed to him by a career lightweight in Montreal, and Tommy was outboxing him comfortably for the first 6, and won rounds 9-12 on all 3 judges scorecards. To me, that says Ray was comprehensively outboxed for the majority of the fight.

Of course, the fight was a 15 rounder, and Ray should get props for the win (I've said it was perhaps the best come from behind victory ever), but I think too many people these days say 'oh, he beat Hearns', which doesn't tell the full story of the fight.

Ray is in my top 15, but I can't have him in my top 10, let alone above Duran, whom I can make a case for being the best ever

 

10 rounds to 5.

 

Career lightweight is not accurate IMO. Duran has antop win over Marcel at super feather, over the limit fights during his lightweight reign, and solid wins over good light welterweight contenders such as Mamby and Brooks, as well as taking a few fights at welter beforehand and bossing recent titlist Palomino in a career-best performance.


Duran was already a pound-for-pound phenomenon and not at any size disadvantage at welter.