Hearns vs. Sibson

Are you that fooled by professional records Coljimar?

I got past misleading records a long time ago. Scan the records of Galindez, Monzon, Arguello, Foster, Tiger, Dempsey before they won their championships.

The carefully manuvering of a fighter's career didn't begin until the age of Leonard and Hearns and hit full swing with Chavez.

 

Hagler was not the only one to beat these guys though. What is one to make of all the other losses? As I recall Sibson had a number of losses aside from the one to Hagler so clearly other guys could handle him.

 

Fair question, Cojimar. If I wasn't around to see him myself, I might be thinking the same thing. Of course, I'm old so I was able to catch him, read about him, study him.

You know how that is. First you read about a guy and if the reviews are interesting enough, you want to see him yourself. Sometimes we aren't impressed by what we see and other times, we think he's great and so on.

What could I say? I was inquisitive-much more so than today. The thing is, I was into the division. I followed other divisions too, even the welters but 160 was my favorite because I thought all the best fighters were there. For sure, fighters with the most viscious styles competed in it. It's nothing like that today unfortunately.

So since 160 was my favorite division i studied the development of not only the champion Hagler but any future prospects and contenders. That's how I know so much about the development of Thomas Hearns and why I chew Leonard out so often.

Remember that development is the key word. And also the development of the division itself and who's who, just the way it was in the heavyweight division was in the days of Ali, Frazier, and Foreman, Lyle, etc otherwise, names become meaningless.

I'm not bragging mind you. There are two other posters here who also have seen him. And we are not the only ones who have taken notice. KO magazine had labelled Tony as Hagler's best challenger to date so even if you can't see what I'm talking about, regardless of his record, there must be a good reason for it if KO magazine agrees with me
(I can't stand their writers)

You must understand that Tony wasn't an overight success. Other contenders like Obel had unbeaten records but against questionable opposition and only locally (he was kind of protected)

He didn't participate in international competition.

It was a highly competitive division where many of the best fighters came out with spotty records (Kalambay) and/or quickly burnt out.

It took Sibbo six years like Hagler, to reach full potential and earn that #1 status to get a title shot. From what I know, the fire went out after the Don Lee fight and like most of the other contenders, became a club fighter before age 30.

 

Let me get this straight:Hearns couldn't ko Sibson but DON LEE could?:rofl

 

We need to get some perspective here. I really liked Sibbo as a fighter when he was up and coming. I even hoped beyond hope that he'd do something with Hagler, although deep down I knew that Hagler would beat him up. He had a helluva left hook on him and was very strong but Thomas Hearns, like Hagler, was in a different league.

Tommy would have to watch the left hook, but he's been in with short fighters with potent left hooks before and done fine. Pipino Cuevas comes to mind. Tommy would control this fight from start to finish, using the jab, right cross and long range left and right hooks to the body. It would end in a mid round TKO or perhaps a straight KO as Sibbo did not quite have the chin of a DeWitt or Barkley IMO. It was a decent chin but perhaps not decent enough to withstand Tommy's power. I can't see Sibbo taking the right cross that Tommy hit Hagler with in round 1 of their fight.

If Sibbo connects cleanly with that left hook then yeah, he can knock Tommy out. But unless Tommy gets careless ala Barkley I it's much more likely that Hearns stops a game but outclassed Sibson in about the same time as Hagler did it.

 

Hopkins is a great, Sibson a blue collar fighter. Never really heard it was invented for certain fighting styles sorry. Class level yes, Sibson = blue collar, Hopkins = great.

When did Tony ever dominate a good fighter with his jab?
Better still, what noses did he break with his jab? More hot air as usual.

You really need to have a good hard look at what you type. Tony wasn't known for great speed. Excellent left hook, heart and determination were some of his bigger assets. Faster than your left jab? That'd be about it.

Considering he went inside most every round he ever fought what first round ko's does he have? What a ridiculous statement.

So he threw non stop punches every second of the fight. Righto :nut

Advantages that can only be found in your delusional fantasies.

Yeah, Tony has advantages in speed, right hand power, defence, experience vs top opposition, left jab etc.

Duran was one of the great inside fighters, pity he didn't get there

Tough match for sure, Tony's a live underdog, but i see Hearn's early here.

 

Trust your instinct, Rooster's full of it. It was an era of many lazy middleweights who could have been decent fighters if only. By far the best of it were fighters moving up.

 

Regarding Sibson's Losses, if one put them under the microscope they are "understandable" against the backdrop of a fighter learning his trade and not concerned with avoiding challenges,

Lotte Mwale - Tony was Ambushed against the little known Lottie - turns out Lottie was a big puncher, class boxer and Lightheavyweight ! - no reflection on Sibson - somebody did not do their homework !

Eddie Smith - A good class tenacious Pro - young Sibbo turned the tables in the rematch

Kevin Finnegan - when on form could be an absolute handful for anyone, including Marvin hagler himself, apparently in his first fight with Marvin it was level after 8 rounds, but Finnegan had won the previous two rounds and was closing strong when the fight was stopped on cuts in Marvins Favour, - there is no disgrace in being beaten by an in form pro like Finnegan

Marvin Hagler - Marvin made sure he used his mobility and Boxing Skills against Sibbo early, Marvin was aware it made little sense to invite a trading war early with a fresh Sibbo, Marvin was professional and used his versatility to make a potentially hard job much easier - not many I suspect could do this to this Sibbo and to this degree of tactical perfection.

In two of his last three fights Sibbo lost to Dennis Andries A big Punching Lightheavyweight and in his last fight, with little fire left in his belly, was served up to Frank Tate,

All loses to me were understandable in one form or another, its Only the Dangerous Don Lee loss that has me scratching my head somewhat, it was a See-Saw battle, at the Time Don was indeed Dangerous, he Saw Sibbo as a quick route to contendership, and Don was prepared to come off the canvas to make the most of his opportunity, tony was perhaps a little too overconfident and complacent ? however, I suspect on this evening Don would of upset quite a few respected Middles,

Tony. An excellent hard hitting fighter when fully on form, and if Barkley can scupper Hearns with a big left hook, I would not say that it was impossible for Sibbo to follow suit,

Hearns would no doubt be favoured, but Tommy was certainly not the dreadnought at middle that he was at Welter and Lt Middle, at Middle, Olajide, Kitchen, and Roldan all introduced Tommy to the Tremors, as mentioned Barkley's shock for Tommy went much further on the Richter Scale,

Location could be the decider, in the states Tommy would seem the safer choice, but at Empire Pool Wembly…with chants of SIBBO…SIBBO..SIBBO nearly raising the roof, Tommy may find this British Bulldog is one underdog that overturns the odds,chews them up and spits them out.

 

I'm certainly not convinced Finegan was on form, he'd lost 5 of hi9s last 7 bouts, 3 by stoppage. Even given 3 were Hagler and Minter one would think even the more reason for him to be negatively affected for what he endured. I'll grant you Tony was young and a couple of years off prominence tho.

 

Cobra I encourage you get your hands on this if you're able to and see it for yourself.

Tony was handling him fine until the moment Don switched stances on him. Tony was having his way with him but it totally threw him off when Don went lefty on him. And it left Sibbo vulnerable for the left. That was the punch that was getting him in trouble and sending him to the canvas but once Don switched back to orthodox, Tony got back in the fight winning the rounds.

It was a shock for me to see Tony beating a man 6-2 with his jab and sneak rights to the head and body. Thomas Hearns does not fight as a lefty and never did.

Tony scored another knockdown in the 8th and that was when Don went back to southpaw and immediately, you could see Tony become vulnerable once more as another left caught him and put him down again and the fight was waved over soon after.

 

Which of his fights have you seen Dopll? No one can say Sibbo didn't have the chin of Dewitt or Barkley with a straight face. Only those who've never seen Sibbo have the right to be doubters.

When was it when Hearns was outclassing all the contenders at 160? As I recall, he was felled like a tree in only his first defense. No successful defenses from what I could see.

And it didn't even come against a Sibson, Hamsho, Davison, or even a Scypion.

As for his chin, Tony was a top ranked contender and Dewit never was. If you're a talented fighter with a punch and no chin then you don't make it to #1 as was the case with Ramos but Sibbo had everything to compete at that level.

To say Sibbo's chin wasn't on the same with Barkley's is ridiculous and I don't think you are as familiar with Sibbo as you are Barkley. I know both fighters well and Iran was stopped in one by one of the stronger middleweights Benn. I think everyone's seen that match where Wallow got on his case in the interview for his tactics and overaggression.

Yet Barkely and Dewitt both stood up to Tommy. Even unranked novice Jeff Mckraken who didn't have any business in the ring with Thomas, went eight with Tommy.

Tommy didn't really do very well as a middleweight because of his short comings never competed at 160 when it was strong. That's why he dropped down to jr. middle and played it safe with Benitez and company for two years. Maybe if the division had more people like Hopkins, Tommy would make a couple defenses.

 

JohnThomas1 - Hi JT Re Kevin Finnegan regaining Form, After the two cut stappages to Hagler, Kevin seemed to slip into High class trailhore mode, but for Sibson, with the British title at stake Kevin was motivated to pull out all the stops, in his next fight he went over to Gretian Tonna backyard and took the European middleweight title of him, gaining revenge for an earlier defeat in the process, this was indeed a short title motivating revival for Kevin
- but a Draw and Loss in his next/last two fights showed that Kevin was indeed past his peak and not able to maintain the reguritated fine form, Kevin retired,

At his Best,as when he when to Paris and took the Euro Title off of French Darling Jean Claude Bouttier, Kevin was a very hard Middle to Beat and would be an Intriguing Matchup for the likes of Hart, Briscoe, Mugabi Dewitt ect ect.

 

Funny you should say that, last time i looked Sibson didn't even win the title let alone attmept to defend it



Allied to the fact Hearn's wins over Schuler and Roldan beat Tony's best wins at middle. He also gave Hagler a better fight.

 

AREA, I'm glad you set the record straight on Hagler-Finnegan. Someone here with a personal bias, was reading some newspaper account that Hagler was hopelessly behind while in fact it seems he had only lost the last two rounds when the cut opened on Kevin.

 

Schuler was top contender too, tell me again how many seconds (never mind rounds or minutes) he lasted against Hearn's?