i am now convinced Thomas Hearns was the greatest ever!

Frank Fletcher would've mauled Thomas, as great as he was.

 

Fletcher would have been slaughtered.

 

Hearns is a great fighter, bit let's be honest here; he's the worst fighter of the Fab 4.

He just didn't have the physical strength, toughness and conditioning.

Compared to guys like Hagler he was fragile. Being rugged is a part of boxing, a big one.

This is combat right? A limited one with rules and such. But still it's about men bashing one another with their fists. In that arena things like durability and stamina are very important. Don't you think?

 

Tommy was great, scintillating in fact. But a former welterweight that gets stopped by Iran Barkley is no way on God's green earth the greatest fighter ever. Period. Not even close. He's not even the greatest welterweight ever.

 

Don't know, if he caught Hearns at the right time, would be a problem.

 

LOL

Hagler was scared of Hearns?

Only in your world.

Hearns chin was excellent?

Hagler and Barkely rendered him practically unconscious

James Kinchen had him badly hurt

Yes, he beat Virgil Hill. Hill tried to outbox him from the outside. He never got inside to do damage.

Manny Steward didn't even think Hearns was the best fighter in history.

Please, get some help.

 

I think it's cool that someone thinks Hearns was the greatest.

 

At what age was that and after how many years as a pro?

Look at what you are saying. Marvin Hagler retired 'extremely early' at only 35 and after only 14 years as a pro.

I wish my wife forgave me as much as you forgive Tommy!

 

Fletcher was an arm puncher, could be cut and had a chin Hearns could easily crack. Hagler was spewing that he got exposed before he could secure a match with him, which was about to be set. It would have been a bloodbath in there, and it would be with Hearns.

Frank was a very exciting face first fighter who the networks loved, for good reason. He seldom had an easy fight even against lower level opposition and didn't have the punch to end things early very often.

It's become a bit fashionable in here to give anyone a chance against Hearns at 160 and many seem to think one good punch and he's gone.

Have a look at the sheer amount of punishment Hearns shipped against Hagler, who is considered a really good puncher but imo is a tad overrated for power by quite a few.

This is more like the Hearns i envision in these fights. How much did the Hagler fight take out of Hearns, particularly durability wise? We'll never know. Maybe not much, maybe a bit more. Look at the Roldan fight and punches he shipped early against Hagler are causing im some trouble. He was always average in durability but he took a bit in the Barkley rematch too tho i'd need to see it again.

Steward says as he declined he liked to keep him away from brawlers. Put him in with a boxer he said and he can still beat near anyone.

 

Agree with every word there JT. Feel better for being positive about my first boxing hero again.

 

I agree Hearns would beat Fletcher.

I think he would catch him on the way in at some point.

If Frank could get inside he could make it uncomfortable for Hearns, though.

I mean, Singletary, DeWitt and Sutherland were able to go the distance - prime Fletcher was at least as good as them.

Frank's management really screwed up. He was highly rated and in consideration for a title shot even before he beat James Green.

He had some rough moments against Green and seemed lucky Green got cut.

After beating Green, Fletcher was assured a title shot after Hagler took care of Sibson, but Fletcher's manager foolishly took a fight with Scypion, who had lost to Green. Lesson learned: if you are already assured of a title fight, don't fight or fight a tomato can. Don't fight anyone remotely dangerous.