If Hearns had never defended against Barkley...

I wouldn't waste my time replying to idiots personally.

 

Nunn would've beaten everyone back then. They all knew it.

 

I think Eubank was made for Hearns.

Toney walks Hearns down and takes him out.

 

It wouldnt be long before somebody else capitalized on his weak chin and aging legs. Probably McCallum could have beaten him by then.

 

Tomey wasnt ready in 88. Somebody else would beat him to it.

 

Oh in 88, Nigel Benn finds a bomb from an absurd angle after being out on his feet himself.

 

This content is protected

 

He was definitely skilled enough. I often wonder if he hadn't faced Toney, what could have been.

 

Interesting question. He has a good chance against all of them, but there are a good amount of dangerous punchers in that lot and I think McCallum would be difficult as well even though he didn't punch hard at all at 160. I think he gets past the first three, but then it starts getting tricky.

 

Neither do I. He wasn't a puncher and his defence was quite dependent on his height and reach, which is bad news against such a sharp puncher of Hearns's reach and height.

 

Maybe so, but not a professional thing to say man.

 

We all know Nunn was the top boy. He already wiped out the division beating Tate and Kalambay, Leonard didn't want to know.

 

Oh it's highly professional.

 

I might beg to differ.

 

Bless.