Is Tommy Hearns Overrated At Welterweight ?

I guess whether or not he’s overrated at welter depends on exactly WHERE the person in question rates him. I think Hearns is one of those fighters who should rate extremely high in a p4p list but probably not very high in any one particular division. Where I think he’s truly overrated is junior middle. Many people have openly stated that he’s the best man ever at 154. Well it’s certainly true he had some huge wins there, I believe the number of actual fights could be counted on less than a full hand with the best ones coming against men who weren’t even indigenous to that class themselves.

 

would you say that Hearns should rate higher than McCallum at 154 despite him going 35-0 in that class, 7-0 in title fights and wins over Jackson, Curry, McCrory and Kalule ? Sure Tommy’s wins over Duran and Benitez are huge but not only is that not a lot of depth but how much did those guys actually do in that class themselves ?

 

As always with rankings DP, it depends on your criteria.

If your criteria is assumed H2H, then I'm sure you'd agree Hearns is a lock for the top 10 all time at WW.

If it is purely on win resume, i.e. ignores how they looked, ignores how they beat the fighters they won against, ignores the fights they lost & how they lost them, but rather is literally just a side by side comparison of the names they beat, then Hearns has no place in an all time top 10 at WW.

My own criteria is to review their career at that weight, evaluate who they beat, when & how, and who they lost to, when & how, to make a determination of how good they were relative to the evolution of their era. Based on that criteria, I rate Hearns #8 all time at WW. Even his loss to my #2 at WW, SRL, where he was ahead after 12-rounds, enhances my view on how good he was. If he came that close to beating a prime version of the second best WW of all time, how far behind can he be?

I think based on my critera, Hearns is way, way ahead of Whitaker & Pacquiao based purely on WW contests, as I'm confident the below comparison illustrates:

Hearns:

WW Record = 29-1
Key WW wins = Pipino Cuevas, Luis Primera, Randy Shields, Cylde Gray & Angel Espada
WW loses = SRL, in a fight he was ahead in after 12-rounds

Whitaker:

WW Record = 12-2-1
Key WW wins = Buddy McGirt x 2 & Wilfredo Riveria x 2 (I also consider his draw vs Chavez as a win for ranking purposes)
WW loses = ODLH in a close fight slightly past his prime & Felix Trinidad

Pacquiao:

WW Record = 12-5
Key WW wins = Miguel Cotto, Tim Bradley x 2, Keith Thurman SD, shot & weight drained ODLH, Joshua Clottey, past prime Shane Mosley, JMM MD, Brando Rios
WW loses = Tim Bradley, JMM, Floyd Mayweather, Jeff Horn in a close fight & Yordenis Ugas whilst past his prime

 

In answer to the original question about Hearns at welter, I’d say… maybe a little bit overrated, yeah.

I mean, if you’re looking at title fights, his record is 4-1: the title win over Cuevas, then the three defenses against Luis Primera, Randy Shields and Pablo Baez before the unification defeat to Leonard. That’s numerically not much different from Barney Ross, who won, lost and regained the title against fellow ATG Jimmy McLarnin before defending successfully against Izzy Jannazzo and Ceferino Garcia and finally losing his title to another ATG, Henry Armstrong. And you don’t usually see Ross in the welter top 10.

Having said that, Hearns did have some very decent pre-title scalps - the likes of former champ Angel Espada and former or future title contenders like Harold Weston, Clyde Gray, Bruce Curry and Bruce Finch.

But I think he gets rated so high because he came so close to beating Sugar Ray Leonard. He almost gets as much credit for that defeat as for his wins. The feeling is that there aren’t many welters in history who could have beaten him that night and it took one of the very best to do it. So it’s quite hard to separate his actual achievements from his H2H capabilities at this weight and I think that’s often what tips him into the top 10 on a lot of lists.

 

Good post Jel.

The Ross comparison is an interesting one. Ross has a higher quality WW win resume than Hearns, if all you evaluate is fighters beaten, not the dominance of the wins. However, Hearns:

1) Was more dominate in his flagship wins at the weight
2) Has a better W/L record - 29-1 to Barney's 21-2 at the weight
3) Hearns was competitive against SRL in his loss, leading after 12-rounds, whereas Armstrong utterly dominated Ross. Admittedly Ross's loss to McLarnin was close, but then so was at least one of his wins over Jimmy, which reinforces point 1.

Viewing their WW records on balance, I extrapolate that Hearns was the superior WW relative to the evolution of the era in which he competed, than Ross was. That said, I rate the much smaller Ross higher P4P, when factoring in - A) His LW & LWW record; and B) His WW record in the context that unlike the relatively huge Hearns, Barney was never a fully fledged WW.

 

Yeah, I don’t disagree, Greg. I’d probably rate Hearns a touch above Ross at welter based on achievement too. H2H, well no question it would be Hearns as much as I love Barney. But Ross has arguably the better championship record when you factor quality of opposition in.

 

Completely agree on all counts Jel.

 

Only in the sense that he is in actuality 50 - 50 against many of the great ww's in history , imo , as opposed to most thinking he ko's most of them .. thats not happening

 

Hearns wins over Duran and Benitez are probably the greatest two wins in history at 154 Goo. They are miles and miles above any wins of McCrory. How many ATG's does Hearns need to beat at the weight?

What did Benitez and Duran do at 154? Well Benitez schooled Duran to the extent that KO mag penned him the winner 13 rounds to 2. It too is one of the great historic wins in the division. Duran showed his mastery at the weigth over an inexperienced but talented and game Davey Moore. Absolutely destroyed him and one can see on film just how brilliant Duran was that night. Duran was closer to the 154 limit than he was to the upper end of 160 when he gave Hagler an interesting evening.

On the flipside you nominate McCrory and Curry for McCallum and both did basically nothing at the weight. It's also exceedingly fair to state Julian Jackson was green at the time they met tho very powerful and dangerous. Kalule? Davey Moore (in context he who Duran decimated) had left him battered at the end of a brutal brawl just the fight before. What on earth was he doing fighting McCallum straight after such a harsh loss? The mind boggles.

 

Duran’s record was 5-3 at jr middle. Benitez was 6-1 and his claim to fame at that weight was beating Duran. Curry and Kalule were both champions at jr. Middle and the only reason I mentioned them is because if Tommy is getting credit for beating men from lower classes then so should McCallum. The Jackson win was still huge and decisive. As mentioned before, McCallum went 32-0 in that class and was 7-0 in title fights including a handful of notables. If you want to say that Hearns packed more quality in a shorter amount of outings at 154 then that’s perfectly fine. In fact I’m inclined to agree… but seriously, maybe five total fights in that class and he’s supposed to be the best ever Jr. middle ???

 

Hearns beat far better men from the below weights tho Goo. Credit is given on merit. Duran was on a streak when Hearns devastated him. Benitez was in fine form as well and rated near the top of boxing. Curry was not long coming off a beating and Kalule had one right prior. McCrory did nothing at the weight. Duran and Benitez did. Show me where McCrory and Curry looked as good at 154 as Duran did vs Moore?

You are giving McCallum 32 wins at 154 yet confining Hearns to 5 total fights there. McCallum was over the weights in about 19 of those fights, comfortably over half so that's not remotely holding water. Alternately Hearns hits at least 13 fights at 154 if one has a proper look.

So suddenly they are on about the same amount of fights at 154. Eye opening isn't it.

 

Ever notice everyone at welterweights are overrated but when they move up to somewhere like cruiser or heavy weights, then, all of a sudden, you see the twinks in they armoire.

 

Yes Hearns beat better men below 154 and above. But if we’re restricting the argument jr middle I think McCallum has more depth. I’ll leave it at that