Well they were clearly some of the best at the time. That means either: A. There was a much bigger discrepancy between the quality of welterweights and heavyweights back then. or B. Walcott was off the scale as a pound for pound fighter.
Guaranteed this thread goes ****ing mental and to 9 pages. Remember the last one? That was brilliant. Anywy. I'm not playing.
"Walcott-Hearns" would resemble a mini version of the 1983 "Spinks-Qawi" 175 lb. WBC / WBA title fight..... Qawi never really got close enough to do anything to the constant moving / jabbing Michael Spinks... Them knockdowns that Spinks supposedly suffered from Qawi in about the 8th round, were really slips and or stepping on toes... Totally bogus... Oh, Michael Spinks, who by the way, cannot box better than Hearns... Hearns still had much better grace than Spinks ever had... I see Walcott plodding forward trying hard to get close on Hearns, but Hearns' speed, power and boxing skills keep Joe Walcott at bay.... Hearns by late round TKO or wide-points decision win....:yep MR.BILL
On the subject of Tommy Hearns. Hearns was drained / over-trained for Ray Leonard in 1981. That 145 pounds that Hearns weighed-in at was bad news for the Kronk team.... I heard that Tommy sat in a sauna on the eve of the fight to ensure he made 147 pounds... WTF? That 145 came back to haunt Hearns in around the 12th round.... Hearns really could've used them two extra pounds of liquid at that point in the fight... By the 14th round, Hearns was dehydrated and weak, and ready to be taken by Ray Leonard.... OH! He was taken in the 14th.... Hehehe...atsch MR.BILL