P4P better

How does one flash knock down compare to being KO'd and hurt multiple times exactly?

Hearns was KO'd by Barkley, hurt by Andries, Roldan and Kinchen and being pummeled around the ring by an old and blown up Leonard at an age when Jones smashed contenders without working up a sweat.

 

I have said three times now that Hearns was only hurt at 160 or above aside from when Ray stopped him at 147, Leonard stopped Lalonde who was a light heavyweight.

 

The question was p4p so what does blown up welter have to do with anything? This is not head to head and again I will say, Hearns was better below 160 so I don`t care about his rematch v Leonard at 168, do you understand?

 

Roy Jones Jr and Tommy Hearns Chins - Boxing Forum

 

Anyone else agree that Roy Jones always had a glass chin?

 

That might be true but Hopkins didn't lose again for 12 years while Hearns lost his belt to Barkley. Hopkins would go on to beat Glen Johnson and Tarver who beat RJJ before avenging his loss to RJJ himself. To compare Hearns lost badly to his eras Hopkins in Hagler. While they both made cameos at 160, RJJs 160 cameo was more successful than Hearns. Regardless if RJJ was facing the very best Hopkins that Hopkins was 29 year olds hadn't lost since his debut and wouldn't lose again for 12 years and after he did proceeded to have a whole 2nd career in RJJs weight class. Thats about as valuable a win as it gets.

RJJ was smaller than Hearns and won major belts at 160, 168 175 and HW and had a reign at 175 while Hearns won major belts at 160 and 175 and didn't reign at all. The Virgil Hill win at 175 was a great single win and followed that up by losing again to Barkley. While Hearns narrowly outpointed Hill RJJ would go on to knock Hill out. Despite being taller than RJJ Hearns with longer reach Hearns biggest reigns were at 147/154 against smaller men. Hearns is as big as it gets for those weight classes despite how respected his opponents were.

At 168 Hearns had close fights with Kinchen and Leonard for WBO belt. At 168 RJJ nearly shut out undefeated James Toney and won almost all his rounds in the weight class.

To me the answer here is clear and overwhelming with all the evidence going the same way. We can litigate how impressive various RJJ feats are but I don't see how one could argue Hearns>RJJ. RJJ is smaller has more feats at every weight class they both competed in and has Hearns's biggest win. RJJs SOS is clearly better in their shared weight classes too as is his record.

 

Honestly for me Roy’s best win is tainted, otherwise I’d say he’d probably have it, Toney was better than anyone Hearns beat by a bit IMO.

 

Ok. So you're not comparing them career wise, or even through their primes, but strictly at best weights?

Then things start to look better for Hearns, yes, but it's also a fairly short period and against fairly few good opponents. Curry, Cuevas, Benitez and Duran would be the guys and Medal could be thrown in there. I think those were his ranked opponents during this time. Not that many, but he looked god damned sensational against them. True that.

So if we compare this with RJJ below 175 lbs... Hopkins, Malinga, Tate, Toney, Paz and I think Sosa were all ranked. And he swept them, just like Hearns swept his below 160 opp. There is the loss to Leonard, but he was a higher calibre of fighter than RJJ ever faced, so this is pretty much even, I'd say. Maybe Jones had the edge since he faced Hopkins and Toney at their best weights, but the Cuevas destruction as third best win/performance for Hearns during this period is pretty damned impressive (even though I think dismantling Malinga is underrated) so hard to say.

But why ignore the higher weights when they were both campaigning there in their primes? I think Hearns, especially, would have struggled to make weight for much longer. The guy had a fight at MW already in '82 and won his first LHW title not a year after leaving 154. He had an absolutely massive frame for 147/154 and was always destined to go up.

 

Roy was not a small light heavy, he was very big for 160 and B-hop was not on Hagler`s level in the early 90`s, nobody was calling B-hop a superstar in the early 90`s.

 

Heans would have destroyed Paz with his eyes shut, Paz was tiny for a super-middle and never won a title at that weight or 160, he wa far too small, Paz would have added nothing to Hearns resume at 160 or above and Tommy would have destroyed Paz at 154 the same way he destroyed Duran, nobody with Paz`s reach would have stood a chance v Hearns, Tommy would have jabbed Pa`s head off, he was not a top super-middle and never fought or proved himself at 160, Leonard would have destroyed Paz too as would Hagler.

 

I think Benitez was better than Toney.

 

Benitez would have boxed Paz`s ears off at 154.

 

Good God no, I love Benitez but no, Toney was on a different level somehow people forget one of the greatest boxers EVER has been under our nose… James should be beside guys like Robinson, Napoles, Armstrong, Burley and Moore… if they were the same size Toney would savage Benitez. That way of fighting… low output, keep away, he only really punched when he was done moving - Toney would stay on him and rake his body, he wouldn’t buy the BS he’d punch with him at every chance, James was a wonder Bill Millers masterpiece… I actually think he’d have busted up Hagler, Hagler I think would lose his nerve a bit, James thought he was made of Gold and came for the other guys blood when the fight was there, once he matured after McCallum we were witnessing an ATG.

 

Debating with you... What is this even an answer to? I named Paz as one of the ranked opponent Jones beat, that's all. He beat him with the ease one would assume, but his legacy hardly rests on that win.

 

One can think whatever of course, but Toney had more work at 168 than Benitez had at 154. I think it's very hard to say personally. Both great wins.