Pacquiao vs Prime Hearns at Welterweight. (No catchweights) Honestly Who wins?

I think hearns beats anyone in a 12 round fight at 147, even ray robinson even though that might be controversial. The man was a complete beast at welter.

 

Interesting logic. So we really don't have ATGs at 147 because Hearns would beat most of them head 2 head.

 

Despite the fact that WW isn't even Pac's best weight, despite him being a small WW who barely even makes 150 on fight night and that Hearns is one of the best welterweights of all time, holds a 6 inch height advantage, 10 inch reach advantage? Wow. I don't even think Duran would have lasted long against Hearns had they fought at 147... does that mean Duran isn't an ATG?

 

Tommy Hearns scares me....

 

No. As much as I love Manny, Floyd, and Trinidad they would stand no chance against Tommy. Hearns outboxed a prime SRL for most of their fight while they were young, what the hell does he do to them? Nothing against them as they're great but they would get killed. Hearns at 147 was just another kind of beast that neither of those three have ever fought. I highly question anyone who says other wise.

 

Pac hasn't blasted anyone at 147 like he did 126-130 and 140 (Hatton). Simply put, he didn't carry his 126-130 power.

 

The reason people are calling Pacquiao an ATG is because of his overall level of achievement. Even if you take away everything he's done at 140+, his resume is still quite strong. Just look at what he did at the lighter weights.

Duran is fairly similar. Look at what Tommy did to him. But the fact that Tommy practically decapitated Duran doesn't at all take away from his impressive resume below WW.

 

:huh Yeah, you're probably mistaking me for someone else here. De la hoya was past it obviously i've never said otherwise, but it was a huge HUGE career making fight for Pac so you can't really fault him for taking that fight. Cotto is a good win because Cotto is a good welterweight. Obviously he is nowhere near the level of Hearns, but who is nowadays? Doesn't mean Cotto is a bad welterweight.

The only reason I say WW isn't his best weight is because I'm pretty sure he can make 140 really easily. And at 140, he doesn't really have to deal with any sort of size disadvantage, he's just as big as the guys at that weight. So obviously, that's where he can dominate the most in my opinion.

 

Pacquiao is basically a JrWW dominating WW's. And fact is that even though Hearns beats him, every other fighter in the world today below MW has even less of a chance of beating a prime Hearns at WW than Pacquiao does.

 

DLH? Hell yeah over the hill. But he outboxed Cotto. Not absolute prime, but definitely not shot.

 

Hearns wins, probably within 6 with a big right rand.

Short, come forward type guys are tailor made for Tommy, look what he did to Cuevas & Duran. I am a fan of Pac, he does have a good chin but isnt the greatest defensively, Tommy has the power to hurt & stop him imo.

 

I love what he's trying to do here. By proving that Pac doesn't have a shot against a prime Hearns, he's hoping to get people to admit that Oscar and Cotto were shot fighters and thus discredit the claim that Pac is an all time great. Which is strange because most people (even Pacfans) acknowledge that Oscar was way past his best and most people (even Pacfans) know that Cotto is in no way comparable to a prime Hearns at WW. It's almost as if Pac's whole legacy hinges on his wins over de la Hoya and Cotto.

 

Pacquiao isnt even a natural welterweight. If Hearns was still around, Pacquiao would never have moved up to welterweight. He might have even stayed away from light-welterweight.