Prime Bob Foster 1968 vs Prime Thomas The Hitman Hearns, 175 lbs, 15 rounds.

Don't you pick Hearns over Ezzard Charles at 175, too? I don't know what type of mind**** you have to have to pull that out of your ass but hey-ho, what can you do?

 

Dumbass? Seriously, what are you being such an ******* for? Because I don't agree AN ALL-TIME great, two-time light heavyweight champ who beat better fighters at light heavy than Foster did wouldn't be blown out by Bob Foster?

**** off.

 

I have no ****ing idea what you're talking about. But I'm done talking to you.

 

Yeah, dumbass. Someone who calls Virgil Hill an ATG deserves that label.

 

He's a first ballot Hall of Famer, dumbass.

Hell, he was elected to the Hall of Fame, came out of retirement, scored another knockout, and retired again.

Jesus Christ.

I'm done with this nonsense.

 

Dubble is a guy whom I can recall like two years back said that Keith Thurman and Danny Garcia could beat a prime Donald Curry.

 

Who gives a ****? The HOF is awful.

Am I supposed to be impressed with him scoring a KO in a comeback?

Don't play coy. Here:

You then proceed to argue in that thread that Hearns would do it. That's laughable.

 

Didn't he say that they had better résumés too? Remind me when they beat a Marlon Starling. Twice.

 

Of course but not when it comes to chin.

 

I love Tommy Hearns but Fosters power was better than Haglers, he was almost as aggressive and he had much bigger proportions.
Technically Foster was better than Hagler.

You've gotta go with a Foster stoppage, but if Hearns won I don't think it would be the upset some of you are making it out to be.