Question About Tommy Hearns

Gotta run so ill quickly reply but about impressive a physical specimen of fighter you will ever see on film.

Top 30 alltime I reckon.

Stops Oscar, easily beats Mosley. Over the shorter distance very few beat at 147 or 154..Over 15 there are a few more that probably could but there is always an arguement for someone like Hearns.

Not quite the same fighter at 160 and higher.
Loses to Hopkins and Roy..but gives them a tough fight for a while..Roy probably knocks him out because he could seriously punch there..Hops overcomes his style, takes out his jab eventually and mauls out a victory.

I dont see him losing to any of the current crop from 147-168 if he was around today. Joe being one that could beat him if he was at 168, which he is not at the moment so thats why I said there is just about no one.

 

Jones probably beats him at middle - but would know he's in a fight. The others get outboxed or stopped.

Oscar has little to no chance, Mosley a little bit more, but still would lose.

Basically you have a guy that was a killer puncher at welter, but could move up to light heavy and win world titles by outboxing guys, with still enough power to earn their respect at that weight.

NOTE: Have to say I'm horribly biased towards Hearns, probably the first guy that I was truly a fan of in boxing. He had everything - including the chance he'd get sparked himself!!

If he had a chin like Haglers, it simply would have been unfair on anyone between welter and light heavy for many, many years.

 

A freak of nature tall - His legs looked like pipe cleaners at 147.

 

I think Hearns stacks up great in history. His career is hurt by the fact he lost his two biggest fights to Hagler and Leonard, but if you look at his wins he beat legends Pipino Cueves (who had 12 title defenses when Hearns stopped him), Wilfred Benitez (He won Benitez WBC 154 pound title), Roberto Duran (Duran was WBA champ at 154 at the time), beat Virgil Hill who was undefeated, which was the second title at light heavyweight Hearns won, and Hearns was the first welt. to win a title at welt. and then win one at light heavy (2 times). His career is great and he is an ATG, but most people do not give him a break because he lost his two biggest fights by knockout. But his resume is better than most great fighters in my mind.

 

6'1" or 6'2"

 

Funny I think Hearns would have beaten Jones with his jab, and Hopkins would have been tough but I see Hearns outboxing him. Hearns did not have trouble with guys like Hopkins and Jones. He had trouble when guys were aggressive. He sometimes had more trouble with guys like Roldan who were not as good, than with the great guys like Hill or Duran. He usually still won, but he did slip a little when he got older. I have no doubt he beats Roy Jones. Roy was good but not the warrior Hearns was.

 

Hearns would fight anyone, anywhere, anytime, at any weight.

Nothing like some of the guys today.

 

co-sign i think he would of beaten both as well

 

If Hearns wasnt so willing to exchange on the inside he would of finished his career undefeated.Best fighter i have ever seen....

 

I've always thought that the brawling was what Tommy WANTED. He was not psychologically capable of staying out of a war when one presented itself.

 

That what i mean,if he could of fought just a little smarter in some of his fights and used his reach....who knows.....but anyway all his fans love him for what he was.Prime Tommy Hearns was a monster at 147-160.

 

I rather doubt that Hearns would claim that he could have beaten Jones. Speed is always difficult to deal with, and Jones was one of the fastest middleweights you are ever likely to encounter. Jones was also a puncher at middleweight. The notion that Jones couldn't get past his jab is actually quite funny!

 

beats them all, but what about Titto?