I am not making excuses. Hearns was better than most guys Hagler fought. Hagler fought him differently than anyone he ever fought and he knew he had to. He fought a brilliant fight, but could he do it again. At a slower pace and Hagler righty I think Hagler has a hard time staying up is all I said. That is just an opinion.. and Hagler wanted no part of that rematch. That is just an opinion obviously like all others. How can I make an excuse for what I think could happen but didn't. I think a slower pace helps Hearns land his punches and get distance for his leverage. And Hagler knew this. He admitted it. He even said especially on the BBC show which I put on youtube years ago "I didn't want to get him room to use his reach or his right hand".
No Hill did not beat anyone on the level of Leonard, but I still think had Ray fought his fight he would have outclassed Duran in the first fight like he did in the second. He outclassed Duran 2 out of 3 fights. It was easy for him. That is the excuse you guys make for Duran. He was easily beaten, and easily beaten by Benitez. I will not mention the Hearns fight because the other two fighters speak for themselves. Leonard koed a Hearns in 1981, but not the Hearns in 1989, who in my mind out experience Leonard because Tommy fought the whole decade. Everything Ray did in 1989 Hearns had an answer to. And in 1991 Hearns pretty much needed his jab to beat Hill, and to sit back and counterpunch. That is how great Hearns was. And I have said many times, I think Hill in 1991 was more advanced in experience than Ray in 1980 when Duran fought him, but Ray learned and learned to fight his fight and have other things figured. He learned the whole game. I would have loved to have seen them fight those guys also. I think Hill might have surprised us with some of the guys in that list, especially Qawi, whom I think he would beat.
Hill has something. His counter jab and counter left and foot movement were exceptional.. you don't get 24 title defenses at two weights for nothing. And you know it. Hill without a counter looked like he was pawing with his punches, although his jab was good, but Hearns jab was better which is why Hearns won.. Hill counter left was one of the best. Stewart fell for it in 1987. Lasisi did.. Czyz was hit. Hearns was not.. Because Hearns was winning with his jab so he didn't have to move in and open himself up. He was the one jabbing and countering Hill. Darius beating Hill and Dwight are different fights. How did Kinchen knock down Hearns and Leonard didn't? How did Rahman knock down Lennox and Tyson didn't. Dwight was how tall? 5-7? some people said 5-5 which couldn't be.
Wow. Stewart, Czyz, Lasisi, very impressive lol. Dwight would have brutalized Virgil. Ya I recognized his longevity, but thats reflective of the quality he was up against. He was easily beaten by the 3 best he fought, including one that was beaten twice by Barkley. Were you born in 65 by any chance?
You ALWAYS make excuses for Tommy and Leonard. And like I wrote before, the guy that lost to Darius and Tommy is getting destroyed by Dwight Qawi.
First off you are 100% wrong about Hagler asking to fight Roberto. That is simply not true. Roberto wasnt even on the Hagler radar until he beat Moore and then Arum saw how close Hags and Duran were in height so he put together a money grab. Do the research yourself. It appears you are the one who didnt follow his career as much as you think. And just as an add on, Hags never challenged Benitez. Hagler wanted both Lenny and Tommy because thats where the money was. As far as Spinks is concerned, he did issue that challenge but there was never any buzz about that fight because Hagler never in his career expressed any interest in moving up, and there wasnt much interest in such a fight. And despite what a great division 175 was in the late 70s early 80s there was no money in it. And if you could prove that Hearns was going to fight Spinks, I would be impressed especially considering Manny's leg massage excuse. I don't remember Tommy ever challenging Spinks who would have obliterated Tommy.
The HOF has unique qualifications for getting in. I mean Arturo Gatti is in. Hill made it on account of his number of titles defenses and longevity. He most certainly DID NOT MAKE IT BECAUSE OF THE QUALITY OF HIS OPPOSITION.
With all these excuses you sound like the Hamed fans that make excuses for their man on these boards.
I don't know if Dwight would brutalize Virgil. Something tells me Virgil's counter left would be a good punch for him.
That was an issue which people mentioned about Gatti. But with Hill no one questioned it.. He had decent opposition. Stewart, Czyz, Tiozzo. Tate, Hearns, Jones, Maske, etc.. I am just relying on memory.
Hamed vs. Barrera? No.. the excuse thing came up with Duran. You thought turning it around devalues what I said about Roberto using excuses.
Its not hard enough to bother Dwight. Plus Qawi was an excellent defensive fighter as well. Hill never hit hard enough to trouble Dwight.
No, I didnt. Thats not true. What I stand by is demonstrating your hypocritical behavior by making excuses for Leonard and Hearns.