the best fighter at jnr middle!

Hearns, easily. I also like McCallum and Jackon. McCallum for his class and Jackson for his devastating power. Wow.

 

In terms of who's the best (not greatest at the weight, which has to do more with resume)

Tommy and Mike are the top 2.

I guess Julian is #3.

Behind them would be guys like Trinidad, Wright, and Norris.

 

Depends if you like quality over quantity. Hearns had very good wins over Benitez and Duran, but only defended his title about 6 times. Norris maybe doesn't have two high calibre opponents on his record like Benitez and Duran, but he did have many more defenses, and he also regained and unified. I'd give Norris the edge over Hearns at 154lbs based on accomplishments. Longevity.

Hearns made his last defense of his WBC title against Medal, June 1986. And he struggled at the weight, as his two fights prior to meeting Medal fight were Schuler and Hagler at middleweight.

 

Who's the best, hmmmmmm.

Head to head

1. Hearns
2. Benitez
3. McCallum

 

Well i was going on this part of the thread

"fav". It's a confusing thread as to whether he's asking for best or "favs".

Hearns beat two of the greatest 5 fighters ever to grace the division. He was also never defeated there. Norris was decimated by Jackson, starched by an aging Brown and was crap by 30. Norris has the longevity but Hearn's pure quality is a world above IMO. Short stay, but real top shelf stuff.

Hearns moved up to 160 via pure choice, not because he struggled to make 154. Not at all. He chose to go up, remember he went all the way to 175 to nab title 4 before title 3 if you get my jist. Of course this didn't mean he struggled to make 160 either.

 

JT. Hearns has way better longevity throughout his career than Norris, but not at 154lbs. Nobody can hold it against him, as his frame put on more pounds as the years went on. However, he did struggle to make the weight against Medal, but not on his initial move up the middleweight to challenge Hagler, hence the reason you said pure choice. Agreed. I can accept he wasn't struggling with the scales against Hutchings at 154lbs, the fight before the Hagler showdown.

Hearns actually moved up and won the light-heavyweight title before he won the middleweight title. Agreed again on him not struggling to make 160lbs because he won the title against Andries before Roldan. Choice again.

But I can say without hesitation, Hearns was struggling to make 154lbs for Medal. He hadn't defended his title for just under 2 years. I'm not assuming this, because Ive heard quotes from Hearns and Steward about it.

It makes sense as his two fights prior to defending against Medal for the last time were middleweight fights against Hagler and Schuler, combined with the very long time span of being inactive at 154lbs between late 84 through to the middle of 86, his last defense.

 

Winky?

 

1. Tommy Hearns
2. Mike McCallum
3. Julian Jackson
4. Terry Norris
5. Winky Wright

 

Excluding accomplishments.

1. Hearns
2. McCallum
3. Norris

 

Thomas Hearns head to head

 

Based on accomplishments
1. McCallum
2. Hearns
3. Norris
4. Jackson
5. Wright

 

Hearns
McCallum
Jackson
Benitez

 

I don't see how Benitez can be rated in the top four or five here. He simply didn't do enough at 154 to warrant such consideration. Great fighter for sure, but perhaps some are basing their opinion on his career as a whole? That's not what the thread is about. It's about the guy that was the best at 154. He just doesn't rate in a list of the creme' de la creme'.


McCallum
Hearns
Norris
Jackson
Vasquez

 

Hearns who used to be first, is now second. Replaced by the new king of the 154 pound division-Terry Norris, the Ezzard Charles of the superwelters.

Then there is the rest of the best--

Second is Hearns followed by McCallum and then Jackson. Rounding out the top five was Tony Ayala jr who easily beat out the passive Wilfred Benitez.