I'd give Hearns a shot against any fighter at 147 or 154 in history. His skill set and physical dimensions were amazing. Does he beat everyone? Obviously not. But he wouldn't be a long shot at those weights against any fighter in history, in my opinion.
Robinson born in 1921 beats Duran who is a lightweight Robinson theoretically born in 1956 beats all of them SRR was 15 years ahead in boxing style, but still 15 years behind SRL. SRR was still blocking punches with his head, was A LOT off balance, had bad footwork and not a good defense. Him being born in 1956 like SRL wouldve meant he had a boxing style even more developed than SRL's
I also think he beats them all best for best, although fighting them as a part of a mad mad schedule might lead to a different outcome.
Are you stupid or do you just know nothing about the subject we're discussing? Since when did a bigger banger knock out Hagler. Hagler and Hearns for me would be the most likely to beat him.
Which really is saying a lot, considering Leonard could easily be rated as the #2 Welterweight ever. I think he could give him a god awfully competitive fight through 12 at 147 until Robinson's body assault throughout has taken it's toll, his legs are no more and Robinson is engaged for the kill. SRL's speed certainly doesn't seem significantly superior to SRR's and that's based on middleweight footage. Completely different levels in terms of power and blunt force trauma. I think Hearns ribs would be caved in before he's stopped in spectacular fashion a lot earlier than Leonard, who despite not having Tommy's physical attributes, reach and power, was a more complete fighter and proved it H2H. Duran is just as, if not more skilled in a p4p sense but is just too small here. Hagler is the only natural middle, and an interesting fight.
None. Hagler had the best chance. Leonard loses a wide UD, Duran as well. Hearns gets sparked in about 7.