Thomas Hearns is a Greater fighter than Marvin Hagler

Snap. This would be my reasoning too. Marvin was probably the best pfp fighter in the sport for 4 consecutive years, which is very impressive in itself and he looked unbeatable for much of that. Tommy, like, say, Evander, always seemed a big fight or two away from a defeat (and, a big fight or two away from a great win, of course). Then again, Tommy could have stayed at light-middle and been unbeaten for just as long perhaps, but that title never had the prestige as 160, especially back then.

 

Exactly.. . He also was the underdog in the Hill fight at 175 I believe .. the fight weight which is in question here ... i think Hearns was a 2.5 to 1 dog .. thats pretty substantial

 

Hearns was actually quite a bit longer than that but firmed late from memory. I think he may have been 4-1 early on.

 

This is pretty ironic because Barkley did not tear Hearns up to the body before the KO, not even remotely. As a matter of fact it was Hearns that went on a real body tear in round 3 before being caught. Barkley didn't do much of anything to the body all fight really. A couple of good shots. Body blows certainly didn't lead to the KO.

 

Yeah, it was Tommy's work to the body that stood out vs Barkley, not vice-versa (the Shuler KO another great exhibition of his bodysnatching).

 

As I said I admire Hearns but I can't envision him challenging the likes of Qawi, Spinks, when Light Heavyweight division was so deep.

I'm not saying he would be afraid but more like knowing realistically he wouldn't have snowballs chance vs them. I could be wrong of course and I don't have anything to back my weak argument in all honesty but that's just how I see it.

And that's why Hagler didn't move up to Light Heavyweight either. But he had no need to anyway because he had plenty of big fights at Middleweight.

 

As I remember it Hearns doubled Barkley over with a body shot shortly prior to Barkley catching him, and it looked like Hearns was on the verge of stopping Barkley.

I don't think it was the body shots from Barkley, it was more of a bolt of the blue right hand than anything else. Barkley was taking a beating before finally catching Hearns.

 

Hagler was the more complete fighter, period ... Hearns was an all time explosive guy. Today Deontay Wilder reminds me of him a bit but of course Tommy was far more polished ... that said Tommy always had vulnerability to big punchers .. he could outbox anyone from welter to what we saw against Hill at 175, pretty amazing but his stamina and his chin were always a bit dicey against there best , talented guys and even in the case of Barkley not the most talented ... Marvin at his best was fast, highly polished, extremely well conditioned, a terrific boxer and a very serious banger with an all time great chin ... I have never even seen him seriously hurt on film , ever ...

 

No he isn't, but he is greater than Sugar Ray Leonard (and I'll die on this hill).

Disclaimer: 3 of 4 of the Fab 4 are my top 10 favorite boxers of all time so there's no bias saying this.

 

Let me guess, those three are Hagler, Hearns and Duran?

 

No it's Leonard. But I still think Tommy was greater and better than him.

I do however (non biased) think Duran ranks highest out of all 4 as an ATG. I think he's in the top 10

 

Fair enough. Leonard better for me

 

I respect and understand why some would hold that position,

 

I'm with you on this one, DP.

Hearns was brilliant and fearless but he wasn't daft.

Of course, we can't be absolutely sure. I just think wiser heads would have prevailed, if and when it came to him moving up to a 175 division that happened to be the dominion of one M Spinks.