Thomas Hearns vs.Bobby Czyz

Hearns was too quick for Bobby Czyz!!!! Czyz was a limited fighter who only beat second rate fighters. No win against anyone really good. I see Hearns controlling this fight and stopping Czyz on cuts in about 10.

 

I think Tommy is too quick and sharp for Czyz. The 3 best guys Czyz fought at 175 were Andries,Wiliams and Hill and Czyz lost to all of them, and Hearns fought 2 of them and beat those 2 Hill and Andries. Tommy would win.

 

The Hitman wins this by KO in the first 3 rounds

 

at 175? Bobby is going to give Hearns some problems, but Hearns has enough to pull out a split decision.

 

HMMMMMM! At 175, Czyz has a real shot....... Czyz could punch pretty well up at 175....

MR.BILL

 

Czyz was a fun fighter, but he was simply not at the level to even be competitive with prime 175lbs Motor City Cobra. Tommy by very comfortable decision; but maybe just maybe, although he never quite showed it at 175, there is one very special Hitman right hand with Bobby's name on it...

 

This simply would not have been pretty, Hearns had to much and Bobby too little for this to be anything but a tko stoppage.

 

Hearns was already passed his best at 175 when he TKO'd Andries in 1987....

Bobby Czyz was game, but out-classed by a peaking, yet late in his career Charles Williams in 1987 and 1988....

I don't think Hearns beats a 1988 Charles Williams at 175.... Dennis Andries was tough, but skilless.....

Czyz gets dicked a lot by the fans.... Why?

MR.BILL

 

You reckon? I think of him as a fun classic American 'TV fighter', who gets a ton of kudos.

 

Czyz lost to Andries in May of 1988, a guy Hearns outclassed. I remember watching that fight on NBC or CBS. Andries outjabbed him and won in a rather boring fight actually. It was surprising. Hearns/Williams? 1987 Hearns knocks out Williams in 5. Later? Tommy diminished a little by 1988 and 1989 after the hard fights, so post 1988 or 1989 Williams might win that one. Williams was sort of a quick inside fighter.

I think Czyz gets insulted by fans because he won titles but never held onto them and was beaten by guys like Andries. He never could stay on top a long time because he was limited and easy enough to hit. Hill beat him easily, which is another guy Hearns beat which beat Czyz.

 

I think to be fair Cyz/WilliamsI was a pretty major upset at the time...

 

It was.. He wobbled Williams and almost had him out, and Charles came back and stopped Bobby with Bobby quitting on his stool. I remember Bobby got some criticism in that fight since prior to the first Williams fight, which was on the Hearns/Roldan undercard he mentioned that Roldan quit against Hagler. He said he would never quit and said he would rather almost die then quit. Something like that, I don't remember the exact quote. Well against Williams he quit in his corner and people sort of lose respect for that when a guy says he would never quit, and then a day later he quits the same way. I thought he was a good exciting fighter who was too easy to hit and not as durable as you would think he would be being built enough. Basically he was more hype than the real thing,and people sort of noticed that. I am just guessing why people didn't respect him. And to add onto this. He always said he was in Mensa with a 180 IQ, and he just had a bit of an attitude. He acted like he was as good as Hearns or Leonard or Hagler in that level, and he never was.

Obviously had he kept winning instead of losing to Williams and Andries in 1987-1988 he would have been given accolades.

 

Hearns way too good. It would be an easy fight for Hearns.

 

That Czyz interview then his subsequent quitting in exactly the same manner is one of boxings great comedic episodes.

The guy was as much of a frontrunner throughout his career as a world class boxer is capable of being.Hearns would smash him at 160 or 175.