Tommy Hearns goes back in time, finds himself in the ring with 1951 Sugar Ray Robinson, 15 rounds.

Maybe you should read what I wrote and pay closer attention this time (and maybe work on your grammar as well...)

I never said they were totally different. I said they were clearly different.

A wasp is clearly different from a bee but they are more alike than unalike.

That is also obvious but if anyone needs to have it explained to them, I'm sure there are clips on YouTube that would help with that as well.

 

Debatable.

Hearns never beat anyone as good as Robinson of the St Valentine's Day Massacre - not debatable.

 

Hmmm, SRR punches harder than Leonard, has proven durability, just as quick with the knock out punches and has more killer instinct.

Tommy outboxes pretty much everyone that ever boxed at welter, but his legs and frame don't lend him well to deal with a SRR that will punch with him, takes a better shot to the body and was absolutely vicious with his own body work and could turn a fight with a hook or straight right.

It's hard to pick Tommy when I've seen the Leonard fight and reckon SRR to be a fiercer and likely more precise puncher than Leonard

 

Hearns certainly is an ATG legend! But, Robinson is his kryptonite (and just about everyone else's, I guess lol): An iron-jawed, lightning fast of both mind & body, deadly two handed accurate punching machine with endless stamina and the desire to hurt you as soon as he could, to get you outta there. From what I've seen, Robinson was one of the best finishers ever, but I don't see it discussed much. If he hurt you, he was on you immediately - more than likely, you weren't going to make it.

And Hearns wouldn't make it.

 

Tommy wouldn't beat LaMotta at 160, much less the greatest to ever lace them up

 

I give Tommy great odds against Lamotta

Look at his physical advantages alone, height, reach. How would jake reach him?

He might corner him but Jake has no power. Tommy has a huge edge there also

Tommy also has better tools; just about everything about him is superior to that of Lamotta and by 1984 when Tommy peaked, I dont think there was anyone around with hands as quick as Tommy's except Camacho. He was loaded with every talent, every weapon imaginable

as for Robinson, I dont think he's ever faced a killer like Tommy, someone as sharp, as quick

The Hearns that stopped Duran in two & Shuler in one is as much a threat as anyone could imagine, a real nightmare for Robinson

 

Whether a decision in Leonard vs. Hearns went the wrong way is another salient question.
I do not think SRR would lose a decision-or deserve to-against Hearns.

 

I don't try to pretend I'm an English major. I also didn't realize this site was about proper grammar. Maybe you should be on a site for that stuff, Not a boxing site?
I wrote they were practically carbon copies of each other. Not exact carbon copies.
Key word "practically".
Perhaps your arrogance and your need to come off as the" smarter man" to placate your inner weaknesses , made you over look it.

 

174 wins....

 

Wonder if he realizes most of those losses
came after he was well past his prime and
above his best fighting weight.
Also against competition for the most
part considered good and great.

 

Hearns is ahead after 13 brutal rounds but Lamotta is still there, and he keeps coming, Tommy isn't moving as much as he was and Jake is beginning to corner him as Hearns appears to be drained in this fast paced fight. Oh ! a hook to the body and a right cross and Hearns is down, he wobbles to his feet and the referee let's it go,Jake is all over Tommy and the referee calls a halt at 2:48 of round 14. Tommy was way ahead on my card but just like Tommy's first fight with Leonard he ran outta gas.

 

This forum is weird. You can't pick out a specific fighter's one night (form) to make your point. All fights are different. Resumes don't fight each other. Both men would have some problems. Not sure why everyone's acting like they know the conclusion (bias).

 

But the entire thread is about Hearns finding himself in the ring against Robinson from 1951...

It isn't as though Robinson's performance in his last fight with LaMotta was miles better than any other performance is his career.

There's a reason why he's widely regarded as the GOAT.

I didn't say Robinson wouldn't have problems. I'm saying Hearns would have more problems and would lose because (in my opinion) Robinson's the GOAT.

You're not sure why?

I think the fact that Robinson is widely regarded as the GOAT might have something to do with it...