Tommy Hearns defined the term "freak of nature" at 147lb. 6'1 78" reach. You know alot of detractors out there like the Red Revolving Pepperman out there try to claim hearns as being very weak at 147lb, and that he filled out much stronger at 160lb. Well he may have filled out much more nicely, but he was nowhere near the dominant unbeatable freak who used his tools to cause terror in the 147lb division. Part of what made Tommy such a beadt a 147lb was the fact that he cut alot of weight. I am a college wrestler, I cut large amounts of weight to make 141lb......and after I am rehydrated I am stepping on the mat around 10lb heavier and I am much bigger taller than my opponent and it becomes a huge advantage, Tomm hearns was kind of like this. Even with a little loss at strength from the weight cutting, hearns was still stronger and more imposing than 95% of the 147lbers out there. I truelly Believe in head to head 90% of the welterweights in history couldn't deal with his tools, Jab, and power in the first place. The other 10% great 147lbers who can overcome them....... Like Napoles, Robinson, Leonard, Griffith, Luis Rodriguez, Hearns had the All Around talent to beat most of these guys. Hearns had argueably the best jab in the history of 147lb division. Take a guy like Pipino Cuevas, a vastly underated fighter who was viewed as so dangerous that there were rumors the Leonard camp wanted nothing to do with Cuevas's power. Cuevas coming into the hearns fight was viewed as super durable, yet after hearns knocked him out with those devastating right hands did Cuevas's chin suddenly become "average" because of his late career knockout losses. But it was Tommy Hearns who completley ruined Cuevas mentally and phyiscally. Cuevas was a very good fighter, on top for a long time. Hearns best weight to me will always be 147lb can you imagine a great welterweight from the past like 5'0 joe Walcott being thrown in against 6'1 tommy hearns with that long jab of tommys?
So there's only 50 WW's in history? Anyways, in a head to head sense, Hearns warrants a very high ranking, but in an overall sense, not that high, not above guys like Napoles, Gavilan, Griffith, Armstrong, etc I wouldn't say.
A weak miscontrual of a statement which, even if taken literally, would still not convey the meaning you attribute to it. The post reads "The other 10% great 147lbers... guys like Napoles, Robinson, Leonard, Griffith, Luis Rodriguez," not "the other completely-literal and precise 10% of all 147-pounders, constituted entirely by Napoles, Robinson, Leonard, Griffith and Luis Rodriguez."
He ranks him #3 of all time according to Suzie, and Suzie has said before he would only take 1 or 2 to beat him, he just puts those guys on his level, so those would be the only ones he'd give even chances. And if he said "guys like Napoles, Robinson, Leonard, Griffith, Rodriguez, etc" and meant them only as examples, according to you, he'd have to give about (very rough estimate)10,000 or so other WW's chances to constitute 10% of all WW's. He should've said more along the lines of 99% or 90% of the top WW's. And it was a joke anyway. Nice try disproving it though, unfortunately you failed.:smooch
#3? For being half champ for 1 year? For 3 defenses? Far from #3 IMO. Pablo Baez, Luis Primera, Randy Shields. These are easily the most forgettable of challengers ever seen in the division, easily the weakest and safest. For instance, no one ever mentions any of Tommy's defenses. When was the last time anyone here ever remembers discussion of any of Tommy's defenses? SuzieQ is mistaken as usual and probably elevates his standing in order to elevate Leonard's standing to make up for his abbreviated career. #11 is a more realistic ranking.
He's a bit of a welterweight Lennox Lewis. A great amount of 147lb'ers would not make it past his combination of speed, power and size.
When Steward took over training Lewis he turned him into a 240lb Thomas Hearns, to a certain extent. Tommy had a better jab and footwork than Lennox ever did but I digress. I agree with SuzieQ. Tommy would give almost any WW who ever lived murder or would shut them out on the cards. On any given day I'd even fancy him to beat any WW in history. Ok he beat some faded guys leading up to the Cuevas fight but it's what he did with Cuevas, and to a lesser extent Leonard, that defines him at the weight. In accomplishments he's certainly not at #3 but combine that with his head-to- head rating and he is, for my money.
Hearns got ripped off on the SRL rematch in not only the decision but also that it didnt happen sooner. He is one of my favorite fighters. It is truely beautiful to watch him box.
Hearns was a supreme welterweight. However, his body was better at 154lbs and beyond. He dwarfed almost every welterweight he fought and his power at the weight makes him among the best hitters that ever lived. He carried his power up the weights as well as any fighter possibly could do, but it was welterweight where he gets the sure approval as one of the most lethal to lace'em up. Even at light-heavyweight he proved he could still bang. If Hearns had a granite chin he'd probably be H2H the best out himself, Leonard, Hagler and Duran. 5th would probably be his highest ranking considering his achievements at the weight, and even that placing is high. H2H he's among the best. He'd certainly give Robinson an extremely competitive fight for as long as it lasted. However, Robinson would likely stop him as Leonard did.
I agree Hearns was more dominant at 147 ,he carried his power up ,but to a lesser extent,maybe Welter and LMiddle ,is his niche.Serious power,serious skills.
