Tommy Hearns or Alexis Arguello, who's more accomplished?

good comparison . i think these 2 r close p4p and very similar in many aspects but i think Hearns edges it . His losses r more excusable and were 2 better fighters than Arguello's . I don't count Arguello's losses 2 Pryor , nor Hearns' loss 2 Leonard , I count Arguello's losses 2 Pryor even less , and Hearns' other losses were usually more removed from his prime time and/or weight , etc than Arguello's . Wasn't Hearns also d better infighter of d2 ?

 

Arguello's resume is much, much deeper.

 

This, though I prefer Tommy's top wins.

 

Hearns has the deeper better record to me. More greats on his resume than Arguello and more iconic a fighter. You don't face guys like Pipino Cuevas,Sugar Ray Leonard,Wilfred Benitez,Roberto Duran,Marvin Hagler, Virgil Hill, Iran Barkley and many many more including Bruce Curry and Randy Shields and not have a better resume.

 

Same could be said for Arguello if we're counting guys he also lost to. Legra, Marcel, Pryor, Olivares, Chacon, Limon, Boza, Navarette, Hernandez, Escalera, Ramirez, Watt, Mancini, and many others.

It's close, and not like you're putting it at all IMO. I'd suggest you do more research on Arguello's opposition.

 

This is fair, I can see either man anywhere between 26-40.

 

and Nate Miller who stopped both Orlin Norris and Bert Cooper , was never stopped as a pro and went d distance with other CW champions like james Warring and others . Somehow Miller vs Hearns went d distance , i guess Miller carried Hearns 4 a reason he won't tell .

 

Very difficult. Both great resumes. I am always partial to Tommy since I think his resume of fighting a legend in each weight class he fought was exceptional. Arguello exceptional also. It is hard to do these comparisons.

 

True but does that means he accomplished more? Debatable. Hard to argue with the first ever 5 weight division world champ in my mind although Arguello has 3 of his own. Tough one for me too call as I'm not really an expert on either of their careers so I'll pay close attention tom the rest of your guys replies.

 

In terms of attributes it's 'what you like' tough for me. Both lanky whatever weight they scaled, Tomny was quicker and had the better feet in terms of outlanouvering his man when he wanted to chance tact(or had to, when he relied on his jab against Benitez for example, and brilliantly if I may add) both are in my top 5 punchers all time. Both destructive guys, Hearns a freakish sharpshooter, Arguello a patient and clinical stalker. Arguello was more durable and way more poised under fire. So they both have advantages over the other in different areas which could be exploited/implemented over different styles accordingly. Neither man was infallible at all their weights and both have a consensus physical peak at their first ascension (Arguello 130, Hearns 154). They are very comparable! :good

When you're comparing fighters this great (and both are of the '2nd tier' IMO: not an 'Alien' a la Robinson, Armstrong, Ali, Duran etc etc) but amongst the very greatest fighters ever without a doubt, so I'm not cussing anyone.

But Arguello had dominant reigns over 3 weightclasses. Hearns did have greater obstacles in his way (Leonard, Hagler) and some quality top level wins, but his 2nd tier wins are way outstripped by Arguello's. Also, Hearns was beaten twice by a Barkley-level fighter (it happens) but had a win I rate very highly over Hill.

As I say, very close, but there's just more to Arguello for me, as well as losing his fights against the very, very best he fought, who at their respective weights are H2H beasts akin to Marv' (160) and Ray (147) at theirs; Marcel (126) and Pryor (140) even if in terms of fully-fledge greatness they fall well short of the other two names.

 

<<<<(Hearn's avy)

Not saying anything lol. TBF both are great fighters and I don't know too much about Arguello's resume bar Mancini, of course Pryor, Olivares, Rooney, Marcel u know the basic ones. Haven't gotten deep into his resume but will see the occassional AA fights soon. Hearns may have the more "notable" wins but they both may be on par or one slightly above the other.

 

They are very close to each other in the same great era of fighters fighting fighters. I pick Thomas Hearns. He fought real legends in every division he fought! Alexis is great but I don't think honestly you can compare his fights to Hearns. And Hearns fought guys like Roldan and Andries as time wasting fights and made them look like amatuers. I don't think you have many fighters with the resume of Hearns if you count win loss look at his list!