Hearns on points, yes pressure fighters could get to Hearns, but it was mostly at 160lbs and above, if they were the same weight naturally, Hearns was able to deal with them when they closed the distance. Griffith had a chin and was tough so I see him lasting the distance, but Hearns lighting him up on the outside and being able to tie him up whenever he wants up close.
Griffiths fight to lose, far too professional for the 147lbs Hearns who was running everyone over but not developed enough IMO for someone like EG who is THEE fighter of the 60. I’d be interested to see Hearns vs Tiger… Griffith I know you’re a fan of so I’d like it if you watched his earliest filmed bouts… pay attention to how badly he does on the inside against Ortega and the other tough guys he fought and notice how he develops it to a strong point, Clancy did amazing work with him.
Hearns really only had issues with big punchers. Hearns' fights happened one or two ways: If you could turn it into a brawl, and break your way inside, you had a shot at getting to Tommy. If not, you were at the end of his shots and getting outboxed from a distance. Griffith was sturdy, but I don't see him doing anything that would be particularily troubling to Hearns. I respect Griffith as a fighter, but at the same time, I don't think he has the style to beat Hearns unless he gets Tommy running out of gas late. This is a winnable fight for Hearns and I see him winning a decision in a boring fight.
When I compare fighters in fantasy matchups, I'm more inclined to think terms of styles and how they matchup, and less what the fighter's accomplishments were. There are many who think because someone was a 5 time world champion, that that is enough to give him the benefit of the doubt in fantasy matchups. I think some of that should factor in, but not entirely.
Thee man? He was the 2nd best 147lber of his time whilst cutting silly amounts of weight. I like and respect Hearns he was an awesome fighter but top of the heap 147lbs? No, Leonard was the man of his era.
There's only two welterweights in history I believe beat Hearns at that weight. The "Sugar Ray "that beat him and that OTHER "Sugar Ray" fella. What did they have in common? They both were similar in size 5'9 or 10 for Leonard, 5'11" for Robinson( Hearns couldn't just overwhelm them with his height and reach, as he would most welters in history , this I believe is the most important impactful advantage for Hearns, most welterweights in history were about 5'8") They both had excellent skill sets, PLUS dynamic athleticism. ( Griffith wouldn't have a problem in the skill set area, but he was nowhere near as dynamic as Leonard or Robinson) Hearns in my opinion could beat Griffith anyway he chose to at welterweight. Hearns could box circles around him, or be The "Hit Man" and knock him out with in 8rds. Hearns advantages in height, reach , skill set , speed and power would just overwhelm the 5'7" Griffith. Love Griffith, but he'd actually do better ( Though he'd lose convincingly) Against those "Sugar Ray" fellas. He didn't have the speed , height , or power to be much of a threat to Hearns.... Hearns all wrong for him.
