Jesus, this is really a terrible thread, one person calling Hearns' power overrated, another person saying Hearns' boxing ability was overrated..... I'm outta here
Hell no, but his chin ... That's what I liked about the Fab 4 era. It was rock-paper-scissors. SRL - fast Hearns - power, weak chin Hagler - chin of stone, workhorse Duran - relentless
Im not trying to bump jc up.if u take the 5 fighters out that i mention that he didnt ko then the rest is a pretty poor bunch
Im not deriding hearns in any way either,i actually know him on a personal level to a degree and hes always been a stand up guy.i worked on the force with him a few years back,great guy but them ko's have definately took their toll
Hearns' chin wasn't as bad as it is made out to be. The people that put him down could crack. Hearns didn't have a great chin but he didn't have a bad one either.
I know - but were these performances really due to superb boxing - or freakish physical advantages? He relied on his freakish height and reach, and never really mastered much of the 'skills' of boxing IMO. His guard was non-existant and his inside game was quite poor IMO. Great fighter though. Not knocking the guy at all. Really great.
No, he hit like what he was: a light heavyweight. He was just hitting welterweights and middleweights.
Hearns was faster than Leonard. Hell, Duran wasn't much slower than Leonard. Look Duran at his peak which was late 70s. He's really fast. Like fast, fast, fast.
I never took your statement as trying to bump JC up. But you compared Tommy's and Joe's ko percentages, and you didn't mention that Tommy went from 147 to cruiserweight and that Joe went from 168 to 175. That means that Tommy started 21 pounds lighter than Joe did and finished a full division above him weight wise.