Was the Hearns v Shuler blow out one of the greatest in middleweigt history?

Kinchen had a much better chin than Shuler. So did Dewitt and Barkley. Sometimes it's more about the catcher than the pitcher. Also, Hearns was not as big a puncher at 160-175 as at 147-154. The Shuler fight was somewhat an aberration.

 

That said Hearn's pounded the hell out of a very large and strong Dennis Andres at 175 and flattened Juan Roldan at 160 ... he surely could hit to see degree ..

 

If the Hitman had a better chin we would be debating if he was the GOAT , nobody ever out boxed him.

 

Hearns also dropped the rugged Roldan every time he landed a half decent right hand and left him on his face. Duran was just 2 1/2 pounds heavier than when he had taken Hagler's shots with aplomb just 7 months earlier and Hearns iced him while weighing just 153. Dennis Andries was up and down like a yoyo when Hearns made a quick pit stop at 175. He was still bowling over decent cruiserweights all the way up until retirement.

If anything let Hearns down knockout wise at higher weights it was his wind.

 

The only aberration it could be is that Shuler was overrated a bit as far as durability. The Dewitt fight, again I don't know why Hearns was up and down in weight so much except Leonard signed to fight Hagler and Tommy didn't know where to go. Although I remember watching that fight after and thinking, maybe Tommy fighting Hagler at this time would not have been too great, unless he boxed. He didn't look great against Dewitt. And moving up and down.. It has affect your punch and your confidence in it. Although he threw it a lot, he did not throw it as hard one punch at a time as he did against Shuler. He was sort of fighting inside and using fast punches in that fight, not many setting down punches. As far as I saw. Dewitt had a good style for Hearns. Kinchen did have a good chin. Even against Williams he took the punches he was just swarmed and stopped. Well with Hill, it was a case of Hill countering.

 

I never understood that issue with him and the wind and how he got tired. I think maybe he just tried to hard to get the knockouts and got tired. He was a bit of a reckless fighter when he had someone hurt or tried for the knockout. I always thought it is a good thing he never really hurt Virgil Hill much in his fight, because it might have been his undoing..

 

For a great fighter he put it all out there and it made me nervous watching him. If he was doing well offensively he would forget at times about defense and about getting tired. That was his biggest flaw. Himself. Do I think he could have outboxed Hagler? I am not sure. He didn't have the lateral movement of Ray. He boxed and moved, but he did more of the step inside punch and pivot out, and he could be hit leaning back when he did this. Ray was better at the lateral movement and holding, which is why he could beat Hagler in that way. But I do think the way Hearns could have beaten Hagler is by TKO. I think he could have jabbed and held when Hagler was close and maybe hurt Marvin and stopped him by TKO about round 7 or 8.

 

It's just genetics. Tommy just didn't have great stamina, or even notable stamina. 10 people can train just as hard as each other and a couple might have ATG stamina and a couple might be poor and six might be mid pack.

They did different things training wise as Hearns aged to try and conserve his legs and not tear them up.

 

that is true. He stopped running much as he got older.Although when he boxed Virgil Hill he stayed pretty even though out the fight because he boxed and stayed relaxed.. Even Barkley rematch he was even with Barkley because he didn't go all out. When he got older he started going the distance more. I remember from 1988-1992 he went 12 rounds 5 times. Which doesn't seem like a lot, but for him it was. Actually for a guy known as a knockout artist , after he fought Cuevas he went 10-15 rounds 14 times if I am not mistaken. Which is surprising to think. he went 15 once, he went 12 rounds 9 times and I think 10-4 times. So he had stamina when he needed to. Almost going 400 rounds in his career. Surprisingly. Hearns and Hagler both have 67 fights, Hagler having 390 rounds and Hearns 380 . Pretty close. And I think those decision are what made them so close in rounds. I would have thought Hearns had much less rounds in his career than Hagler. Yet Hagler had a better knockout record than Hearns, but not one punch power.