Was Thomas Hearns the best pure boxer of the 80's?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by dpw417, Aug 12, 2014.


  1. robert ungurean

    robert ungurean Богдан Philadelphia Full Member

    16,258
    15,314
    Jun 9, 2007
    Your boxing knowledge is very limited. Ur like a horse with blinders on who only see s what he wants and only believes what he wants. U need to b impartial and u can't.
     
  2. fists of fury

    fists of fury Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,297
    7,047
    Oct 25, 2006
    I don't know about the very best. The 80's had some brilliant technicians. Tommy doesn't really give ground to anyone though and can hold his own with anyone. It's quite fascinating that his pure boxing pedigree was honed in the amateurs, before he discovered that he could punch.
    I do think that his boxing skills were aided greatly by his height and reach, as well as speed. These natural talents augmented his superior boxing skills and when you consider that he could punch like a mule's kick, it's a frightening combination.

    But I will say that Hagler (since he has been brought up here) had excellent boxing skills as well. He for me is pretty much right up there with Tommy. I've never seen another fighter that could transition from orthodox to southpaw as seamlessly he he could, and he was equally adept from either stance. Awesome jab and uppercut...maybe the best in the business at his peak.

    Another guy I'd like to mention is Wilfredo Gomez...typically thought of as a puncher, but he had excellent boxing skills as well. He probably got hit a little too much (thanks to his aggressive style) but the man had serious boxing skills.
     
  3. SILVER SKULL 66

    SILVER SKULL 66 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,714
    47
    Oct 6, 2013
    Whatever, i know what i see, and i saw your boy, Spaghetti legs being carried away like a ragdoll after the side of his grill was smashed by Haglers right hand, i suppose your gonna be dumb enough to try and tell me i saw something different:lol:..

    I wish to hell they would have had a rematch so i could have had the great pleasure of watching Hagler knock him unconscious again...:dead
     
  4. robert ungurean

    robert ungurean Богдан Philadelphia Full Member

    16,258
    15,314
    Jun 9, 2007
    Yea we all know how u love to call Hearns names. Let me ask u how many title belts to u have??
    I have too much respect to call professional fighters derogatory names cause I know how hard it was just sparring dudes a long time ago.
     
  5. pablod

    pablod Active Member Full Member

    788
    14
    Nov 14, 2011

    classy
     
  6. AlFrancis

    AlFrancis Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,812
    843
    Jul 25, 2008
    I don't think Hagler's win over Hearns proved he was the better pure boxer. Having said that looking at how the fight panned out I think both fighters went out for a shootout. Maybe neither of them fancied their chances in a boxing match against the other.
     
  7. salsanchezfan

    salsanchezfan Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,799
    11,420
    Aug 22, 2004

    He's part of the new breed of Classic poster we've seen over the past few months.

    Terrific, ain't it? :-(
     
  8. robert ungurean

    robert ungurean Богдан Philadelphia Full Member

    16,258
    15,314
    Jun 9, 2007
    Couldn't agree more:mad:
     
  9. detamour

    detamour Guest

    Ray leonard. Was voted boxer of the 80s by ko magazine folks. Hearns, was not a pure boxer to my knowledge of him!!
     
  10. fists of fury

    fists of fury Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,297
    7,047
    Oct 25, 2006
    I agree, but even in the Leonard fight, he managed to regain the initiative with pure boxing after being rocked & hunted down by Ray in the 5th. (I think it was the 5th.)

    He was by no means a pure boxer, but if he needed to, he could rely on his considerable boxing ability. He did it against Hill too...who was no slouch himself as a pure boxer.
     
  11. pablod

    pablod Active Member Full Member

    788
    14
    Nov 14, 2011
    hearns could outbox pure boxers but wasn't a pure boxer?
    I know what you mean though, funny old game
     
  12. salsanchezfan

    salsanchezfan Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,799
    11,420
    Aug 22, 2004
    Hearns isn't a pure boxer? WTF?

    I guess it's time we define what a pure boxer is. I do not agree with that in the least.

    Just because he happened to hit really hard doesn't mean he's not a boxer.
     
  13. fists of fury

    fists of fury Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,297
    7,047
    Oct 25, 2006
    I suppose as you say, it depends on what a person's definition a pure boxer is. To be perfectly honest, I'm not sure what constitutes a pure boxer by definition. I guess I'd look to someone like Mayweather as an example of a good 'pure' boxer.

    Hearns I've never really defined as a pure boxer, simply because he was always looking to take his opponent out. But on the other hand, I guess one could argue that he used his boxing skills to set up the knockouts. Bugger it...it's late here and I'm waffling.

    See you guys tomorrow. :good
     
  14. Goyourownway

    Goyourownway Insanity enthusiast Full Member

    2,667
    21
    Feb 13, 2011

    Struggling to see how "boxing on even terms" with a faded, ageing lightweight is a particularly worthwhile accomplishment for a boxer that you're describing as "one of a kind."



    Again, what's remarkable about boxing on "even terms" with welterweight that had approximately one fight in five years? And if we're being honest, the first six rounds - before those ageing legs started to show - were anything but even.


    I think I'll leave your assertion that Hagler had a better jab than Hearns well and truly alone.
     
  15. Titan1

    Titan1 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,685
    2,561
    Oct 18, 2004
    Howard Davis Jr, Greg Page, Tony Tubbs, Ray Leonard, and Tyrone Crawley were better pure boxers than Tommy, as was Bernard Taylor and Michael Spinks.