Where do you place Hearns-Andries in the list of Tommy's best wins?

Hi

At least I know people are listening to my argument about Duran's overrating. But to answer your question. Sure it should be the same if the circumstances are the same. But where is Duran's win over a great Virgil Hill 30 pounds over his original title winning fight? Davey Moore? Duran fans want to say that beating Moore and Barkley is the same as Hearns beating Virgil Hill who was undefeated and had 10 title defenses. Again the facts are not warranted for Duran.

With Hearns, beating guys like Hill and Cuevas and Benitez and Duran are wins against greats for the title when it mattered. If you look at Hearns resume, he beat Cuevas for his first title. Benitez for 2 and Hill at 175. Unheard of some of his wins, yet they are not noticed. Duran beats Davey Moore in 1983 a year after Benitez outclassed him and people act like that is an alltime win. A guy who had 11 fights was Davey Moore. Also, if a guy fights the best guys and does not have one knockout win over the ATG fighters, then the ranking of a great fighter is not warranted. But Tommy beat ATG fighters he is underrated. Tommy stopped two of them when they were champs. Other fighters are overrated, but Tommy is underrated.

 

how was it exposed? I have explained numerous times how Duran is 1-5 vs. the fab 4. Hearns beat great fighters and lost to two of them. So his wins over the other greats was overshadowed by his losses in primetime to Leonard and Hagler. Duran lacks those other wins and still people want to rate him 1-5 ATG which is not warranted. I think the facts speak for themselves. If Duran beat Benitez for the title (which he did not) or Hearns then you could say he was ATG 1-5. Hearns has the great wins which Duran does not. That is why I say Duran is overrated and Hearns underrated. I stand by that. Hearns is a case where people overlook his great wins. Duran is a case where mediocre wins and made into great wins.

 

Andries was not elite, but it was a good win over a champ many divisions over where Hearns won his first title. I thought the Roldan win was almost better but they are comparable. When Tommy fought Roldan, Marvin said during the 4th round (now he is facing a fighter-meaning Andries was not a fighter and Roldan was.). Although the fact he fought Roldan and was given a tough fight might have to do with Hagler overrating Roldan.

 

Tommy was 32 when he beat Hill, about 14 years into his career. Duran was 38 and 22 years into his career when he beat Barkley. You know, Barkley, the guy who beat Tommy right after he beat Hill?

Moore had already stopped the excellent Kalule and he blitzed Benitez right after his slaughtering at the hands of Duran.
Leonard, Buchanan, Barkley > Benitez, Cuevas, Hill. Then we take into account the overall depth of their resumes and longevity, and well, you know the story.

Tommy may be underrated, but thats not the point. The point is that you're ridiculously biased against Duran, for whatever reason, and you're defending Hearns from the same things you criticize Duran for. It's called hypocrisy.

 

:goodGREAT post:good

 

Tommy was the same age when he beat Hill as Duran was when Tommy beat him. So much for trying to make a point. Barkley was not great. He beat Tommy, but was also beaten by Kalambay,Nunn, and stopped by Benn in an easy one round knockout at the same time Duran barely beat him. Had Hearns not been stopped by Barkley, Hearns would have had a knockout in round 4 by bodypunches.

Moore had 11 fights. Add to that Duran thumbed him and Moore had dental surgery days before. And fact is Duran was outclassed by Benitez a year and a half before the Moore fight, and fight Duran fans try to forget and never mention. I am defending Hearns because unlike Duran he beat the best 175 pound fighter 30 pounds above his starting title winning weight and beat him at his own game. Duran never did that. Fact.

Tommy won 3 of his titles vs. ATG fighters. Duran did not. Am I saying anything which is not truthful? Did Duran beat anyone 30 pounds above his first title winning weight who was the best guy in the division? undefeated? 5 years younger? No he didn't. Aside from Ray, Duran lost to all the fab 4 including Benitez. And he lost easily to Hearns and Benitez and Leonard. All Hagler had to do was win the last remaining rounds when he was sleepwalking in some early rounds and he beat Duran. Hearns won the 175 pound title two times. First man to win 4 and then 5 titles. first man to win the welt title and then the 168 pound title and first man to win welt and then 175 pound title (2 times). Facts speak for themselves. You cannot make Moore and Barkley the caliber of wins Hearns had over Benitez and Hill or Duran.

 

Barkley was not great. Hill wasn't either. Losing to Benitez at 32 isn't as bad as losing to Iran, thats for sure. As for the first fight, you're right, If Hearns hadn't lost he would have won - whatever that's supposed to mean.

Moore was an undefeated champion who took the belt from the excellent Kalule and was a heavy favorite. Duran was beaten before that by Benitez, but then he managed to come back and still have success. Where's Tommy's great success after the 2nd loss to Barkley? Duran won the Middleweight title 17 years after he won the Lightweight title. What was Hearns doing 17 years after he began his career, nevermind after his first world title?

Cuevas and Hill are ATG's? I doubt your going to find many who agree with you there. Even if we go ahead and decide that the Barkley win isn't comparable with the Hill win, despite everything saying otherwise, Duran doesn't need Moore and Barkley to be on the same level of Tommy's wins over Benitez, Hill, or Duran. He's got Leonard, Buchanan, DeJesus 2x, and Palomino for that.

If you want to keep arguing about the achievements of Duran and Hearns, I'm all for it, but again, thats not the point I was making. Your bias leads to hipocrisy, that's the point.

 

It would be hypocritical of me only if Hearns fought mediocre guys like Duran did, yet lost to all the others which were better fighters. Hearns did not lose to Benitez and Duran and Hill. He beat the top guys still -yes Hill was great. 25 title defenses is great. Hill has more title fights than Duran ever did.
ATG ranking is subjective. It all comes down to time and who rates the ATG. Now many people are influenced by Duran's machismo and charisma, but his ranking is already starting to slip and Hearns is going up.

Hearns beat higher rated champions than Duran ever did. Virgil Hill was one example of a few. Hill suffered from a lack of knockout power which hurts his fight clips, and also the Hearns loss diminished his confidence a little. He never was as dominant after that loss. My point? Hearns beat ATG champions and destroyed them and outclassed them. Never did he have excuses like Duran. People know Leonard fought Duran's fight since the rematch and rubbermatch prove Ray could beat Duran easily .

Tommy had the great wins. Several of them- including Duran. A Duran which was one year removed from the Moore fight.
Cuevas is ATG yes. 10 title defenses and Hearns ended his reign. Very dominant reign. Pulverizing left hook. Hearns knocked out Cuevas and after that Cuevas was never the same.
Benitez whom Hearns beat over 15 rounds easily beat Duran in 1982, and later that year Hearns beat Benitez for that title, then later Hearns destroyed Duran in an outclassing. Duran comes back and cannot beat Robbie Sims, but gets a fight with Barkley only after Barkley beats Hearns. The only reason he got a chance at Barkley was because Tommy lost to Barkley. I knew Duran would beat Barkley in 1989. The style matchup was perfect for Duran. Besides Barkley who else good did he beat in those years? You have to go back to Davey Moore to find his next good opponent. 2 opponents in 6 years, and all the greats Benitez,Hearns,Leonard,Hagler beat him.

People can spin Duran and make him 1-5 ATG, but the wins over ATG fighters is lacking regardless of the excuse of he was too old or small. Fact is he fought at 154 pounds as early as 1978, before Hearns and Leonard and Benitez ever fought that high.

Dejesus is not ATG. Palomino not ATG. Buchanan is definetely not ATG. Leonard he beat when Ray fought his fight, but the rematch and rubbermatch was Ray winning an outclassing, which in Jan of 1982, Benitez showed was not hard to do. If you gave Duran an opponent like Barkley, or Moore when they did not move he could beat them. So what. He could not beat an elite fighter who boxed. He never did.

 

op

 

Anyone think it was odd that when Hearns took a knee against Andries, it didn't seem to register with the commentators? I could be wrong but from memory they barely said a word about it :huh

 

you mean in round 10? Andries sort of pushed Hearns down even though he hit him with a good enough left, it was not a punch which would have sent him down. So they figured it was a pull down. Andries the previous rounds was all over the place and pulled Hearns down at one time. Andries was so tired and out on his feet and he did try to stay up, but he just could not get away from Hearns punches. He showed great heart though.