Who do you favour to beat a Prime Hearns @ Welterweight

Hearn's height and reach advantages are negligible compared to Gavilan. They'd be non-factors. Gavilan was more of a versatile boxer than WW Hearns ever was. He would be master of two ranges and would hold his own outside.

Gavilan may get hurt by Hearns, but I find it just as likely if not more likely that Hearns would be hurt by Gavilan.

 

And Basilio,but never kod.

 

I agree with most of this post...

WW Hearns seems to be overestimated here on the Classic forum. I think it is because people tend to combine the WW Hearns with the JMW Hearns -who was absolutely fearsome. The WW Hearns had that freak-power and that serious reach and height advantage, but was more vulnerable than his record suggests. And again, he was just 23 when he moved up to weight divisions were he was stronger.

Cuevas ain't Burley et al.!

 

He may have been more versatile in that he tried different techniques, but that doesn't make him a more effective outboxer. How highly do you rate Billy Graham in that case? Do you figure he'd hold his own on the outside with Hearns when the likes of Ray Leonard, Wilfred Benitez, etc. could not?

Also, I think the odds of either man hurting the other are about even, possibly even in favor of Hearns, given Gavilan's lack of power in comparison(though I think it was better than his KO percentage suggests).

 

Napoles eyes were prone to cutting ,that is the factor that decided me to pick Tommy over him I actually think Napoles had more natural talent than Hearns.Picking the two Ray's is of course just my opinion ,which I should have added[imo] I usually do!

 

How can totally forget about Barney Ross & Mickey Walker beating Tommy Hearns.

Robinson beats him yes.

Napoles? Maybe, but its no gurantee.

Maybe Griffith, he has a chance.

Gavilan yes. He'd have grinded Tommy down.

Tommy beats Rodriguez.

 

Gavilan's power does appear to be better than his record suggests.

Of the footage I have seen, he seems to seriously hurt his opponent more than once in virtually every fight I've seen of his.

It's probably close, but I might lean towards Gavilan being able to hurt Hearns more than Hearns hurting Gavilan. Probably not stop him, but I'd say Gavilan has Tommy hurt in the fight at some point. I guess the same can be said the other way around, but for some reason it's just hard for me to see Gavilan truly hurt to where he's in danger of being stopped.

 

LMAO @ the thought of him beating Hearns! Boxing evolved so much since then, from the 60's on.

I doubt Ross would beat Buddy McGirt, let alone Tommy Hearns.

 

I didn't say Gavilan was "more effective" outside. I said he'd hold his own, but would be the boss at mid-range and in close.

Graham was a damn good fighter -he had a win (1 out of 4 -and that disputable) over Gavilan, Carmen himself, and Giardello. And no, I don't believe that the 5'7 Graham would be wise to deal with Hearns outside.

 

Hearns was 21/2 inches taller but more importantly he had 7 inches more reach than Gavilan at 78in,I dont consider that negligible.

 

...

Do you watch KO clips for a living? Or is the black and white, one angle shot skewing your perception?

Tell us in what ways boxing has evolved as an applied science from what you see in that clip.

 

The height is negligible. But the reach ain't.

 

Do you rate Gavilan higher as an outboxer than Ray Leonard Stonehands? Leonard was out-sized in basically the same way, and it certainly didn't appear negligible when Hearns was outboxing him for the majority of the fight. Leonard had the power to offset that though, something Gavilan may not have had.

 

Gavilan brings different things to the table than Leonard in terms of boxing. Leonard was a good technician, fundamentally sound, and a good, crisp puncher. Gavilan was not always looking for the KO -which partly explains his low % of such, however he was a master who took his boxing to another level. More angles, more output, more unorthodoxy designed to disrupt and preoccupy his opponent.

Gavilan would not be standing off like Leonard did, eating jabs and trying to box Hearns on Hearns' terms. Leonard was circling, circling and doing very little for the first few rounds, content to allow Hearns dictate the pace. Gavilan would never allow this, he'd use his feet which were as good as Leonard's, but he would be applying pressure from all angles. He would be shifting and angling and far busier. Once Leonard cut the distance and got inside to applied pressure, Hearns started getting caught and began to wilt. This is how Gavilian fought -crazy pressure, all angles, looping shots. He'd catch Hearns and I don't think Hearns, at 147 could sustain the pace and deal with the unending pressure of Gavilan...

 

Hm, I think the whole fab 4 are slightly overrated just like Ali-Frazier-Foreman due to their big names and that they fought each other. Now every fighter who gave them trouble is at least a very good fighter. They still are great but a tad overrated imo.

I think Ross has a good chance outworking Hearns, Armstrong I´m pretty sure would win. Even DLH has a chance I think.