Who faced the better version of Hearns

Leonard.

 

hagler for sure for all the obvious reasons.

First, he was more experienced. For leonard, tommy really hadn't fought anyone of class other than Cuevas. all others were too worn and badly beaten up ex contenders incapable of putting up a fight; not having the reflexes to defend against tommy's attack so they took shots flush-the perfect opponents for tommy.

and after cuevas it was more of the same weak competition: Primera who was unknown outside of his native Valenzuela, then impotent Shields-no threat at all and later stopped by Bumphus. Then Baez given an emergency top ten ranking to qualify for a title shot. read all about it in Ring magazine. Tommy showed he had a lot of maturing to do during the Baez match, dropping his hands but he got away with it in that fight.

His competition was weak and he was bowling over stiffs.

After leonard he at least faced durable although very modest competition - signletary-10 rds, geraldo, Mc Craken-8, 15 with Benitez, 10 with Sutherland, 12 hard rounds with Minchillo, duran and Hutchins and the 14 with leonard, a somewhat demanding fight but all badly needed rounds for Tommy.

Not to mention carrying his weight much better. Don't believe the liars-Tommy was not at a healthy weight for Leonard and had actually outgrown the welters. now look at him for the Hagler fight at a very strong 159 pounds. Weight problems were a thing of the past.

and it's just not realistic to think Tommy was at his prime at 22 and 145 pounds. he looked very skinny for that fight.

 

Hagler.

 

He was so much expirienced that coming to kill unkillable where he must box.

 

Leonard. Benitez fought an even better version minus the broken hand, and Duran the peak version IMO. Marvin fought a peak Hearns but not at his peak weight. Still a killer version tho.

 

Leonard.

 

Hearns was 26 years old against Hagler and was a powerful MW. He was experienced, having already faced greats like Leonard, Benitez, and Duran.

He was a 21 years old untested kid against Leonard and he was lanky and emaciated.

-The question is easy.

 

Hagler.

Against Leonard he was too skinny and not experienced enough,he didn't even clinch when hurt!
The Hearns that Hagler fought,was stronger,bigger,more experienced everything!

 

Hagler.

SRL opened against Hearns by boxing cautiously and alertly, mindful of Tommy's performance against Cuevas and Shields. (Hearns was far better against Shields than SRL was.) Hagler didn't take a backwards step against the fully matured destroyer who just blasted out Duran. SRL would have been killed, going immediately after Tommy like that.

Hearns had seasoning and confidence going in against Hagler that he didn't possess against SRL.

 

Agreed, although HEarns hurt his hand early and didn't box clever against Hagler

 

Hagler did.

Hearns was a true beast at middleweight. Much more powerful, he carryed his speed as well, looked unbeatable...
Leonard fought a young version of Hearns, I think he wasn't at his best (mentally) against SRL but he definitely was with Hagler.

 

Tommy liked to trade in all his fights including leonard when he was caught. Look at rds 3-6. most of what you see is tommy wanting to slug it out. Tommy always fought like he was in a hurry and had to be somewhere else

 

Hagler did, minus the overtrained legs and broken right hand in round 1. The Hearns that Leonard faced was still maturing physically.