Who is the greater figther: RJJ or Thomas Hearns

Jones is a bit unlucky that he hasnt had the same level as competitipn the Hearns had. Roy is the better boxer but hearns has the better resume and therefore a more legendary fighter

 

Fanboy alarm!

Castro is no HoF.
Hopkins was inexpeirenced, still a good win.
Toney was weightdrained, still a good win.
Pazienza was above his best weight and never anything special.
McCallum was above his best weight and far far past it.
Virgil Hill is a good win and a future HoFer but he came of a bad loss to DM.
Trinidad was shot and 2-3 weightclasses above his best weight.

Out of those wins only Hopkins, Toney and Hill hold some water. Compare that to:

Hearns gave Hill is first loss when Hearns himself was already past it and at least 3 weightclasses above his best weight.
Hearns beat Leonard the second time around, even Leonard himself admits it.
Hearns beat Duran shortly after Duran went 15 with Hagler beeing the only man to do so in Haglers reign. Hearns knocked him out in two.
Hearns beat atg Benitez.
Hearns destroyed future HoFer Pipino Cuevas.

Sorry but that´s just clear. Hearns has the better resume and longevity. Accomplishments are about even. So Hearns takes it.

 

right now its close but if RJ somehow beats Calzaghe then he goes ahead of Hearns.

 

hearns

 

Hearns

He has a fantastic resume and preety much fought every one and its a shame roy is my 2nd fav fighter of all time but you got to be honest.

Roy didnt fight DM for what ever reason so this hurts him at 175, he didnt for what ever reason fight eubank or benn.

All fights imo jones wins, but he never fought so it is a black mark against him. Still if he some how manages to beat joe cal then id have to rethink but as it stands and as i think it will stay hearns is better imho. :good

 

This is a very hard question to answer. I voted for Hearns in the end though.

 

Tommy is the greater fighter.Purely because of his resume'....Roy Jones,however,is the more skilled of the two.

H2H...The Hitman is my man an' all....but Roy at his peak...160-168....is a threat to anyone in history including the legendary Sugar Ray Robinson.

Tommy's ledger tho',will always keep him infront of Roy Jones.

 

hearns is one of my favorite fighters, and i mean top 3 favorite. was'nt a fan of rjj either. personally i think hearns just shades it. i admit i'm biased, though i have no problem with anyone who says rjj.

 

Good point however the performance of a fighter should be considered even if infact he did lose

 

Good poll idea. I go with RJJ, but I can definitely see the argument for Hearns.

Hearns's best wins were Duran, Benitez, Cuevas, and Virgil Hill IMO.

RJJ's best wins were Toney, Hopkins, Griffin II, and Ruiz IMO.

Hearns has the edge, but RJJ is not too far behind.

However, I think RJJ is pretty far ahead in terms of ability. At his peak he hardly lost a round, and had amazing all-round skills.

Hearns was a great in terms of ability, he had incredible power and is surely one of the best welterweights in history. But his stoppage loss to Barkley at only 29 years old highlighted Hearns's great weakness- chin. I would feel more comfortable betting on Jones v the best middles and super middles and light heavys, than I would betting on Hearns v the best welters for this reason. RJJ never showed the chin frailty til he was too old and worn to avoid the punches.

Two great fighters, but I go with Jones p4p.

 

Hearns. He fought MUCH tougher competition and took A LOT of risks something Jones refused to do.

Look at the names on Hearns resume and look at Glass Jaw Roy's. It is not even close.

 

Overall Jones,he was prefect in his prime,but I'm pretty biased when it comes to my fav fighter

 

It's so easy just to automatically say the fighter from the 1980s had the better resume.

Hearns did have the better resume in this case, but it is not as clear-cut as you think.

Hearns top 5 wins were Duran, Benitez, Cuevas, Virgil Hill, and...

Andries? DeWitt? Someone else? You see, Hearns's resume does not contain that many great wins.


Jones Jr's top 5 wins were Toney, Hopkins, Griffin II, Ruiz, and Tarver.

But there was also a great KO win over Virgil Hill.


As I said, in this comparison Hearns's resume IS better, but not by too much. Hearns never beat the best fighters on his resume (Hagler and Leonard), and got stopped by Iran Barkley when he was 29.

Jones Jr fought in an era where there were not so many great names to fight, but he still managed some very good wins, and one truly great win v Toney, which was better than anything on Hearns's resume other than Duran and maybe Benitez.

 

The difference is Hearns was stopped by ATG's like SRL and Hagler.

Jones? He was knocked cold by feather fisted Glen Johnson and Tarver.

And, Hearns took huge risks fighting the big names of his time. Jones REFUSED to to this on several occassions. Do you think Hearns was a cherry picker like Jones was? Absolutley not. :deal

 

The obvious difference is Hearns was stopped by Leonard and Hagler when he was at his peak, RJJ only got caught and stopped when he was in his mid-30s and had ****ed his body up by piling on muscle to get to heavyweight then burning it all off again in the space of a year.

And what else you say is conjecture, Jones's top 5 wins are not too far behind Hearns's in terms of quality victories.