Who was more exciting : Hearns or Tyson ?

Two freakish punchers!
I would pick Tyson because of his killer instinct....

 

Hearns was more clinical in his approach. He had the goods but didn't mind piling up points.

Tyson was the definition of search and destroy.

 

Hearns because even at his best there was always the chance he would get hurt.

 

Yep.

I mean, there was even VIDEO GAME CHARACTERS formed on Mike!

No Boxer EVER will match that type of buzz. Floyd certainly doesn't.

Saying that, Hearns fights were must see.

 

def Tyson that guy was what night terrors were made of ..

interesting side note .. buddies of mine who were a great deal older than I used to go watch hearns fight when he was coming up .. he'd go in and knock some poor sucker out so fast .. and they'd take bets on which hand it was that's how fast he was swinging .. they'd have to wait till they got the actual results when they were listening to the results on the way home

 

Each to their own.

I would rather watch SRR on film for 24 hours non stop than watch highlight reels of any 10 Heavyweights you care to name.

 

Too bad there's no footage of prime SRR, who fought 4 times as much as sugar ray leonard. Only amateur clips and couple of middleweight bouts.

 

I don't claim to be a great mathematician, but I am sure 198 fights, is more than 4 times 40.

Unless of course you mean he WON slightly over 4 times the amount of fights Leonard had in his total career.

 

Mike had the masses but those that were really into boxing at the time Tommy and his straight right came along were probably just as hyped as when Mike came along.

After Tommy destroyed Duran nobody was sure anyone could stop him.

 

This message is hidden because latineg ( all bollox ) is on your ignore list.

 

A true kill or be killed style.

 

In many fights but when the occasion demanded he could sit back and box with the best of them. Benitez and Hill were such clinics.