Who would win, Henry Armstrong or Thomas Hearns at 147?

The weird thing is, Armstrong should have a stylistic advantage against a tall rangy fighter with chin issues. So should Duran for that matter. On paper their all wrong for Hearns.

But reality showed us Hearns managed to destroy Duran. And Armstrong is an inferior version of Duran. I mean Armstrong has a chin made of iron, but then again so does Duran. Armstrong is a master at getting inside a bigger man, but then again so was Duran.

I cannot for the life of me picture Armstrong being flattened by one punch, but I couldn't have pictured Roberto either.

I think on the strength of the Duran destruction, I have to go with Hearns, but I'm not happy about it.

 

I disagree with that.

 

Any infighter is an inferior version of Duran since he's the gold standard.

 

No, because Armstrong is the golden standard

 

Homicide Hank would have to change his nickname to Suicide Hank rushing at the Motor City Cobra.

Armstrong is the single most-accomplished fighter in the history of the sport by reigning from feather to welter all at the same time (with a strong argument to be made that he should have added the middleweight crown), and he rates up there with anyone including Robinson in the debate for P4P No. 1 all-time, but Hearns at 147 is just all kinds of wrong for him.

 

How can you know that? Armstrong was lethal puncher and he made a career of fighting bigger men.

 

Armstrong did OK matching bigger guys too.

He first won a world title at featherweight. He then actually won the world welterweight title weighing inside the the lightweight limit and after that won the lightweight title. He held these three world titles simultaneously. In the middle of Welterweight defenses he drew with the reigning world middleweight champion as well.

Given he could still make Featherweight and win the title after 6 years of boxing one could perhaps argue that his Welterweight was Duran's middleweight. Have a good hard look at what Armstrong did at welterweight.

What makes it even more mind boggling is that he was pumping said Welterweights in title defenses while quite often weighing inside the lightweight limit or sub 140. Just to compound things further again (hopefully you get the jist of this point) the man was also a swarmer.

 

Garcia hurt Armstrong with right hands in their first fight I think Hearns can do better he has the handspeed and power to halt Hank in his tracks even if the smaller guy can consistently get under his jab and work inside.

 

I dunno, Armstrong was so good & had a stylistic advantage.
Yes the size difference is large, but remember it is not like Duran vs. Hearns where they fought at 154.
Hearns was more bambi legged at 147, he was very thin at that weight for his height & frame.
He had less power when he was fighting SRL at that weight than when heavier, agreed?

Up to WW same day weigh in, I have to go with Armstrong.

 

Armstrong would probably draw hurns into a brawl thayd knock each other down a few Time's with Armstrong getting kod around the 5th (would probably look a bit like the roldan fight)

 

Joe Savage was a heavyweight Roberto Duran.