Why is Hearns rated on ATG list that DLH is absent from?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by kg0208, Oct 23, 2007.


  1. BewareofDawg

    BewareofDawg P4P Champ Full Member

    27,677
    184
    Apr 8, 2006
    And I own your ass Jack :good After this one you stopped trying to debate with me and picked you pom poms back up and started spelling out K-A-Y-G......with your feminine arms :lol:

    Gaygb doesn't own ****, accept maybe 1/2 your possesions, and his bias and unyielding hate for Oscar blinds his judgement.
     
  2. BewareofDawg

    BewareofDawg P4P Champ Full Member

    27,677
    184
    Apr 8, 2006
    And since you dug this thread back up, maybe you and/or your goofball friend can answer my question. What was it about Vargas, IN THE DELAHOYA FIGHT, that makes you think he wasn't his best???? I honestly think he could've been suffering from back problems leading up and used the steroids as a result. But on that night, however much his back was hurting him, the roids were helping.....because he was a beast; Strong as ever, fast, ferocious.....and Oscar beat his ass :good
     
  3. gr8fight

    gr8fight Active Member Full Member

    802
    0
    Dec 7, 2007
    You have good logic. Hearns performed better. Against greater competition. But i get your point.
     
  4. JAM Killer

    JAM Killer Coming Through. Full Member

    1,274
    0
    Nov 5, 2006
    Oscar is higher on my list. He performed better in his biggest fights.
     
  5. sugarngold

    sugarngold RIDDUM Full Member

    18,550
    5
    Jun 10, 2007
    What list are you talking about? The recent ESPN ranking of the top 50 boxers of all time included both Thomas Hearns and Oscar De La Hoya.
     
  6. stuistylee

    stuistylee j.c.chavez superstar Full Member

    1,734
    0
    May 22, 2007
    spot on mate...i also think hearns would have landed the jab and the big right hand on delahoya...ko9:bbb
     
  7. kg0208

    kg0208 Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,031
    6
    Aug 8, 2005
    It was more of a general question, but most didn't seem to get it. I wasn't asking who should be rated higher, just why Hearns seems to get a high ranking on the same criteria that is used to criticize DLH : Fighting great competition but not winning against most of those fighters.

    When ranking Hearns, people say he fought great comp, and even though he didn't win against Hearns or Leonard, he fought them and also had some other great wins over solid opposition.

    When ranking DLH, you will see people say he fought great comp, but lost to most of them, and therefore doesn't deserve a high ranking, or to be ranked at all in some cases.

    Same criteria, fought great fighters but didn't win most of those fights....but different outcomes on the opinion.
     
  8. Dostoevsky

    Dostoevsky Hardcore......to the max! Full Member

    5,691
    6
    Jun 17, 2007
    That pretty much sums it up.
    My feelings exactly.
     
  9. kaygb

    kaygb Member Full Member

    488
    0
    Jul 20, 2004
    The list is pathetic Jack. Now get this. they have Oscar at #40 and Carlos Monson at #46. :lol: Even worse than that they have Whitaker at #45 and Mayweather at #49. Oscar ranked above those guys is mindboggling and tells you the list is only something you wipe your ass with.
     
  10. BewareofDawg

    BewareofDawg P4P Champ Full Member

    27,677
    184
    Apr 8, 2006
    So post your list Bert Sugar, I'll make confetti out of it in a matter of seconds :good
     
  11. BewareofDawg

    BewareofDawg P4P Champ Full Member

    27,677
    184
    Apr 8, 2006
    The only way Kaygbs **** has any boxing knowledge in it, is if he didn't completely fart out the present gave him in there last night.....for you are a true genious of the game Jack :roll: . Kaygb however is a shitstain in the underwear of the ignorant :deal Oh, so I'm the skywalker to your vader :rofl Ok?