Would Canelo Alvarez, Danny Jacobs, and GGG be able to compete with the Fabulous 4 from the 80’s?

Hearns

 

the only reason that a one fight titlist like jacobs is getting a vote here is because he fought canelo and 3g, of whom we have zealous fans here.

take any of the one of the 50 one fight titlists from the last 50 years at MW, noone would pretned they beat hagler and co. They are just lying in THIS case becos they are trying to big up canelo or 3g. its BS.

 

I'm not sure what you are getting at. Hearns fought at 141, I think, as an amateur. Amateurs have to stay at weight for longer periods, so the weight was apparently fairly easy to maintain for him and 147 would be a logical move for him. I don't know for sure, but I would bet just about anything that he was getting into the ring at 150-152 during his welterweight fights.

 

Canelo fought at 140 as a professional.

 

Let me be more clear: A fighter can make a certain weight regardless of it’s same day or not. Day before was instated to protect fighters from themselves because they were cutting weight and entering the ring dehydrated, which is a health risk.

 

It is not the same thing and the mentality with which it is pursued has changed. When you weigh in on the same day, when you fight six to eight hours later, you essentially fight at the weight. The mentality now is that you only have to weigh that much for as long as it takes to get on and off the scale.

The intent may have been to protect the fighter but it has, in reality, encouraged even more drastic cutting in the attempt to gain an edge. The belief is that the extra time forgives all sins. So you come to camp at 150, cut to 126 and then two 148 pound guys fight for the featherweight title. In 1964 those same guys would most likely have been lightweights.

Canelo was 16-17 years old when he fought at 140.

 

Yeah I think he is getting sold a little short here as well....although I felt GGG edged their fight, I had it 6-6 with the KD sealing the decision for me.

 

I would favor Hagler over all 3. I would favor GGG & Canelo over Hearns Leonard & Duran at MW, and Jacobs would be a live dog vs all 3 of them and probably does better than 0-3 even if he does not win the majority.

 

What they did, they saw a tall guy that could make 147 and took a shot. Hearns was 18 or 19 and he fought 32 times in just over three years. That's what he needed to do to get a shot and young guys cut weight easier. As he got older it got harder, though I imagine that staying at 147- and he did, he fought so often- was hard as hell.

 

In the 40 years I have been watching boxing, I have never heard of this before that resumes do not matter … Competition, Activity, who you are in the ring with and when, and your performance against them mean EVERYTHING in analyzing boxing. Of course boxing ability and styles matter(resume who have you proven yourself against different styles, that is a resume), … so before you write a 6 paragraph response. DO NOT start it off with resumes do not matter …

 

As I said before, you fight whoever is around. Vitali Klitschko's best win is Samuel Peter. Are you going to tell me he's not a great head to head fighter? Why is Larry Holmes rated so highly despite having an underwhelming resume? Can you name one great light-heavyweight Bob Foster beat? What happens if someone fought in a relatively weak era? Take Sonny Liston for example. His best win is Floyd Patterson. Patterson was much smaller than Liston. I've seen people pick Liston to beat Joe Louis. If resumes really were that important, no one would ever pick Liston to beat Louis. No one could beat Greb in a fantasy fight. You said resume means everything. Shouldn't we pick Golovkin to beat Hearns then? Golovkin has a much better resume than Hearns at 160.