Would have Nigel Benn have defeated Tommy Hearns when both were prime at 160 lbs?

Depends on how Tommy comes in.

Benn has the power and skill to land something vicious to Hearns' body and head and I don't like Hearns' durability/survivability versus the biggest of punchers and Benn could absolutely hit. However, Hearns' jab and hook to the body were elite and I could easily see Hearns timing and catching a reckless Benn trying to negotiate his way in with wanton abandon to sound defensive techniques.

Benn's headmovement was better than he's given credit for and he's naturally the heavier man so eventually, I expect him to bully and maul Hearns somewhat. However, I recognise that Tommy is leagues ahead in terms of skillset and has the height, reach and handspeed and power combination to keep Benn honest.

There will be KDs and I can see Tommy dropping Benn with a left to the body-right hand over the shoulder chopping down on the chin combo or something similar to what he caught Duran with. The difference is that I think Benn could take it and get off the canvas and a hurt Benn was dangerous. If the referee lets him maul Tommy, he could literally foul and punch the momentum out of Tommy, but I will caveat that with Tommy being a Kronk war veteran - he will give as good as he gets, but Benn is the naturally larger man.

The only two outcomes I can see is Benn stopping an exhausted Tommy or Tommy boxing his way to a close but very comfortable victory, in that whilst rounds were close, he wins about 8 - 10 of them on his boxing ability, gets a flash knockdown, maybe a more serious knockdown, but he will have to hold his ground and withstand an onslaught of fightback that a snarling Benn would definitely bring. Benn could very well get stopped at the same time from accumulation - Tommy could also hit and Benn's come forward style could absolutely maximise the power behind Tommy's hook and straight right. There is also the possibility that as Benn comes in low, with chin tucked, Tommy could damage his right hand on the top of Nigel's head.

 

Yes he d struggle against Hearns jab.
Same as a lot of the guys Tommy faced.
Benn would have to bank on getting in close somehow and somehow landing a few nuclear bomb s on his chin.
Would be Intresting to see, if it starts out like the Hagler fight, both going absolutely crazy at each other, who comes off worse.

 

I'd heavily favour Hearns because he was too good a boxer. That said 160 was not his best division and if Benn could land the power Hearns could well be put to sleep.

 

Hearns was in his prime below 160 but did look good enough v Hagler to beat Benn who was beaten by Watson and Eubank at 160. Benn`s stamina was an issue at 160, he punched himself out v Watson and gassed v Eubank also, this may have been like Hearns v Roldan.

 

Hagler had a far better chin than Benn and was harder to hit, the staright rights that Hearns landed on Hagler in that 1st round would have finished Benn, Barkley had Benn hurt but was too slow to finish him.

 

Hearns by KO.

This is the Hearns of 85 we’re talking about and it took Marvin Hagler to beat him and Hearns still got his licks in in the first round. Benn doesn’t have Hagler’s chin and wouldn’t survive.

Benn still has a puncher’s chance and if it was the Hearns of 87/88 then I can see Benn springing an upset like Barkley did, but I’d still favour Tommy even then.

 

This content is protected

 

Hagler had one of the greatest chins in middle weight history..

 

This has every chance of being a carbon copy of Hagler v Hearns.
I favour the more rounded Hearns to beat Benn inside 5.

 

Hagler vs Hearns demonstrated how truly special
Hagler's chin was, Hagler's fights with punchers
like Sibson, Briscoe, Lee, Roldan, and especially Mugabi
only are conformations of Haglers extraordinary ability
to take a punch.
Nigel Benn may have punched harder with one punch
than Hagler, may have been a little quicker with his hands
and feet than he was. But wasn't close to be as skilled
or tough as Hagler.
Hearns demonstrated with his shocking ko's of James
Shuler, and tough as nails Juan Roldan he was still
as lethal at middleweight as he was at the lighter weights.
I'll lean to the fighter with the better overall skills and lethal
power, than just lethal power.
This is a old west shoot out, the gunfighter with the fastest
draw, and accuracy will win.
I'll take Hearns by early ko, stopping the charging Benn in his tracks with
his jab, setting up that lethal right hand for a early finish with in 5 rds.

 

I've read some here write that they thought Hearns' best weight was 160 and I can't fathom that. His speed and relative leg strength/mobility and speed were so much more pronounced at 147 and even 154. By the time he hit 160 he was first struggling to redefine himself coming off the Leonard defeat somewhat unimpressively (Singletary, Sutherland) or later trying to reestablish himself against Shuler and Roldan. Those were more impressive outings, but not enough information to sway any decision that such showings were better than what he did at the lighter weights. Aside from the huge losses to Hagler and Barkley, what else have you got?

Therefore, I see this as pick-em. Benn could be had, certainly. But he was strong enough and resourceful enough to rebound from adversity and rally to take Tommy out. Chances are it would be the other way around but Benn has more than a puncher's chance.

 

Benn couldn't get past Malinga's jab in two attempts, so Hearns jab would be a nightmare for him, I see no reason why Hearns shouldn't be a fairly big favourite here. Outside of a hail mary punch from Benn, different class of fighters.

 

Hearns KO mid-rounds. As stated earlier, the Hearns jab would be hard for Benn to deal with, let alone the hook (especially downstairs), cross & everything else that comes with it.

 

I'd say Hearns by KO but my advanced, confidential and registered algorithims made it an 80/20
fight, so it's POSSIBLE that Benn lands a good punch and takes Hearns out

 

Benn stops him, my guess would be 6 rounds or less