Thomas Hearns v. Bernard Hopkins at 160 and 175
-
Vladimir5555
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 1221
- Joined: 12 Apr 2013, 11:38
Thomas Hearns v. Bernard Hopkins at 160 and 175
What happens?
Re: Thomas Hearns v. Bernard Hopkins at 160 and 175
I find this hypothetical to be interesting in a landscape of yawners.
I know I'd like to see Bernard get tested like this. I usually like the slick fighters and think of them in a positive light when facing murderous punchers. Not sure Bernard appeals to my senses quite that way. Nor do I think of Tommy as JUST a murderous puncher. So my opinion would be very swayed by what I would want to happen.
So other than state that I find this a very interesting fight, I'll be interested in seeing the opinions.
Wouldn't Middleweight be the best catch weight for these two? I'd want to see both men equally compromised, or find the weight that overall cost these two guys the very least. Isn't Bernard the naturally bigger guy?
I know I'd like to see Bernard get tested like this. I usually like the slick fighters and think of them in a positive light when facing murderous punchers. Not sure Bernard appeals to my senses quite that way. Nor do I think of Tommy as JUST a murderous puncher. So my opinion would be very swayed by what I would want to happen.
So other than state that I find this a very interesting fight, I'll be interested in seeing the opinions.
Wouldn't Middleweight be the best catch weight for these two? I'd want to see both men equally compromised, or find the weight that overall cost these two guys the very least. Isn't Bernard the naturally bigger guy?
Re: Thomas Hearns v. Bernard Hopkins at 160 and 175
I'd agree Bernard is the naturally bigger guy, who knows when he last made 147 strong.
At 160, Hearns obviously wasn't the force he was at 147 but in a 12 round fight I would still take him to beat Hopkins. I'm going for the 154lb Hearns of the Duran fight against Hopkins Tito Trinidad form. Hearns can stop Hopkins here but I figure he gets him hurt once or twice but Hopkins finesses his way out of trouble but into losing a wide UD. Hopkins goes down at some point. Hearns jab would keep Hopkins occupied and that flashing right hand would have him in ultra defensive mode. Struggling with Jermain Taylor doesn't bode well for a fight against Hearns.
At 160, Hearns obviously wasn't the force he was at 147 but in a 12 round fight I would still take him to beat Hopkins. I'm going for the 154lb Hearns of the Duran fight against Hopkins Tito Trinidad form. Hearns can stop Hopkins here but I figure he gets him hurt once or twice but Hopkins finesses his way out of trouble but into losing a wide UD. Hopkins goes down at some point. Hearns jab would keep Hopkins occupied and that flashing right hand would have him in ultra defensive mode. Struggling with Jermain Taylor doesn't bode well for a fight against Hearns.
-
polecateddy
- Heavyweight
Re: Thomas Hearns v. Bernard Hopkins at 160 and 175
I think Howard Eastman could have beaten Hopkins if he'd been more committed and a little fitter. I think Hearns can take the decision in a dull fight.
Re: Thomas Hearns v. Bernard Hopkins at 160 and 175
The Tommy hearns of 86-87 who fought at between 160-175 was past his very best the 89-92 version was shot.
But I still take both version beating Hopkins.even the best Hopkins of 2000-2001.that Hopkins was quick,unorthodox a professor in finding a way to win.but hearns was big and flamboyant in his speed ,power and boxing skills. The earlier version might even get up on his toes and methodically outbox Hopkins.the older one will be like what we saw against hill
But I still take both version beating Hopkins.even the best Hopkins of 2000-2001.that Hopkins was quick,unorthodox a professor in finding a way to win.but hearns was big and flamboyant in his speed ,power and boxing skills. The earlier version might even get up on his toes and methodically outbox Hopkins.the older one will be like what we saw against hill