Be real

[JeanClaude Van Damme]

Hmm.. I remember people bringing up the same thing when Mosley landed a big shot on Floyd. They claimed if Pacquiao landed a similar shot, which he did in this GIF you just posted, that Floyd would be either knocked out or Pacquiao would have the remedy to be able to finish the fight. Just saying.

Those people are retarded. Tommy Hearns would have floored a heavyweight.

Mosley hit Floyd with a shot that could have knocked out a Heavyweight as well. I think you're underestimating Floyds chin to degree.. Of course if Hearns hit Floyd flush, there's a chance he could have knocked him out, but again I've seen Floyd take some huge shots from some of the best punchers in the sport and has yet to touch down (unless you count the Judah fight where he caught Floyd off balance, but in no way did that punch "hurt" Floyd). Just be real dude, you're thinking of the best case scenario for Hearns and completely ignoring some of the facts. I saw a lot of guys take Hearns best shot and not get KTFO.

Hearns knocking Floyd out is not a forgone conclusion, too many other variables to add in there. It's not as simple as saying Hearns could punch like a mule so if he landed a shot on Floyd, Floyd would have been KTFO.

Floyd at the very least would have been hurt worse than he ever has in any fight. One thing we have no seen Floyd do is survive, because he's never had to.

[Syntax Error]

Tommy Hearns gas admitted that Floyd would be a very difficult fight for himself. Yet the fans can not admit w h at Hearns himself has said

Floyd would cause problems against any welterweight in history

Hearns is just being a gentleman.

I bet, when he is at home, chilling out with Mrs Hearns, he sits there & says to her that if he was around today, he'd smash that Mayweather bloke.

[Syntax Error]

I'd never pass up a chance to give props to Tommy the Hitman, one of my favorite fighters of my lifetime. But to be honest, Sugar Ray had the wherewithal to proceed through round after round of losing to Hearns and then break through and hurt him, so we can't say for sure that a prime Floyd couldn't have done that too.
Thinking back, Hearns lost to Leonard because he proved to be chinny, but also because he had no idea how to hold. And Floyd... there's a guy who could give lessons in holding. Makes me yearn for that Hearns-Leonard era. Not only did those guys do the sporting world a favor and have great fights against each other at their prime, but it seems to me that holding was understood back then as a last ditch thing you do to avoid collapsing after your opponent has hurt you, not a first line of defense against getting hit in the first place. What even constitutes excessive grabbing and holding these days? Going bell to bell without letting go?

Excessive holding is what Boneclutcher Smith did to Mike Tyson in 1987.

[Badhusker]

Why don't we at least fantasize on an even playing field, since there are always some that bring up the"ya he beat Pac but he is no Hearns, Leonard etc."

How about any of the greats at 38 yrs old at welter vs Floyd? He would beat most if not all.

[jezzamundo]

Why don't we at least fantasize on an even playing field, since there are always some that bring up the"ya he beat Pac but he is no Hearns, Leonard etc."

How about any of the greats at 38 yrs old at welter vs Floyd? He would beat most if not all.

Yes, Floyd is well preserved, largely because he hasn't faced the level of opposition that the likes of Leonard did.

The OP is correct - Hearns is stylistically all wrong for Floyd and would beat him widely, either a stoppage or a lopsided decision. Same applies with a Mayeather-Leonard or Mayweather-Robinson matchup. A prime Don Curry would probably beat Mayweather too. Mayweather is a great fighter, but he's a step below the elite level welterweights.

[Ricky_]

Well consider they were 38 and 36 last night. And clearly past prime.
I guess you could say that

They would both be put to sleep, rather unceremoniously, at any point in their careers by The Hitman at welter, IMO.

Fully agree but at least the Pacman would give it a damn good go and go out on his shield in what would be a war for as long as it lasted. Floyds reach would be neutralised and he'd go out cowering on the ropes.

[ldlamb]

Did somebody on here say that Floyd was a better offensive fighter than Ray Leonard?

At Welterweight?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-hfaYrVV_tb4/V ... %2BGIF.gif

[ClivePatrickLyons]

Did you see the difference in size between Mayweather and Hearns at the WBC gala night with all the champ's of the day and ex champ's
Mayweather would have dodged this bloke for ever not 5 year's

[Bobbyptsd]

Why don't we at least fantasize on an even playing field, since there are always some that bring up the"ya he beat Pac but he is no Hearns, Leonard etc."

How about any of the greats at 38 yrs old at welter vs Floyd? He would beat most if not all.

Problem is, a lot of those guys weren't even fighting anymore at 38, or had long since left any nearby division.

People always want to mention Leonard, he hadn't fought in awhile and never would again at the age Floyd is now. Hearns wound up at Cruiser. Duran at super middle. Whitaker had been done for awhile.

Prime for prime, I'm certainly not saying I think Floyd beats everyone, he wins some and loses some. But amidst all the "Floyd couldn't beat these guys though!" hysteria, I feel it useful to point out that Floyd is on a level none of these guys were even at anymore (of those who were even active) at his age.

[Dancin' Dan]

Different era but must say I have met both Mayweather and Sugar Ray Leonard. Ray is about two inches taller. I can't see Mayweather hanging all night with Ray or Tommy. Tommy is at least 6'1 if not 6'2. Horrible match up for Floyd but lucky for him it is a short era. Keith Thurman is tall at 5'10. Watch Ray beating his dad for styles. Mayweather really peaked probably at 135. Impressive leap in weight by Floyd and Pac (truly crazy amount of weight). Neither would have come up if there were monsters at welter.

[Badhusker]

Why don't we at least fantasize on an even playing field, since there are always some that bring up the"ya he beat Pac but he is no Hearns, Leonard etc."

How about any of the greats at 38 yrs old at welter vs Floyd? He would beat most if not all.

Problem is, a lot of those guys weren't even fighting anymore at 38, or had long since left any nearby division.

People always want to mention Leonard, he hadn't fought in awhile and never would again at the age Floyd is now. Hearns wound up at Cruiser. Duran at super middle. Whitaker had been done for awhile.

Prime for prime, I'm certainly not saying I think Floyd beats everyone, he wins some and loses some. But amidst all the "Floyd couldn't beat these guys though!" hysteria, I feel it useful to point out that Floyd is on a level none of these guys were even at anymore (of those who were even active) at his age.

You make some good points. The reason I don't believe in fantasy pfp lists or comparing fighters of other eras, is there are way too many variables and scenarios to consider or spin the direction you want it to go. My comment about no atg boxers are as good as Floyd is at 38 is an example of that.

[ClivePatrickLyons]

Well consider they were 38 and 36 last night. And clearly past prime.
I guess you could say that

They would both be put to sleep, rather unceremoniously, at any point in their careers by The Hitman at welter, IMO.

I think a 25 - 30 yr old Floyd would have done fine against Hearns. Floyd has much better defense than SRL had, and had more offense in his prime as well. Could Hearns KO him? Certainly, if he could hit him solid. Mosley almost did it, but again Floyd was nearing his mid 30's when that happened. SRL was totally shot by that age.

What the fu.. THE BIG SHOT CEO'S WOULD BE GETTING A SEARCH PARTY TOGETHER ABOUT ROUND 2 TO GO LOOK FOR FLOYD
WHO RUN RIGHT OUT OF THE ARENA AND HE RAN AND RAN RIGHT OUTA SIGHT

[armageto]

Floyd would cause problems against any welterweight in history

Cause problems, yes. He's good defensively and moves around a lot. That doesn't mean that he would be the best 147 of all time. Floyd's best weight is well below 147. IMO, he wouldn't even be a top 5 welter of all time.

[tiny_acres]

Floyd would cause problems against any welterweight in history

Cause problems, yes. He's good defensively and moves around a lot. That doesn't mean that he would be the best 147 of all time. Floyd's best weight is well below 147. IMO, he wouldn't even be a top 5 welter of all time.

I agree 100%.
I have made the same comment about mythical match ups with Floyd in the boxers of the past section.
Floyd was moving to welterwight when the majority of the all time greats were winding down their careers
or retiring
I would much rather see Floyd in mythical match ups at 130-135.
But I still contend he would not embarrass himself at 147.

[KBB]

It's not defense that defeats Hearns. You have to hurt him.

His size and speed render silly running tactics useless.

Then in that case I guess he would've caught up to the slower and shorter Manny Pacquiao and KO'd him quicker.

[Ezzard]

Hearns would spark Pac. Mayweather could go the distance. My guess he would go into survival mode and lose 11 of 12 rounds. If he did get brave...it wouldn't be good for him.

But if we're being honest...Floyd would never take this fight. He'd retire.

[BigGar]

I think it's pretty obvious that Pacquiao would be completely and utterly destroyed by Hearns. The size difference alone would be just too much and I'd be astonished if Pacquiao lasted three rounds.

Mayweather would have a far better chance of lasting the distance. Having said that, I'd still favour Hearns. I think people often forget just how good a boxer he was. He was most definitely not just a puncher.

Hearns v Pac - Hearns by KO in three
Hearns v Floyd - Hearns by decision or mid/late KO