Hearns V Mayweather at Welter

[davie]

You cannot say that Hearns would win with absolute certainty no more than I can say Floyd would win,

Come on, admit it, you were the one guy that voted for a floyd KO victory, weren't you?

[IKSRTFO]

Pryor never beat Hearns.They never fought. Maybe in the amateurs but that don't count.

Sure the amateurs don't count, in your world but the fact of the matter is he fought someone who was significantly shorter than him and was beaten, that was the other poster's main argument.

That argument has been totally negated no matter how much you dislike Floyd.

In that case, Floyd lost to Augie Sanchez.

[jamesmcdonnell]

Pointing out the Leonard fight as a reason why Mayweather could do well against Hearns is a bit shortsighted. Leonard was considerably bigger than Mayweather and had a much greater punch output, a more proven chin and significantly greater punching power. Leonard was also unable to outbox Tommy and had to take a lot of punishment in order to close the distance and out-slug him - something that Mayweather would never be able to do. I think Hearns is generous to Floyd in his assessment of the fight, but ultimately I agree with his call - Hearns wins a clear decision if Floyd fights his normal defensive fight. If Floyd tries to employ Leonard's tactics of walking Hearns down, he gets knocked out.

Leonard was as you say a very different fighter, far more attacking, and willing to take far more risks. He used his feet much more, and threw a hell of a lot more punches. Nobody fighting in a defensive shell giving away lots of height and reach was going to beat Tommy, not at Welterweight.

Mayweather would have had to have taken far more chances to win, and that would have mean getting hit.

A lopsided decision to Hearns.

[ElJefe]

Hearns vs Mayweather would be completely different from Hearns vs Leonard.

Sugar Ray is 5'10 and has a 74 inch reach. Floyd is 5'8 and has a 72 inch reach. That's a massive difference, especially coming up against a fighter who is 6'1 and has a 78 (SEVENTY EIGHT) inch reach. Hearns had a big physical advantage over Ray, the advantage over Mayweather would be huge. Beside from the physcial advantages, Mayweather just doesn't have the style to bother Hearns. Leonard was more willing and able to mix it up than Mayweather is.

By the way, just because someone thinks Mayweather would lose doesn't mean he hates him.

You mean the same way Hearns' big reach advantage gave him the huge advantage over the shorter Aaron Pryor (who actually beat him), right??

You guys make me laugh, as far as you thinking that I was saying that to someone who doesn't hate him then obviously you don't know anything about Ricky (he hates Mayweather with a passion unequaled).

You cannot say that Hearns would win with absolute certainty no more than I can say Floyd would win, the bottom line is that you are just speculating like everyone else and you guys act as if Hearns was unbeatable/couldn't be touched or that he hadn't already lost to shorter/just as short men than Mayweather.

Hearns beard wasn't all that either so let's stop pretending this would be a whitewash because of his reach/size advantage because it wouldn't.

I never said I was certain Hearns would win. I never said it'd be a white wash because of his reach and size. I said those factors would give Hearns a huge advantage that Mayweather doesn't have the style to overcome.

You mention Pryor beating Hearns in the amateurs, not only was he 3 years older than a 17/18 year old Hearns, as I have already mentioned, the styles of fighters are massively important. Leonard was more willing to trade than Mayweather, Pryor was even more aggressive than Leonard, so comparing Pryor and Mayweather just because they're a similar size is pointless.

My point is clear, the combination of Hearns' huge size and reach advantage, along with Mayweather's defensive style mean that Hearns would be a big favourite to win. Instead of just accusing people of hating Mayweather because they think he'd lose, why don't you come up with a genuine argument as to how Mayweather would win?

[jas80s]

It is hard for me to imagine a scenario in which Floyd would AGREE to fight a Welterweight Thomas Hearns....And this from a guy who routinely backs Floyd's resume as one of the absolute best in Boxing among fighters who have fought largely since 2000.

If Floyd agreed to fight him, it would be because he felt strongly he could beat him, so I can see liking Floyd in a match up. :)

Forget who would win, if anyone believes he would fight him at all, they don't know boxing.

[Luckybattles]

It was a different era when boxing was more serious. Today boxing is like a reality show. Fighters with moderate talent getting blown up and calling themselves best of all time. Tommy Hearns, Larry Holmes, Salvador Sanchez, Aaron Pryor, Duran, Hagler, and Leonard. These guys were serious fighters. Imagine Hagler running and holding a blown up featherweight all night on route to a unanimous decision. That's the kind of stuff you see from the greats of today. Hearns by KO. Mayweather wouldn't have the power of Hagler to KO the hitman or the balls of Leonard to wear him down.

[zojo]

The boxrec rules clearly state that the champion of the past will clearly beat a champion of today in a hypothetical matchup.

If both boxers were from the past, then the one from an earlier time wins.

[SNG]

Uncle Roger is on record as saying he'd be against Floyd fighting a prime Vernon Forrest; I liked Vernon, but he wasn't nearly Thomas Hearns though he brings many of the same things to the table--height, reach, firing power, kick-arse jab, savage bodypunching. In Tommy's case, all those advantages would be exacerbated.

So: Hearns, every day of the week & twice on Sundays.

This time two.

I just don't see what Floyd has to keep Hearns at bay.

[KBB]

I never said I was certain Hearns would win. I never said it'd be a white wash because of his reach and size. I said those factors would give Hearns a huge advantage that Mayweather doesn't have the style to overcome.

You mention Pryor beating Hearns in the amateurs, not only was he 3 years older than a 17/18 year old Hearns, as I have already mentioned, the styles of fighters are massively important. Leonard was more willing to trade than Mayweather, Pryor was even more aggressive than Leonard, so comparing Pryor and Mayweather just because they're a similar size is pointless.

My point is clear, the combination of Hearns' huge size and reach advantage, along with Mayweather's defensive style mean that Hearns would be a big favourite to win. Instead of just accusing people of hating Mayweather because they think he'd lose, why don't you come up with a genuine argument as to how Mayweather would win?

Ok I will give you that Hearns has a size advantage but that's about the only advantage he has; Floyd's chin is far superior than Tommy's, his endurance was far better, he is naturally faster or as fast as Tommy too not to mention he wouldn't take half as many shots as Hearns was able to dish out against SRL (who was as flawed there fundamentally as RJJr).

Let many people in boxing tell it today then it was impossible for anyone in this era or in the eras before for anyone outside of Hagler and Leonard that could beat Hearns but I just don't believe that is/was the case.

You mention Floyd not having the style to overcome, lol, how many styles have we seen Floyd employ? And just what really is Floyd's style because he constantly adjusts to any fighter thrown in front of him, was Hearns able to do that?? HELL NO he wasn't!!

Floyd has proven that he doesn't have just one style or a one dimensional style like most boxers, he has always made adjustments and finds a way to beat his opponents, let's not act as if he'd be a sitting duck like Duran or simply allowing Hearns to force him into exchanging, it's not that simple with Mayweather.

The real question isn't whether or not Floyd has the style to overcome Hearns but rather, does Hearns have the style to overcome Floyd because we all know Mayweather is going to play the counterpuncher/sniper who will pick his spots while making Tommy miss and tire himself out.

And oh, don't forget about those little skinny chicken legs Hearns has as well as his scrawny little body that wouldn't be able to take a constant jab to the pit of the stomach, and did I mention he was chinny??

Where some may see a whitewash in Hearns favor I actually see a real battle coming down to who can land with consistency and who has the better defensive skills to counter what the other will be bringing, we all know Mayweather is leagues better than Hearns in that department.

[ElJefe]

Ok I will give you that Hearns has a size advantage but that's about the only advantage he has; Floyd's chin is far superior than Tommy's, his endurance was far better, he is naturally faster or as fast as Tommy too not to mention he wouldn't take half as many shots as Hearns was able to dish out against SRL (who was as flawed there fundamentally as RJJr).

Hearns may not have as good of a chin as Floyd, but Floyd doesn't have the power at 147 to hurt Hearns anyway.

Let many people in boxing tell it today then it was impossible for anyone in this era or in the eras before for anyone outside of Hagler and Leonard that could beat Hearns but I just don't believe that is/was the case.

I didn't say it was.

You mention Floyd not having the style to overcome, lol, how many styles have we seen Floyd employ? And just what really is Floyd's style because he constantly adjusts to any fighter thrown in front of him, was Hearns able to do that?? HELL NO he wasn't!!

Floyd has proven that he doesn't have just one style or a one dimensional style like most boxers, he has always made adjustments and finds a way to beat his opponents, let's not act as if he'd be a sitting duck like Duran or simply allowing Hearns to force him into exchanging, it's not that simple with Mayweather.

What really is Floyd's style? I think we all know Floyd counter punches off the back foot.
How man styles have we seen him employ? A couple, he has occasionally walked opponents down behind his tight defence, but for most of his time at welterweight at least he has boxed on the back foot, on the outside, as a counter puncher.

The real question isn't whether or not Floyd has the style to overcome Hearns but rather, does Hearns have the style to overcome Floyd because we all know Mayweather is going to play the counterpuncher/sniper who will pick his spots while making Tommy miss and tire himself out.

Mayweather is going to box on the back foot and pot shot against someone with a 6 inch reach advantage? Really? Hearns was only ever really troubled by people who could put a lot of pressure on him. That's not Mayweather's style at all. Floyd may have been able to make adjustments in fights, but when has he ever had to adjust to someone who can trouble him from long range? Zab Judah? Not really on the same level as The Hitman.

And oh, don't forget about those little skinny chicken legs Hearns has as well as his scrawny little body that wouldn't be able to take a constant jab to the pit of the stomach, and did I mention he was chinny??

Hearns may have been "chinny" - but look at who actually stopped him. Leonard could certainly punch at 147. Hagler was a massive puncher at 160. Barkley could also punch at 160. Meanwhile Mayweather has 2 legitimate KO's in 14 fights at 147 and above. Getting hit by Mayweather's jab to the body is hardly the same as getting hit by Marvin Hagler's right hand.

Where some may see a whitewash in Hearns favor I actually see a real battle coming down to who can land with consistency and who has the better defensive skills to counter what the other will be bringing, we all know Mayweather is leagues better than Hearns in that department.

I'm not taking anything away from Mayweather, I enjoy watching him, but I just don't think he can put anywhere near enough pressure on Hearns to beat him, and I don't see any way he can beat Hearns from the outside no matter how quick he is, Hearns is just too big, too rangy and too powerful.

[MachoTime]

The Kronk Style Was Big Back in the day that Hearn's fought. Jab Hand below the waist. Jab Up. Lean Back Style. If Mayweather would have fought Hearn's the blueprint was already there cause that's the style Hearn's fought.

I believe Hearn's could match Mayweather in every facet. The big advantage was the difference in size.That favors Hearn's.

Hearn's would be too big for Mayweather. I think that's obvious.

[KBB]

I didn't say it was. What really is Floyd's style? I think we all know Floyd counter punches off the back foot.
How man styles have we seen him employ? A couple, he has occasionally walked opponents down behind his tight defence, but for most of his time at welterweight at least he has boxed on the back foot, on the outside, as a counter puncher.

True!!

Mayweather is going to box on the back foot and pot shot against someone with a 6 inch reach advantage? Really? Hearns was only ever really troubled by people who could put a lot of pressure on him. That's not Mayweather's style at all. Floyd may have been able to make adjustments in fights, but when has he ever had to adjust to someone who can trouble him from long range? Zab Judah? Not really on the same level as The Hitman.

He won't have potshot because he can catch Hearns (who never really stayed outside except when in trouble) as he comes forward, for all Hearns' height he ended up many times fighting in close quarters. Let's not even bother to bring competition into this because that is taking these two out of the face to face comparo.


Hearns may have been "chinny" - but look at who actually stopped him. Leonard could certainly punch at 147. Hagler was a massive puncher at 160. Barkley could also punch at 160. Meanwhile Mayweather has 2 legitimate KO's in 14 fights at 147 and above. Getting hit by Mayweather's jab to the body is hardly the same as getting hit by Marvin Hagler's right hand.

It is far easier to recover from a head shot than a bodyshot but from reading what you wrote it hardly seems that you believe that Floyd would ever reach Hearns' chin (many short fighters have reached it plenty of times).


I'm not taking anything away from Mayweather, I enjoy watching him, but I just don't think he can put anywhere near enough pressure on Hearns to beat him, and I don't see any way he can beat Hearns from the outside no matter how quick he is, Hearns is just too big, too rangy and too powerful.

I personally don't believe he has to put pressure on Hearns to beat him, all Floyd has to do is allow Tommy to bring himself into close range as he did with many of his fights and use his superior defense and lateral movement to pepper him with 1-2 type of quick shots and then move and circle and he could catch him on the inside and possibly win it.

I love Hearns as a fighter but I don't see him being able to figure Floyd out just as many who has faced him already found out.

For now we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[Bobbyptsd]

Hearns by fairly wide decision. He's too big, he had the power to keep Floyd at bay, had quite fast hands, reach and could really box when he wanted to.

Assuming everyone is at their relative peak, there are very few fighters from 130-154 I'd pick over Floyd with any kind of certainty, but Hearns is one for sure.

[Ricky_]

I didn't say it was. What really is Floyd's style? I think we all know Floyd counter punches off the back foot.
How man styles have we seen him employ? A couple, he has occasionally walked opponents down behind his tight defence, but for most of his time at welterweight at least he has boxed on the back foot, on the outside, as a counter puncher.

True!!

Mayweather is going to box on the back foot and pot shot against someone with a 6 inch reach advantage? Really? Hearns was only ever really troubled by people who could put a lot of pressure on him. That's not Mayweather's style at all. Floyd may have been able to make adjustments in fights, but when has he ever had to adjust to someone who can trouble him from long range? Zab Judah? Not really on the same level as The Hitman.

He won't have potshot because he can catch Hearns (who never really stayed outside except when in trouble) as he comes forward, for all Hearns' height he ended up many times fighting in close quarters. Let's not even bother to bring competition into this because that is taking these two out of the face to face comparo.


Hearns may have been "chinny" - but look at who actually stopped him. Leonard could certainly punch at 147. Hagler was a massive puncher at 160. Barkley could also punch at 160. Meanwhile Mayweather has 2 legitimate KO's in 14 fights at 147 and above. Getting hit by Mayweather's jab to the body is hardly the same as getting hit by Marvin Hagler's right hand.

It is far easier to recover from a head shot than a bodyshot but from reading what you wrote it hardly seems that you believe that Floyd would ever reach Hearns' chin (many short fighters have reached it plenty of times).


I'm not taking anything away from Mayweather, I enjoy watching him, but I just don't think he can put anywhere near enough pressure on Hearns to beat him, and I don't see any way he can beat Hearns from the outside no matter how quick he is, Hearns is just too big, too rangy and too powerful.

I personally don't believe he has to put pressure on Hearns to beat him, all Floyd has to do is allow Tommy to bring himself into close range as he did with many of his fights and use his superior defense and lateral movement to pepper him with 1-2 type of quick shots and then move and circle and he could catch him on the inside and possibly win it.

I love Hearns as a fighter but I don't see him being able to figure Floyd out just as many who has faced him already found out.

For now we'll just have to agree to disagree.

[jezzamundo]

There's a reason why Hearns leads this vote 53-7. This isn't simply a case of nostalgia giving the older fighter the advantage, it's simply a horrible clash of styles for Mayweather and a favourable one for Hearns. I wouldn't argue with anyone rating Mayweather higher than Hearns on an all-time p4p list (thought I personally would have Hearns slightly higher), but in a matchup at welterweight, while it's certainly possible that Mayweather could win, I wouldn't give him more than a 1 or 2 in 10 chance of doing so. The only way I could possibly envisage a Floyd victory is if Hearns fought a really stupid fight, going gung-ho for the knockout and punches himself out early in the fight. If Tommy sticks to his jab, fights from the outside and waits for opportunities to land his long right hand, he would win a wide decision. If a post-prime De La Hoya was able to win multiple rounds against a prime Mayweather with his jab, Hearns would do it much easier. Also, people mention chins, but based on the evidence, Hearns would have a much better chance of taking Floyd's punches than Floyd would have of taking Tommy's - we're talking a massive gulf in punching power. Hearns was only ever hurt by men far bigger and more powerful than Floyd.

Frankly, because of the stylistic clash, I'd give Ricardo Mayorga a better chance of beating Tommy Hearns than Floyd Mayweather.

[Syntax Error]

[quote="jezzamundo"]There's a reason why Hearns leads this vote 53-7. This isn't simply a case of nostalgia giving the older fighter the advantage, it's simply a horrible clash of styles for Mayweather and a favourable one for Hearns. I wouldn't argue with anyone rating Mayweather higher than Hearns on an all-time p4p list (thought I personally would have Hearns slightly higher), but in a matchup at welterweight, while it's certainly possible that Mayweather could win, I wouldn't give him more than a 1 or 2 in 10 chance of doing so. The only way I could possibly envisage a Floyd victory is if Hearns fought a really stupid fight, going gung-ho for the knockout and punches himself out early in the fight. If Tommy sticks to his jab, fights from the outside and waits for opportunities to land his long right hand, he would win a wide decision. If a post-prime De La Hoya was able to win multiple rounds against a prime Mayweather with his jab, Hearns would do it much easier. Also, people mention chins, but based on the evidence, Hearns would have a much better chance of taking Floyd's punches than Floyd would have of taking Tommy's - we're talking a massive gulf in punching power. Hearns was only ever hurt by men far bigger and more powerful than Floyd.

Frankly, because of the stylistic clash, I'd give Ricardo Mayorga a better chance of beating Tommy Hearns than Floyd Mayweather.[/quote]

Initially when you read this, it sounds crazy, but when you think about it, it makes perfect sense. 8)

Mayorga was rough, tough & aggressive & those types of fighters always gave Hearns his biggest problems.

Providing Mayorga could have taken Hearns' Right hand, he would indeed have given Tommy more hell than Mayweather Jr ever could have.

[koolkc107]

I say Hearns by decision. I think Tommy does exactly what he says he would...box outside and pile up points and rounds.

And without enough power to turn the fight by KO as Leonard did, Floyd loses a pretty wide decision.

But, I wouldn't totally dismiss Floyd's chances. One thing we know is that Mayweather has always seemed to find a way.

And El Radar, another defensive wizard, gave Hearns fits even while losing a majority decision

[jamesmcdonnell]

There's a reason why Hearns leads this vote 53-7. This isn't simply a case of nostalgia giving the older fighter the advantage, it's simply a horrible clash of styles for Mayweather and a favourable one for Hearns. I wouldn't argue with anyone rating Mayweather higher than Hearns on an all-time p4p list (thought I personally would have Hearns slightly higher), but in a matchup at welterweight, while it's certainly possible that Mayweather could win, I wouldn't give him more than a 1 or 2 in 10 chance of doing so. The only way I could possibly envisage a Floyd victory is if Hearns fought a really stupid fight, going gung-ho for the knockout and punches himself out early in the fight. If Tommy sticks to his jab, fights from the outside and waits for opportunities to land his long right hand, he would win a wide decision. If a post-prime De La Hoya was able to win multiple rounds against a prime Mayweather with his jab, Hearns would do it much easier. Also, people mention chins, but based on the evidence, Hearns would have a much better chance of taking Floyd's punches than Floyd would have of taking Tommy's - we're talking a massive gulf in punching power. Hearns was only ever hurt by men far bigger and more powerful than Floyd.

Frankly, because of the stylistic clash, I'd give Ricardo Mayorga a better chance of beating Tommy Hearns than Floyd Mayweather.[/quote]

Initially when you read this, it sounds crazy, but when you think about it, it makes perfect sense. 8)

Mayorga was rough, tough & aggressive & those types of fighters always gave Hearns his biggest problems.

Providing Mayorga could have taken Hearns' Right hand, he would indeed have given Tommy more hell than Mayweather Jr ever could have.

Tommy was vulnerable against Durable punchers, who could take his early power shots, and hurt him back. Barkley was quite similar in many ways to Mayorga, big, strong, durable, crude and mauling, on paper Tommy was much better fighter, however, in the real world, Barkley flattened him. I still remember Harry Carpenters words - "He's folded like a carpenters ruler."

[jezzamundo]

I say Hearns by decision. I think Tommy does exactly what he says he would...box outside and pile up points and rounds.

And without enough power to turn the fight by KO as Leonard did, Floyd loses a pretty wide decision.

But, I wouldn't totally dismiss Floyd's chances. One thing we know is that Mayweather has always seemed to find a way.

And El Radar, another defensive wizard, gave Hearns fits even while losing a majority decision

Good post. However, you need to remember that the draw scorecard in the Benitez fight was an outlier - most had Hearns winning clearly in a competitive fight, despite the fact that Tommy hurt his hand in the 8th and fought the remaining seven rounds with one hand. Pretty impressive against a master defensive fighter like Benitez.

[koolkc107]

I say Hearns by decision. I think Tommy does exactly what he says he would...box outside and pile up points and rounds.

And without enough power to turn the fight by KO as Leonard did, Floyd loses a pretty wide decision.

But, I wouldn't totally dismiss Floyd's chances. One thing we know is that Mayweather has always seemed to find a way.

And El Radar, another defensive wizard, gave Hearns fits even while losing a majority decision

Good post. However, you need to remember that the draw scorecard in the Benitez fight was an outlier - most had Hearns winning clearly in a competitive fight, despite the fact that Tommy hurt his hand in the 8th and fought the remaining seven rounds with one hand. Pretty impressive against a master defensive fighter like Benitez.

I did mention the majority decision. The point is Benitez did do things defensively that Hearns never solved.

So, if you are among those who consider Floyd better defensively than Benitez, then all of a sudden the fantasy matchup is a bit more even.

[jezzamundo]

Fair enough. Mayweather has certainly been more consistent in his career than Benitez, but he never fought the level of competition that Benitez did. At their welterweight peaks, I think it's hard to pick the better fighter, I think Mayweather was better defensively but Benitez was better offensively.

[KBB]

Come on, admit it, you were the one guy that voted for a floyd KO victory, weren't you?

Maybe it was you, I'm not delusional though I'm a fan. I did pick Floyd by decision, I'm not like some of you who only go with Hearns out of emotion. (your hate/dislike for Mayweather).

[KBB]

Fair enough. Mayweather has certainly been more consistent in his career than Benitez, but he never fought the level of competition that Benitez did. At their welterweight peaks, I think it's hard to pick the better fighter, I think Mayweather was better defensively but Benitez was better offensively.

So I guess Pacquiao isn't on the level of SRL?? Boxing fans sure do rank fighters differently these days, oh well.

[Pureist]

What makes you so paranoid kbb, if someone doesn't pick Floyd they are considered haters by you, yet you complain when someone questions your opinion

[davie]

Come on, admit it, you were the one guy that voted for a floyd KO victory, weren't you?

Maybe it was you, I'm not delusional though I'm a fan. I did pick Floyd by decision, I'm not like some of you who only go with Hearns out of emotion. (your hate/dislike for Mayweather).

No, unlike you I can look at this completely without bias and see the strengths and weaknesses, the physical advantages and give an honest appraisal of who I believe would win.
Emotion played absolutely no part.
But I didn't pick your boy so I must be a hater, eh?