Super Welterweights: Thomas Hearns vs Sugar Ray Leonard (II)

[elmersalsa]

How about a rematch in your view of Hearns vs Leonard, this time at 154lbs. For Hearns WBC crown. Who wins?

Hearns wins by KO or a comfortable unanimous decision

[dr_devious]

Probably similar to Hearns v Leonard 3, Hearns does enough to get a point win but could get screwed over

[tiny_acres]

Probably similar to Hearns v Leonard 3, Hearns does enough to get a point win but could get screwed over

Bingo We have a winner.

[Ezzard]

It would never be a comfortable fight for either man.

If it's 12 rounds or under I'd pick Hearns. if it's 15 then Leonard.

They could fight a 100 times and they'd have had 100 classic and close fights.

[elmersalsa]

After watching The great Thomas Hearns destruction of the great Manos de Piedra and Fred Hutchings, I can't see a guy that struggled with Ayub Kalule, Kevin Howard and Marcos Geraldo withstand that barrage. It would be too much. Hearns was at his perfect weight class. Sugar Ray, obviously cannot outbox him. He would not outspeed him nor outjab him. The ONLY WAY for Leonard to win this fight is too pressure Hearns. But, this is not 147lbs. It's 154. A weight class that Leonard DID NOT LOOK THAT GREAT TO BEGIN WITH and will not have enough firepower to stop the Hitman this time. But Once Hearns clock him, it all over!

The bigger the weight class, the better for Hearns

[King Carlos]

It would never be a comfortable fight for either man.

If it's 12 rounds or under I'd pick Hearns. if it's 15 then Leonard.

That's how I see it. Even in their '89 rematch it seemed pretty clear that Hearns wouldn't have survived had the fight gone much longer than 12. I tend to think the fight would've almost always gone the same way, regardless of weight. Hearns on points over 12. Leonard by late stoppage over 15.

[elmersalsa]

It would never be a comfortable fight for either man.

If it's 12 rounds or under I'd pick Hearns. if it's 15 then Leonard.

That's how I see it. Even in their '89 rematch it seemed pretty clear that Hearns wouldn't have survived had the fight gone much longer than 12. I tend to think the fight would've almost always gone the same way, regardless of weight. Hearns on points over 12. Leonard by late stoppage over 15.

The great Thomas Hearns was almost shot by that time. Iran Barkley knocked him out cold a year earlier. And in his first 168lbs fight, the Hitman didn't look that impressive.

At 154lbs, Hearns looked too devastating as a puncher. What a monster!

[King Carlos]

It would never be a comfortable fight for either man.

If it's 12 rounds or under I'd pick Hearns. if it's 15 then Leonard.

That's how I see it. Even in their '89 rematch it seemed pretty clear that Hearns wouldn't have survived had the fight gone much longer than 12. I tend to think the fight would've almost always gone the same way, regardless of weight. Hearns on points over 12. Leonard by late stoppage over 15.

The great Thomas Hearns was almost shot by that time. Iran Barkley knocked him out cold a year earlier. And in his first 168lbs fight, the Hitman didn't look that impressive.

At 154lbs, Hearns looked too devastating as a puncher. What a monster!

If Hearns was close to being shot, Leonard WAS shot. Hearns would continue fighting pretty consistently for the next decade, winning titles at Lt. Heavyweight and Cruiserweight. Hell, two years after the Leonard rematch he gave Virgil Hill his first loss. After Hearns, all Leonard did was win the stinker of a rubber match with Duran. And if you're saying Hearns didn't look too impressive against Kinchen, Leonard certainly didn't against a weight-drained Donny LaLonde, either.

Any way you slice it, it seems to me that Leonard could take Hearns' best down the stretch, while Hearns couldn't take Leonard's. Hence, the difference between the 12 and 15 round difference in a fight.

[dempseyfire]

It would never be a comfortable fight for either man.

If it's 12 rounds or under I'd pick Hearns. if it's 15 then Leonard.

That's how I see it. Even in their '89 rematch it seemed pretty clear that Hearns wouldn't have survived had the fight gone much longer than 12. I tend to think the fight would've almost always gone the same way, regardless of weight. Hearns on points over 12. Leonard by late stoppage over 15.

The great Thomas Hearns was almost shot by that time. Iran Barkley knocked him out cold a year earlier. And in his first 168lbs fight, the Hitman didn't look that impressive.

At 154lbs, Hearns looked too devastating as a puncher. What a monster!

If Hearns was close to being shot, Leonard WAS shot. Hearns would continue fighting pretty consistently for the next decade, winning titles at Lt. Heavyweight and Cruiserweight. Hell, two years after the Leonard rematch he gave Virgil Hill his first loss. After Hearns, all Leonard did was win the stinker of a rubber match with Duran. And if you're saying Hearns didn't look too impressive against Kinchen, Leonard certainly didn't against a weight-drained Donny LaLonde, either.

Any way you slice it, it seems to me that Leonard could take Hearns' best down the stretch, while Hearns couldn't take Leonard's. Hence, the difference between the 12 and 15 round difference in a fight.[/quote]

This. Leonard at that point was essentially doing the George Foreman moonlighting bit after beating Hagler (as George did post Moorer). Whereas Hearns was still a legit contender who'd gone on to bear Hill for the 175 lb title.

Over 15 give me the sugar man everytime.

[BoxBuzz]

It would never be a comfortable fight for either man.

If it's 12 rounds or under I'd pick Hearns. if it's 15 then Leonard.

That's how I see it. Even in their '89 rematch it seemed pretty clear that Hearns wouldn't have survived had the fight gone much longer than 12. I tend to think the fight would've almost always gone the same way, regardless of weight. Hearns on points over 12. Leonard by late stoppage over 15.

The great Thomas Hearns was almost shot by that time. Iran Barkley knocked him out cold a year earlier. And in his first 168lbs fight, the Hitman didn't look that impressive.

At 154lbs, Hearns looked too devastating as a puncher. What a monster!

He was great....but his fluke KO of Duran has put him in the extraterrestrial league for you simply because you have made Duran out to be a fellow extraterrestrial. He wouldn't accomplish that twice in 10 fights....and the other fights would be pretty competitive. Barkley gives you the keys as to how to fight Tommy, but few followed it. Sugar Ray would always be competitive with Hearns, and Hearn''s could never be a great MW (top 10)...just a pretty damn good one.

[campfire]

Probably similar to Hearns v Leonard 3, Hearns does enough to get a point win but could get screwed over

[littlepug]

Fluke ko of Duran ? would back hearns to repeat that trick 10 times out of 10

[elmersalsa]

Roberto Duran, Wilfred Benitez nor Sugar Ray Leonard, although greats, cannot beat a monster like Thomas Hearns @ 154lbs. It's not about a talent issue here. It's about the weight issue. The bigger the weight, the better for the Hitman against all three of them.

I have never seen someone at any weight as formidable like Thomas Hearns at 154lbs. He just looked PERFECT THERE! What a fighter.

[elmersalsa]

Fluke ko of Duran ? would back hearns to repeat that trick 10 times out of 10

At 154lbs and above? Hearns beat Duran every day of the week and twice on Sunday

The same for Leonard and Benitez with Tommy. Tommy will whupped all 3 of them at 154lbs and above, and twice on Sunday, too!

[elmersalsa]

He was great....but his fluke KO of Duran has put him in the extraterrestrial league for you simply because you have made Duran out to be a fellow extraterrestrial. He wouldn't accomplish that twice in 10 fights....and the other fights would be pretty competitive. Barkley gives you the keys as to how to fight Tommy, but few followed it. Sugar Ray would always be competitive with Hearns, and Hearn''s could never be a great MW (top 10)...just a pretty damn good one.

At 154lbs, Hearns was too sensational. Too devastating. Iran Barkley is way stronger than Duran, Leonard or Benitez. He was a NATURAL STRONG MIDDLEWEIGHT. Plus, Hearns after losing to another monster like Marvelous, was not the same fighter.

Hearns KO win of Duran was not a fluke, but, a weight issue. The 154lbs was too much for the Hands of Stone to handle. If the fight was at welterweight, at least, it would've been a fair fight.

[BoxBuzz]

Fluke ko of Duran ? would back hearns to repeat that trick 10 times out of 10

And I'd be happy to collect on the majority of the bets we made on those fights. Probably every one.

[elmersalsa]

The great Thomas Hearns was almost shot by that time. Iran Barkley knocked him out cold a year earlier. And in his first 168lbs fight, the Hitman didn't look that impressive.

At 154lbs, Hearns looked too devastating as a puncher. What a monster!

If Hearns was close to being shot, Leonard WAS shot. Hearns would continue fighting pretty consistently for the next decade, winning titles at Lt. Heavyweight and Cruiserweight. Hell, two years after the Leonard rematch he gave Virgil Hill his first loss. After Hearns, all Leonard did was win the stinker of a rubber match with Duran. And if you're saying Hearns didn't look too impressive against Kinchen, Leonard certainly didn't against a weight-drained Donny LaLonde, either.

Any way you slice it, it seems to me that Leonard could take Hearns' best down the stretch, while Hearns couldn't take Leonard's. Hence, the difference between the 12 and 15 round difference in a fight.

Leonard was fresher than Hearns. He picked the fight because the consensus at the time was that Hearns was shot. It was a year later after the first Iran Barkley fight. At 154lbs, The Hitman was in complete prime. A beauty of a fighter he was at that weight. Stronger and sturdier legs and hit harder. For Leonard to win it will take Hearns to break his right hand, King Carlos.

I can't see Leonard outbox him. I can't see him being faster than Hearns at 154. I can't see him stopping him. This guy Hearns is all wrong for Leonard.

Put Leonard in the same ring of the Hagler vs Hearns fight. Would Leonard survive the barrage of either one of them? It's too much.

It's a weight issue. Not a talent issue. Hearns at 154lbs got all the advantages. Not a fair fight.

[King Carlos]

Leonard was fresher than Hearns. He picked the fight because the consensus at the time was that Hearns was shot. It was a year later after the first Iran Barkley fight. At 154lbs, The Hitman was in complete prime. A beauty of a fighter he was at that weight. Stronger and sturdier legs and hit harder. For Leonard to win it will take Hearns to break his right hand, King Carlos.

I can't see Leonard outbox him. I can't see him being faster than Hearns at 154. I can't see him stopping him. This guy Hearns is all wrong for Leonard.

Put Leonard in the same ring of the Hagler vs Hearns fight. Would Leonard survive the barrage of either one of them? It's too much.

It's a weight issue. Not a talent issue. Hearns at 154lbs got all the advantages. Not a fair fight.

He had the weight advantage at 154 but not at 160+? Doesn't make much sense to me. Hearns was the fresher fighter of the two in their rematch, I'd say, and would prove it afterwards by continuing to fight at a high level, something Leonard definitely did NOT do.

And your scenarios don't abide by general logic. You're saying Hearns' power went up from 147 to 154 but went down from 154 to 160?

Leonard doesn't need to outbox him or outspeed him. He needs to do exactly what he did both of the times they were in the ring with each other. Walk Hearns down and beat him up down the stretch. As I said, Leonard proved himself capable of taking everything Hearns could throw. Hearns proved that he simply could not respond in the same manner when forced to deal with Leonard's punches.

[elmersalsa]

Leonard was fresher than Hearns. He picked the fight because the consensus at the time was that Hearns was shot. It was a year later after the first Iran Barkley fight. At 154lbs, The Hitman was in complete prime. A beauty of a fighter he was at that weight. Stronger and sturdier legs and hit harder. For Leonard to win it will take Hearns to break his right hand, King Carlos.

I can't see Leonard outbox him. I can't see him being faster than Hearns at 154. I can't see him stopping him. This guy Hearns is all wrong for Leonard.

Put Leonard in the same ring of the Hagler vs Hearns fight. Would Leonard survive the barrage of either one of them? It's too much.

It's a weight issue. Not a talent issue. Hearns at 154lbs got all the advantages. Not a fair fight.

He had the weight advantage at 154 but not at 160+? Doesn't make much sense to me. Hearns was the fresher fighter of the two in their rematch, I'd say, and would prove it afterwards by continuing to fight at a high level, something Leonard definitely did NOT do.

And your scenarios don't abide by general logic. You're saying Hearns' power went up from 147 to 154 but went down from 154 to 160?

Leonard doesn't need to outbox him or outspeed him. He needs to do exactly what he did both of the times they were in the ring with each other. Walk Hearns down and beat him up down the stretch. As I said, Leonard proved himself capable of taking everything Hearns could throw. Hearns proved that he simply could not respond in the same manner when forced to deal with Leonard's punches.

That's your view and I accept that. I have never said that at 160, Hearns power went down from 154. I have said that the bigger the class, the better for the Hitman. Plus, going up in weight, Hearns speed at 175 is not the same speed as 154, but, it's more effective than Leonard's.

Plus, The Hitman was coming from a brutal KO suffered by the hands of Iran Barkley. I just can't see Leonard taking those wicked shots Hearns give to Duran, Hutchins and Hagler. I don't believe that he has a better chin than Duran or Hagler.

And when they met the second time, both were almost washed up. You're saying that Hearns was fresher. I am saying that Leonard was. Leonard could not compete at higher weight classes against top and strong middleweights not because of talent. But, because of the WEIGHT. Hearns could compete with stronger middleweight boxers. He was a tall boxer and can absorb the weight class way much better than Leonard, Duran or Benitez. And it was understandable. He was way taller than the 3.

Can we imagine the Leonard fighting Kevin Howard and Ayub Kalule vs the Hitman that destroyed Duran and Len Hutchins?

[Giancarlo]

your scenarios don't abide by general logic.

The only 'logic' Elmo applies is how strong his man love is for the fighters involved.

Nothing else matters.

[elmersalsa]

The great Sugar Ray Leonard is invincible in here in the eyes of many. No matter if it's above 147. No matter if he fights King Kong or Superman, he is the winner, smh.

[Ambling Alp II]

your scenarios don't abide by general logic.

The only 'logic' Elmo applies is how strong his man love is for the fighters involved.

Nothing else matters.

Amen.

[King Carlos]

The great Sugar Ray Leonard is invincible in here in the eyes of many. No matter if it's above 147. No matter if he fights King Kong or Superman, he is the winner, smh.

Or we could just be using the evidence from both of the times they actually DID fight. Both of which are strikingly similar. You're entitled to believe that Hearns was too weak at 147, superhuman at 154, and too fat(?) at 160 if you wish, though.