Primes: Mugabi vs Hearns, 154lbs?

Rocky Balboa · Post by **Rocky Balboa** » 13 Mar 2006, 12:54

Who you got?

This is one match-up I would have loved to have actually happened.

I remember after a particular Mugabi victory, his fans were chanting: 'We want Hearns, we want Hearns etc'!

Mugabi was BIG for 154lbs, I think he may struggled a bit to make the limit in some of his bouts @ JM? Hearns was by no means, a small man @ the weight either. Mugabi also had a very long reach for a JM.

So, guys, you do you feel would prevail, both @ their peak?

I will post my views later!

Cheers!

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 13 Mar 2006, 15:40

For me this was a fight that would have made Mugabi's career, but sadly Hearns was shameless in avoiding him.

I watched Mugabi fight on the USA Network against Don Morgan and the commentator Randy Gordon said there were only two guys at 154 he wouldnt put Mugabi in with, Mike McCallum and Earl Hargrove. Randy felt that Mugabi would KO Hearns early and so did a lot of other people.

Anyway, Duff didnt follow Randy's advice and put Mugabi in with Hargrove.

The result : Mugabi knocked him cold in the first.

This is exactly how I see a Mugabi - Hearns fight going, with Mugabi the victor.

Mugabi had a very brief prime (Nov 1983 - March 1986) 28 months.

But in his prime he was one of the most Dangerous fighters who ever lived.

theone · Post by **theone** » 13 Mar 2006, 18:36

Hearns violent 1st round ko over Mugabi. "The Beast" would not survive the kind of barrage Hearns would lay on him, like Hagler was able to.

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 13 Mar 2006, 18:56

theone wrote:Hearns violent 1st round ko over Mugabi. "The Beast" would not survive the kind of barrage Hearns would lay on him, like Hagler was able to.

A Prime Mugabi had a much better chin than Hearns, hit harder and was much stronger. He also had decent speed.

Hearns would come out pretty much like he did against Hagler, but this would play right into Mugabi's hands.

If, as I suspect, Hearns would come out slugging, he doesnt survive the first.

Hearns is a great fighter, better than Mugabi, but no way he beats The Beast toe to toe.

For me, Hearns legacy will always be tarnished due to the fact that he avioded John for 2 years.

Jaime Garza · Post by **Jaime Garza** » 13 Mar 2006, 19:05

This would have been one heck of a fight, while it lasted. I watched Mugabi on a Don Elbaum show once and saw plenty of his fights on TV. Ive seen a lot of Hearns fights. Tommys only chance of winning would be to box to a decision. He could win well if he boxed and moved. But Tommy had the pride of a lion and this would have got him into a fierce exchange early.

Tommys the better fighter but trading with Mugabi at his best is a no no.

Mugabi inside of 2 rounds.

generic screen name · Post by **generic screen name** » 13 Mar 2006, 21:15

Mugabi's prime was erased by Hagler

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 13 Mar 2006, 21:47

tough one but I lean very very slightly to Mugabi. But if these guys would have gone at it, it would have been a crap shoot and whoever got on a roll first would have the distinct advantage.

generic screen name · Post by **generic screen name** » 13 Mar 2006, 21:55

If it was a test of stamina, I'd pick Hearns, Hagler took him to the later rounds and put him away. If Hearns would've brawled with Mugabi, Mugabi would easily have won...

I'd pick Mugabi by KO4

Rocky Balboa · Post by **Rocky Balboa** » 14 Mar 2006, 10:34

Hearns is a great fighter, better than Mugabi, but no way he beats The Beast toe to toe.

I would agree with this statement strongly. Hearsn had a lot more ability than Mugabi, is higher in the all-time great list, but he would not have beaten Mugabi @ his own game, no way!

People are wrong when they say Mugabi had a weak chin, and they use the Norris loss a one of the reasons why they feel this. Before fighting Marvin Hagler, Mugabi had a solid chin, after the Hagler fight, I do believe his chin and ability to tak a punch were not the same. The fight with Hagler took a great deal out of John Mugabi.

Remember, this is prime vs prime, and Mugabi had a better chin than Hearns during their peaks. If Hearns chose to go about Mugabi like he did Roberto Duran, Mugabi would have KO'd him in 1 round!

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 14 Mar 2006, 11:12

I think posters looking at Hearns' fights against Hagler and Duran are misleading themselves. Tommy wanted to keep Hagler on the jab and put the right over to keep him honest. Hagler forced Tommy to fight differently. Mugabi didn't have that kind of mobility.

Mugabi can KO Hearns but I think Hearns pre-Hagler (just like Mugabi) took a decent shot. Hearns is a better boxer with a better defence and faster hands. I can see his jab seriously taking the fight out of Mugabi if John hasn't won by the 5th round.

These are 2 big bangers but a UD to Hearns is not out of the question.

theone · Post by **theone** » 14 Mar 2006, 18:00

Mugabi is being absurdly overrated here.Mugabi never, ever faced a fighter like Hearns. No one that hit as hard as Hearns or boxed as well as him. Mugabi would be destroyed by Hearns with his style. Mugabi made his name by beating a bunch of stiffs and fighters well past there best.
Mugabi would get hit faster and harder then he ever had up as a jr middle and didnt possess the savy or defense of a Duran to even last to the second round. It would be like the Norris fight; although admittinglyt Mugabi may have been past his prime when they fought, Norris was no prime Hearns either.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 14 Mar 2006, 18:54

Styles make fights and judgment makes fights.

Question for theone....In your opinion....Would Hearns have done better to box with Hagler?

To clarify why I lean to Mugabi,..... would Hearns have the patience to feel ok with a decision? Like I say anything could happen here but the reason I lean slightly to Mugabi isn't about skill, it's about judgement. Would he be satisfied to just outpoint Mugabi? My guess he goes after Mugabi the way he goes after Hagler and that erases Hearns advantage to me.

Hey if they both used all the skills and all the brains in the world I would pick Hearns, but like I say I don't lean to Hearns.

theone · Post by **theone** » 14 Mar 2006, 19:06

Question for theone....In your opinion....Would Hearns have done better to box with Hagler?

Hearns didnt box because Hagler didnt let him. Hagler beat Hearns because he was the stronger, better middleweight period.

Hagler was a better fighter than Mugabi, with a much better chin. I dont think Mugabi would have taken the barrage Hagler took from Hearns in that fight.
Although the fight lasted only 3 rounds it was the most punishment Hagler ever endured.
Besides that, this hypothetical fight is at Jr middle, a weight I believe hearns was almost unbeatable at.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 14 Mar 2006, 19:52

Tommy Hearns is my all time fav fighter, but the truth is, there's just no way you can predict what would happen - for certain - if these two juggernauts clashed in their prime.

Hearns is an all time great, and the better fighter no doubt. But at his peak, Mugabi was a middleweight George Foreman - wrecking ball fists that would level most fighters outside of those that have a chin like Marvelous Marv. Which the Hit Man didn't.

I'd back Mugabi in this one - at his peak he was a monster.
And might have caught Tommy by surprise.

jedijojo · Post by **jedijojo** » 14 Mar 2006, 20:59

BoxBuzz wrote:Styles make fights and judgment makes fights.

Question for theone....In your opinion....Would Hearns have done better to box with Hagler?

To clarify why I lean to Mugabi,..... would Hearns have the patience to feel ok with a decision? Like I say anything could happen here but the reason I lean slightly to Mugabi isn't about skill, it's about judgement. Would he be satisfied to just outpoint Mugabi? My guess he goes after Mugabi the way he goes after Hagler and that erases Hearns advantage to me.

Hey if they both used all the skills and all the brains in the world I would pick Hearns, but like I say I don't lean to Hearns.

Well Hearns had the patience against Benitez, and he felt satisfied to have outpointed him. Hearns would have to be very disciplined against Mugabi, and if he is, it won't be a hard night.

theone · Post by **theone** » 14 Mar 2006, 21:25

Hearns is an all time great, and the better fighter no doubt. But at his peak, Mugabi was a middleweight George Foreman - wrecking ball fists that would level most fighters outside of those that have a chin like Marvelous Marv. Which the Hit Man didn't.

Hearns would have been able to ko anyone Mugabi did. The beast looked awesome against far less than spectacular opposition.

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 15 Mar 2006, 02:38

theone wrote:
Question for theone....In your opinion....Would Hearns have done better to box with Hagler?
Hearns didnt box because Hagler didnt let him. Hagler beat Hearns because he was the stronger, better middleweight period.

Hagler was a better fighter than Mugabi, with a much better chin. I dont think Mugabi would have taken the barrage Hagler took from Hearns in that fight.
Although the fight lasted only 3 rounds it was the most punishment Hagler ever endured.
Besides that, this hypothetical fight is at Jr middle, a weight I believe hearns was almost unbeatable at.

Mugabi took a barrage from Hagler in round 6 and came right back at him.

Hearns wilted under similar pressure.

Hearns is very fragile against Robust fighters.

Watched Hagler vs Haerns and Mugabi last night.

Toomy couldnt live with a peak Mugabi.

Jaclem · Post by **Jaclem** » 15 Mar 2006, 02:48

..tough one to call. i can see hearns winning a decision if he boxed and stayed active and focused for the entire fight. with that said, if i had to bet, i'd go with mugabi. very strong and he probably would have forced hearns into a slugging match, as hagler did.

i don't think hearns outpointing the excellent benetiz adds much to go on here....completely different kind of fighter.

a better comparison is hearns/iran barkley...and the fact they fought at middle doesn't really matter...we're talking a few pounds here..and same for both fighters. barkely was just too strong for hearns....and i think the same was true of mugabi.

in his overall career hearns was no doubt the superior fighter....but one on one....i think mugabi would probably win by a kayo.

surf-bat · Post by **surf-bat** » 15 Mar 2006, 03:34

Rocky Balboa wrote:Who you got?

This is one match-up I would have loved to have actually happened.

I remember after a particular Mugabi victory, his fans were chanting: 'We want Hearns, we want Hearns etc'!

Mugabi was BIG for 154lbs, I think he may struggled a bit to make the limit in some of his bouts @ JM? Hearns was by no means, a small man @ the weight either. Mugabi also had a very long reach for a JM.

So, guys, you do you feel would prevail, both @ their peak?

I will post my views later!

Cheers!

With bangers of this magnitude it depends on who would beat who to the punch. Hearns was much faster and punched much straighter than Mugabi. Hearns would fire one of his devastating right crosses right down the middle of Mugabi's obscenely wide, arcing punches. Hearns has too many weapons for the beast.

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 15 Mar 2006, 05:39

Mugabi collapses before Hearns does - KO6. Hearns was at his devastating best at junior middle and I don't see Mugabi having the skill to beat him. Hearns boxes his ears off before going in for the kill

Primes: Mugabi vs Hearns, 154lbs?

Primes: Mugabi vs Hearns, 154lbs?

Re: Primes: Mugabi vs Hearns, 154lbs?