Tommy Hearns v Nigel Benn
-
googoogachoob
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 7
- Joined: 01 Apr 2003, 07:56
Tommy Hearns v Nigel Benn
At Middleweight who wins?
-
overhand_right
- Heavyweight

-
googoogachoob
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 7
- Joined: 01 Apr 2003, 07:56
If Hearns boxes he should win easily.
However, Benn was adept at drawing oponents into a war & Hearns could be made to brawl (Hagler/Hearns for example). Benn showed in the McLellan fight that he was pretty good at evading the hard straight shots & confirmed that he was most dangerous when hurt. At middleweight I think they both carry roughly the same punch power & because both can be hurt I see both visiting the canvas.
Hearns is one of my favourite fighters but I feel in a tear up Benn reacts slightly better when hurt & wins by KO around the 6th.
However, Benn was adept at drawing oponents into a war & Hearns could be made to brawl (Hagler/Hearns for example). Benn showed in the McLellan fight that he was pretty good at evading the hard straight shots & confirmed that he was most dangerous when hurt. At middleweight I think they both carry roughly the same punch power & because both can be hurt I see both visiting the canvas.
Hearns is one of my favourite fighters but I feel in a tear up Benn reacts slightly better when hurt & wins by KO around the 6th.
-
David Mills
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 29
- Joined: 01 May 2003, 13:19
-
overhand_right
- Heavyweight

hearns-benn
i give it 3 rounds. absolute war, both on floor, hearns last man standing. if only benns chin was as good as his punch.
-
David Mills
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 29
- Joined: 01 May 2003, 13:19
-
overhand_right
- Heavyweight

-
David Mills
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 29
- Joined: 01 May 2003, 13:19
-
David Mills
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 29
- Joined: 01 May 2003, 13:19
-
googoogachoob
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 7
- Joined: 01 Apr 2003, 07:56
I recently read a good book on the McLellan/Benn fight, can't remember the author but it was called "War Baby" & it's well worth a look.
I agree that Hearns was a better fighter than Benn but that doesn't necessarilly mean that he would beat him. Look at Hearns/Berkley, I would argue that Hearns was a better fighter but he lost to Berkley twice.
I agree that Hearns was a better fighter than Benn but that doesn't necessarilly mean that he would beat him. Look at Hearns/Berkley, I would argue that Hearns was a better fighter but he lost to Berkley twice.
-
David Mills
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 29
- Joined: 01 May 2003, 13:19
-
googoogachoob
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 7
- Joined: 01 Apr 2003, 07:56
I wouldn't say Hearns was past his prime in the first fight, although he was well on top, he couldn't quite catch Barkley. In the end he got caught himself & that was that. Not impossible that the same thing could happen in a fight with Benn.
As I've said before though, if Hearns chooses to box it's an easy fight for him.
As I've said before though, if Hearns chooses to box it's an easy fight for him.