Hearns vs. Leonard at 154?

[Kalan]

Like I have said before: Only the great Mike McCallum I see as the one that beats Tommy at 154. And if someone says that Hearns beats McCallum, he is not wrong. They are evenly matched

I was about to say you sure have that right... Mike McCallum destroys Tommy Hearns at 154... SOMEBODY always thinks a stronger, tougher, and more skilled fighter would lose to his particular favorite... Nobody ever asks this, but if you have so-called SMART MONEY who's taking the counter bet?

[jezzamundo]

Hearns by a clear decision, probably gets a KD somewhere along the way, possibly a KO. If it's a 15 round fight, Leonard could get another late stoppage, but my money would be on The Hitman.

[elmersalsa]

After watching how the great Thomas Hearns decapitated The Hands of Stone and how he destroyed quickly Fred Hutchins, there's no doubt in my mind that Tommy would've exterminated Sugar Ray also. He was too devastating at 154lbs. I like Sugar Ray, but this is in another weight class. It doesn't have nothing to do with skills.

[Seamus]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54BCLYNkFKg

[Ambling Alp II]

[elmersalsa]

Ask Sugar Ray of the Kevin Howard fight why he didn't challenged Tommy Hearns in 1984. I don't think that version of Leonard would have survived against the guy that decapitated the great Roberto Duran.

Dream on, Seamus, alright. Dream on.

[Kalan]

Okay... But then how about matching the Hearns who got knocked stiff by Iran Barkley -- with the Leonard who beat Marvin Hagler???

An ATG can make terrible showings where he falls through his ass -- You'd love the peak version of your guy to catch him on that night.

[elmersalsa]

Okay... But then how about matching the Hearns who got knocked stiff by Iran Barkley -- with the Leonard who beat Marvin Hagler???

An ATG can make terrible showings where he falls through his ass -- You'd love the peak version of your guy to catch him on that night.

Hearns prime ended when Marvelous knocked him out in three rounds of hell.

[Syntax Error]

Okay... But then how about matching the Hearns who got knocked stiff by Iran Barkley -- with the Leonard who beat Marvin Hagler???

An ATG can make terrible showings where he falls through his ass -- You'd love the peak version of your guy to catch him on that night.

Hearns prime ended when Marvelous knocked him out in three rounds of hell.

Tell that to James Shuler & Dennis Andries.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Andries was the end of his prime.

[elmersalsa]

Okay... But then how about matching the Hearns who got knocked stiff by Iran Barkley -- with the Leonard who beat Marvin Hagler???

An ATG can make terrible showings where he falls through his ass -- You'd love the peak version of your guy to catch him on that night.

Hearns prime ended when Marvelous knocked him out in three rounds of hell.

Tell that to James Shuler & Dennis Andries.

That's to let some people know how great was Thomas Hearns. I think he's in the SAME LEVEL technically with Sugar Ray. But, I rate Sugar Ray over him because:
1. Sugar Ray better fighters in his prime
2. Sugar Ray beat him in the fight for all the marbles.
3. The Hitman lost the 2 BIGGEST FIGHTS of his career (vs Leonard I and Hagler)

But, when it comes to who did better going up on weight, Hearns had better performances against Sugar Ray above welterweight:
WKO1 Marcos Geraldo
W15 Wilfred Benitez...He beat Benitez with the jab. It was The Hitman's most underrated win. He outboxed the boxer. He could have knocked The Radar out, but he broke his hand around the 7th or 8th round. I think this win over Benitez was better than when Leonard beat Benitez at 147.

WTKO2 Roberto Duran...Hearns' greatest win. The first man to knock out The Hands of Stone.

LTKO3 Marvelous Marvin Hagler....It was Hearns' last great performance in his prime.

WTKO7 Dennis Andries...Even though he was out of his prime, Hearns demonstrated that not any light-heavyweight could run over him.

WTKO4 Juan Domingo Roldan....Hearns becomes am all-time great when he becomes THE FIRST BOXER EVER TO WIN 4 CROWNS IN 4 DIFFERENT WEIGHT CLASSES. He had to drop 15 pounds to stop the iron-chinned Argentinian.

D12 Sugar Ray Leonard (fight #2)....A draw my ass! Hearns put Leonard to eat dust twice in the fight. By no means this was a draw. No way! The judges took The Hitman's glory away from him in a rematch that he craved 8 years to happen. Tho time was at 168lbs. And Hearns demonstrated that he was stronger fighter. And Leonard took the fight because he THOUGHT THAT TOMMY WAS WASHED UP AND SHOT. That is why he took the risk. Why he didn't challenge Hearns in '84 when Kevin Howard dropped him? Think about that, folks!

W15 Virgil Hill...Hearns came back to light-heavyweight and took the crown from a dominant champion that is considered a top 25 light-heavyweight great. He outboxed Hill just like he did the great Wilfred Benitez....With the jab! It was The Hitman's Last Hurrah.

[Ambling Alp II]

Love how it's considered a great perfromance for Hearns getting stopped by Hagler in three.
How did Leonard do against Hagler? Oh, that's right, he won.

If you want to count Roldan as a big win, then count Leonard beating Kalue and Lalonde as a big deal.

I guess we are still crying about the draw with Leonard. Any other fights in 130 years of boxing where a guy got hit more than his opponent, and got hurt more by his opponent, yet somehow got "robbed"?

Strangley missing is the part where Hearns lost to Iran Barkley. Twice.

[elmersalsa]

Love how it's considered a great perfromance for Hearns getting stopped by Hagler in three.
How did Leonard do against Hagler? Oh, that's right, he won.

If you want to count Roldan as a big win, then count Leonard beating Kalue and Lalonde as a big deal.

I guess we are still crying about the draw with Leonard. Any other fights in 130 years of boxing where a guy got hit more than his opponent, and got hurt more by his opponent, yet somehow got "robbed"?

Strangley missing is the part where Hearns lost to Iran Barkley. Twice.

You know that being dropped by a third and fourth rater is not a great performance, Ambling Alp. Donny Lalonde? Really?

Ayub Kalule was beating Sugar Ray on points in my scorecards.

The TRUTH is that The Hitman was better than Sugar Ray moving up. I rate Leonard over The Hitman because he beat him in their primes, and beat better prime opponents.

Any blind man can see that Hearns did better than Leonard moving up in weight.

[Ambling Alp II]

Yes he got knocked down against Howard; otherwise he was winning the fight handily. This was after being off for more than two years.

Donny Lalonde was as good as Juan Roldan.
Having Kalue ahead of Leonard on your scorecard is absolutely ridiculous. Leonard was winning that fight convincingly. Not even close.
Hard to take you serious elmer.

Any blind man, please. Leonard never lost to anybody like Iran Barkley. And it happened twice. And Leonard beat Hagler, Hearns never beat anyone that good.

[elmersalsa]

Yes he got knocked down against Howard; otherwise he was winning the fight handily. This was after being off for more than two years.

Donny Lalonde was as good as Juan Roldan.
Having Kalue ahead of Leonard on your scorecard is absolutely ridiculous. Leonard was winning that fight convincingly. Not even close.
Hard to take you serious elmer.

Any blind man, please. Leonard never lost to anybody like Iran Barkley. And it happened twice. And Leonard beat Hagler, Hearns never beat anyone that good.

The Hitman would not even be dropped by Kevin Howard even if The Hitman had a big party the night before. Hearns doesn't get dropped by that bum even if he only trains for 3 days.

Put that Howard against Hearns that night and the Hitman would've probably go to jail because of murder. That is how pathetic Howard was. The referee made Sugar Ray looked good. Howard wasn't winning that fight no matter what.

And Donny Lalonde is in the same sentence with Juan Domingo Roldan? LOL!

[Ambling Alp II]

Oh please. Hearns had a glass jaw compared to Leonard. Leonard never would have got stopped by Iran Barkley. You keep forgetting this fight.

Juan Roldan? He doesn't have one meaningful win in his entire career. Beat nobody. So yeah, Lalonde was at least as good.

[elmersalsa]

Oh please. Hearns had a glass jaw compared to Leonard. Leonard never would have got stopped by Iran Barkley. You keep forgetting this fight.

Juan Roldan? He doesn't have one meaningful win in his entire career. Beat nobody. So yeah, Lalonde was at least as good.

Iran Barkley can hit. And he could have beaten Sugar Ray, too. Ain't he beat The Hitman twice? Hearns was not in his prime, but still formidable when he lost to The Blade. Hearns' prime in my view was circa 1979-85, after he left it all out with Marvelous. After the war with Marvelous, he wasn't that great again, but still had something left.

Donny Lalonde was a BUM.

And you're saying that Juan Roldan doesn't have a significant win? How did he became number one middleweight contender twice?

[Ambling Alp II]

Classic elmer at his best (or worst depending on how you look at it).

Hearns has the embarrassing losses to Barkley. So how does he prop up Barkley? He says that he beat Hearns!!

He says Juan Roldan must have had a signifcant wins becasue he was the top contender. As if top contenders always beat good competition. Yet he didn't actually mention any specific significant wins for Roldan.

Then he says Donny Lalonde is a bum. Lalonde was a champion.

[elmersalsa]

Classic elmer at his best (or worst depending on how you look at it).

Hearns has the embarrassing losses to Barkley. So how does he prop up Barkley? He says that he beat Hearns!!

He says Juan Roldan must have had a signifcant wins becasue he was the top contender. As if top contenders always beat good competition. Yet he didn't actually mention any specific significant wins for Roldan.

Then he says Donny Lalonde is a bum. Lalonde was a champion.

Donny Lalonde was not a good fighter. Nobody in here in this forum thinks that this Canadian was something special.

At least Roldan won 67 fights and knocked out about 45 of those wins.

At least Iran Barkley was a triple crown division champion.

[Ambling Alp II]

Lalonde beat Leslie Stewart who was a pretty good fighter. Better than anyone Roldan ever beat. He gave Bobby Czyz a tough fight. He was no legend, but he was good.

Roldan entire record is built up almost completely against stiffs.

Barkley was a triple crown champion. Two of them were against Hearns, which of course hurt's Hearns case. Can you really not figure that out?

Barkley also won the Super middleweight title against Darrin Van Horn. Wow what an accomplishment.
As we have seen time and time again, before titles can be deceiving.
Barkley was slow, had a weak defense, and a questionable chin. Which is why he lost so many times in different ways.

You are all about the title except when it hurts your argument.
Roldan never won a world title.
Lalonde did.

[elmersalsa]

Lalonde beat Leslie Stewart who was a pretty good fighter. Better than anyone Roldan ever beat. He gave Bobby Czyz a tough fight. He was no legend, but he was good.

Roldan entire record is built up almost completely against stiffs.

Barkley was a triple crown champion. Two of them were against Hearns, which of course hurt's Hearns case. Can you really not figure that out?

Barkley also won the Super middleweight title against Darrin Van Horn. Wow what an accomplishment.
As we have seen time and time again, before titles can be deceiving.
Barkley was slow, had a weak defense, and a questionable chin. Which is why he lost so many times in different ways.

You are all about the title except when it hurts your argument.
Roldan never won a world title.
Lalonde did.

Leslie Stewart nor Donny Lalonde would have been champions in the Marvin Johnson-Saad Muhammad-Michael Spinks era. They were just lucky champions.

Juan Roldan had to fight probably in the eyes of many the best fighter of the decade and middleweight ever. Then, he fought the great Tommy Hearns for the vacant crown and also rising superstar Michael Nunn for the IBF crown. Not an easy task for anybody. He became #1 contender at least twice. Another fighter instead of Marvelous, Tommy or Nunn, and he would have been world champion.

Iran Barkley beat Hearns twice. I admit that Hearns was not in his prime, but, they were great wins. He could've beaten a Sugar Ray Leonard that night, too. Leonard wasn't at his very best then. He was also past his best years. He lost to a washed up Manos de Piedra. It was a war. No shame in that. A rematch and Barkley would have probably win.

[Ambling Alp II]

Lucky champion? Gotta love it. How many times have you made a big deal about a guy having a title (literally any title, NABF, Australian, Puerto Rican etc. ) when it helps your argument.
Suddenly a title doesn't mean anything to you.

Losing to quality competition doesn't make Roldan really good. Beating some quality competition would have.

Do you seriously not understand that you can't use Barkley wins over Hearns to prop up Barkley and make Hearns loss to Barkley seem so bad?

Try this for a fighter you don't like, Lennox Lewis. Lennox Lewis lost to Rahman. Well Rahman must have been really good. Why? Because he beat Lewis. Therefore Lewis loss to Rahman was not a big deal because Rahman was really good. Do you understand how stupid that is?

Take a deep breath. Use the brain God gave you. Think. Now do you realize how silly it is to prop up Barkley by saying he beat Hearns, therefore Hearns loss to Barkley was no big deal?

[elmersalsa]

Lucky champion? Gotta love it. How many times have you made a big deal about a guy having a title (literally any title, NABF, Australian, Puerto Rican etc. ) when it helps your argument.
Suddenly a title doesn't mean anything to you.

Losing to quality competition doesn't make Roldan really good. Beating some quality competition would have.

Do you seriously not understand that you can't use Barkley wins over Hearns to prop up Barkley and make Hearns loss to Barkley seem so bad?

Try this for a fighter you don't like, Lennox Lewis. Lennox Lewis lost to Rahman. Well Rahman must have been really good. Why? Because he beat Lewis. Therefore Lewis loss to Rahman was not a big deal because Rahman was really good. Do you understand how stupid that is?

Take a deep breath. Use the brain God gave you. Think. Now do you realize how silly it is to prop up Barkley by saying he beat Hearns, therefore Hearns loss to Barkley was no big deal?

In my view, pound per pound, Iran "The Blade" Barkley was better than Hasim Rahman. You cannot put Lennox Lewis and the great Thomas Hearns in the same sentence, neither in the same pantheon nor in the same house. Beating a legendary fighter like Hearns is ten times better than beating a prime Lewis.

Barkley was a good fighter. He proved it. He became a triple crown division champion in a tougher era than today's.

He beat The Hitman twice. No matter if The Hitman was not in his prime, it was still a great win. Not too many fighters of that era could have done it.
Barkley was better than Donny Laonde.
He was better than Hasim Rahman.
He was better than Leslie Stewart.

He fought in a tougher era than those 3 combined.

The titles today, you can't put them into consideration unless proven that the boxer beat someone good. Titles are DILUTED, ABC organizations are a joke and today's boxing is a joke.

[Ambling Alp II]

Barkley was a good fighter, no more than that. You can't use the two wins over Hearns to make Hearns look better. This is the part where you have to use your brain.

The wins over Hearns are two of his titles. The other one? He beat frikkin Darren Van Horn for a WBS title. So what.

Barkley lost fights early in his career, the middle of his career, and later in his career. He could be out boxed or outfought.
Who is the 2nd best fighter he ever beat? Van Horn? Olajide? Big deal.

Love the argument that he was in a tougher era that today. Guess what? Lalonde and Stewart were in the same era as Barkley.

Love the argument that Barkley is better because he won 3 world titles and Lalonde only won 1. Yet somehow Lalonde isn't better than Roldan who won zero.

Are you capable of making a decent argument?

[elmersalsa]

Barkley was a good fighter, no more than that. You can't use the two wins over Hearns to make Hearns look better. This is the part where you have to use your brain.

The wins over Hearns are two of his titles. The other one? He beat frikkin Darren Van Horn for a WBS title. So what.

Barkley lost fights early in his career, the middle of his career, and later in his career. He could be out boxed or outfought.
Who is the 2nd best fighter he ever beat? Van Horn? Olajide? Big deal.

Love the argument that he was in a tougher era that today. Guess what? Lalonde and Stewart were in the same era as Barkley.

Love the argument that Barkley is better because he won 3 world titles and Lalonde only won 1. Re Yet somehow Lalonde isn't better than Roldan who won zero.

Are you capable of making a decent argument?

Yes, I am CAPABLE! Is that your argument is not strong enough.

First, Like it or not, Iran "The Blade" Barkley was better champion than Donny Lalonde, Leslie Stewart and Hasim Rahman. We could make a poll about that. And any smart poster will vote for Barkley. Do you wanna try it?

Second of all, Barkley beat the legendary Thomas Hearns. That happened in a time that not just anybody could have beaten him. Barkley beat Hearns twice. He could've beaten Sugar Ray in that time frame, too. And why not? He beat Hearns. He was as good as the other 3 of the Fab 4.

Third, Nobody is saying that Barkley was a great boxer. He was very good. He could hang against any other middleweight or light-heavyweight in history. I can't say that about Donny Lalonde. Barkley goes to 175lbs and I would not be surprised if he beats Lalonde or a bum like Leslie Stewart. If those two fight The Blade back then, I'd bet on Barkley. That is how confident I am about it.

Fourth, Juan Roldan didn't had the breaks like Lalonde. At the time, the middleweight division was stronger than the 175lbs division. He had to fight 3 phenomenal fighters in his title tries. If it were someone else? Right now Roldan would have been in the record books as world champion. He had more wins than Lalonde, and had more knockouts than Lalonde had fights. How about that?