BoxRec

golden oldie wrote:

Kalan wrote:

elmersalsa wrote: The Hitman almost took Marvelous' head off in the first round. Sugar Ray, Marvelous and the Blade and the Cincinnati Hawk gave us THE BLUEPRINT of how to beat The Hitman. You could only beat him by applying constant pressure. Nobody outboxed Hearns in his career.

Barkley sure did... In their rematch he outpointed Hearns... In their 1st fight he just clubbed him unconscious.. When you look at how easily James Toney out-boxed and stopped Barkley -- and how easily Barkley was out-boxed by Nunn, Kalambay and others -- you know Tommy didn't didn't fight the greatest boxers.

Talking of rematches, and posting clips of audiences booing decisions, how about the Hearns / Leonard rematch. I notice Leonard fanboys NEVER like to bring that up, even though,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

The decision was soundly booed, as most felt that Hearns had won. Eventually, Leonard admitted that Hearns deserved the decision.

I fail to see the problem. If someone's hero finally admits the other guy should have got the decision, why is it so difficult for fanboys to acknowledge it?

Hearns-Leonard II was close.. I had Hearns winning by a point, but he was very rocky. Hearns got hit and hurt very bad several times by Leonard.. I fail to see how that performance reflects positively on either fighter.. The only brilliant boxer Leonard ever fought was prime Terry Norris.. Norris got iced by Julian Jackson and wasn't defensively perfect, but he looked like a master craftsman out-boxing the betting favorite Leonard by a million miles.. Of course the excuse is that Leonard was 34 and past it.. Duran was 38 and pudgy as Hell in the Leonard-Duran rubber match -- so he wasn't going to do crap.

For anyone who says Wilfredo Benitez was a fabulous boxer I disagree.. He was too much on his lead foot at times and gave you his head to shoot at.. He would then slip and counter 95% of his opponents who couldn't throw.. I saw he was going to have tremendous problems when he fought anyone with great patience and a great jab and straight right. It's impossible to slip a masterfully thrown jab or straight right coming straight as a bullet. You have to block them. Leonard had a very fine jab and speared the shiit out of Benitez -- who also couldn't get away from the straight rights and follow up combinations. Leonard was a bit TOO patient and he had a couple holes in his defense. I thought he'd have WB out in 6 to 8.

SenorPipino wrote:People in boxing have always said that the unshakeable Durnan was actually intimidated by Hearns.

When they met at gatherings, Duran would never look Hearns in the eye, and really didn't want to fight him.

Duran was Mr. Tough Guy but wanted no part of the Hit Man.

When he stepped into the ring against Hearns, Duran was actually scared and fought like it.

Don't know if it's true, but that's the chatter.

I can believe that.

Tommy Hearns was scary at 147/154.

Even Leonard has admitted to being a tad intimidated by Tommy's size & when you add in The Hitman's baleful stare, he would have been a terrifying prospect to most opponents at those lower weights.

Syntax Error wrote:

SenorPipino wrote:People in boxing have always said that the unshakeable Durnan was actually intimidated by Hearns.

When they met at gatherings, Duran would never look Hearns in the eye, and really didn't want to fight him.

Duran was Mr. Tough Guy but wanted no part of the Hit Man.

When he stepped into the ring against Hearns, Duran was actually scared and fought like it.

Don't know if it's true, but that's the chatter.

I can believe that.

Tommy Hearns was scary at 147/154.

Even Leonard has admitted to being a tad intimidated by Tommy's size & when you add in The Hitman's baleful stare, he would have been a terrifying prospect to most opponents at those lower weights.

Bit it's like that whenever you're mismatched with somebody.. Frazier was scared of Foreman -- you could feel it. Patterson was terrified of Sonny Liston.. That fight was almost a shame the fear was so bad.. Michael Spinks froze against Mike Tyson. Duran had no fear of Hagler or Barkley -- and THEY had no fear of Hearns.. But Duran knew instinctively that Hearns was the wrong match-up for him.. The height, reach, and power punch angles Hearns had didn't work for Roberto.. Wladimir Klitschko for some reason was afraid of Corrie Sanders, a smaller man and HUGE underdog.. In the pre-fight staredown you could feel it.

There's that guy out there who isn't afraid of you and knows he can beat you... and you best not fight him.

golden oldie wrote:

Kalan wrote:

golden oldie wrote:
Talking of rematches, and posting clips of audiences booing decisions, how about the Hearns / Leonard rematch. I notice Leonard fanboys NEVER like to bring that up, even though,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,




I fail to see the problem. If someone's hero finally admits the other guy should have got the decision, why is it so difficult for fanboys to acknowledge it?

Hearns-Leonard II was close..

No it wasn't. Hearns clearly won.

I apologise for deleting the rest of your post, but I simply wasn't interested. My point was quite easy to comprehend. Some fools, or Leonard fanboys were trying to use the crowd reaction to the Duran / Viruet result as a stick with which to beat Roberto. My answer was the same reaction occurred to the Hearns / Leonard 2 result, albeit to a much larger, and more vociferous crowd.

Very insightful

Hearns won cleanly -- but he was hurt worse than Leonard from head shots.. He was rocky and wobbling several times in rounds that went to Leonard.

Knockdowns don't necessarily sew up the fight... Wladimir Klitschko and Sam Peter both legitimately won fights where they were knocked down 3 times. Marquez was floored 3 X by Pacquiao in their draw -- but he won the fight on my scorecard by taking 8 rounds.. The judges were all over the map with their ridiculous scores, 2 having wide margins for different guys and 1 draw.. The judge with the tie scored the first round 10-7. It was 10-6. My score was 113-112.

Kalan wrote:Hearns won cleanly -- but he was hurt worse than Leonard from head shots.. He was rocky and wobbling several times in rounds that went to Leonard.

Knockdowns don't necessarily sew up the fight... Wladimir Klitschko and Sam Peter both legitimately won fights where they were knocked down 3 times. Marquez was floored 3 X by Pacquiao in their draw -- but he won the fight on my scorecard by taking 8 rounds.. The judges were all over the map with their ridiculous scores, 2 having wide margins for different guys and 1 draw.. The judge with the tie scored the first round 10-7. It was 10-6. My score was 113-112.

Dribble Dribble

golden oldie wrote:

Tomasino wrote:

golden oldie wrote:
No it wasn't. Hearns clearly won.

I apologise for deleting the rest of your post, but I simply wasn't interested. My point was quite easy to comprehend. Some fools, or Leonard fanboys were trying to use the crowd reaction to the Duran / Viruet result as a stick with which to beat Roberto. My answer was the same reaction occurred to the Hearns / Leonard 2 result, albeit to a much larger, and more vociferous crowd.

Very insightful

If I were you, I'd be more worried about eyesight, than insight if you also believe Leonard / Hearns 2 was close.

I'd worry about your own eyes as your clearing seeing things that are not there.

ClivePatrickLyons wrote:

Kalan wrote:Hearns won cleanly -- but he was hurt worse than Leonard from head shots.. He was rocky and wobbling several times in rounds that went to Leonard.

Knockdowns don't necessarily sew up the fight... Wladimir Klitschko and Sam Peter both legitimately won fights where they were knocked down 3 times. Marquez was floored 3 X by Pacquiao in their draw -- but he won the fight on my scorecard by taking 8 rounds.. The judges were all over the map with their ridiculous scores, 2 having wide margins for different guys and 1 draw.. The judge with the tie scored the first round 10-7. It was 10-6. My score was 113-112.

Dribble Dribble

Swallow and you won't have that problem.

Kalan wrote:

ClivePatrickLyons wrote:

Kalan wrote:Hearns won cleanly -- but he was hurt worse than Leonard from head shots.. He was rocky and wobbling several times in rounds that went to Leonard.

Knockdowns don't necessarily sew up the fight... Wladimir Klitschko and Sam Peter both legitimately won fights where they were knocked down 3 times. Marquez was floored 3 X by Pacquiao in their draw -- but he won the fight on my scorecard by taking 8 rounds.. The judges were all over the map with their ridiculous scores, 2 having wide margins for different guys and 1 draw.. The judge with the tie scored the first round 10-7. It was 10-6. My score was 113-112.

Dribble Dribble

Swallow and you won't have that problem.

That's good advice from THE EXPERT

It's what I tell all the girls who do me... Works for them -- should work for you.

Hearns had the ability to do what he did to Duran to a lot of other welterweight greats. I have little doubt Hearns would have similarly knocked out Floyd, Pacquiao, Curry, Starling, Hatton, Oscar. Well, scratch Floyd, there is no way in hell that haymon would have let floyd get in a ring with prime Hearns. Heck he even had to protect floyd from margarito, williams, cotto 2008 and pacquiao for six years. Hearns at 147 has to be the scariest welterweight in history.

I think Floyd would waste Hearns... The skinny kid was very easy to hit with right hands -- just ask Iran Barkley who Duran beat for the 160 Title..

Hearns may have been the skinniest Welterweight in history... When Leonard started hitting Tommy real good he blew him away like a fart in a windstorm.

A lot like Marvin did -- but SRL waited for the skinny kid to run out of gas... Look at the girth of Leonard's arms compared to Hearns's skinny arms.

And those legs...

Kalan wrote:I think Floyd would waste Hearns... The skinny kid was very easy to hit with right hands -- just ask Iran Barkley who Duran beat for the 160 Title..

Hearns may have been the skinniest Welterweight in history... When Leonard started hitting Tommy real good he blew him away like a fart in a windstorm.

A lot like Marvin did -- but SRL waited for the skinny kid to run out of gas... Look at the girth of Leonard's arms compared to Hearns's skinny arms.

And those legs...

I think tommy beats floyd all day. Too tall too powerful too rangy. And with floyds low left hand stance ?????
He never ever fought an opponent as dangerous with their right hand as tommy.
Hearns by ko for me. Probably one shot ko also

The ONLY WAY to beat the great Thomas Hearns was to force the fight and pressure him constantly. No boxer could outbox The Hitman.

Pressure, pressure, pressure. That's the only way to beat him.

elmersalsa wrote: No boxer could outbox The Hitman

Except Ray Leonard, Iran Barkley, and all the outstanding boxers Hearns ducked.. The 3rd rate Barkley beat Tommy both by KO and by out-pointing him.

James Toney boxed Barkley to death and punched him out -- something Tommy "Hit Me" Hearns could never do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_cont ... as7CLtAulo


I don't see Viruet winning this fight....maybe a close fight....but Duran clearly had the edge from my perspective.

Duran vs Viruet fight was one of those boxing matches when the referee should stop breaking the fighters every few seconds -- and monotonously allowing Viruet to step back outside and reset every time... He SHOULD stand there and yell "Let go of him Edwin" ... "Let GO of him Edwin" and if Edwin DOESN'T let go on command, the referee should stop the action "TIME" send Duran to a neutral corner and read Viruet the riot act.. "Edwin you're holding too much.. Next time you do it I'm taking a point.. Do you understand me?? GOOD!! ... TIME IN!!"

Not only is EXCESSIVE holding a foul.. Under Queesberry Rules any grabbing, holding, and wrestling are clearly disallowed... It also stinks up the fight.

One of the reasons Joshua vs Klitschko was such a great fight was there was very minimal clinching and holding slowing up the action.. Trying to grab hold of AJ's massive arms and pin them is relatively difficult no matter how strong you are. The man is brutally powerful.. It kind of reminds you of some of those smaller heavyweights in the 1950's who tried to tie Sonny Liston's arms up when they were badly hurt.. Good luck with that.. He finished them off big time.

Viruet outjabbed Duran, consistently caught him coming in, impressed the judges with his ability to withstand anything he got hit with, and at the bell, clearly looked the fresher of the two. Unfortunately for Viruet, he ended up a questionable loser on the cards in three of the biggest fights of his career, vs Sammy Goss, this bout, and Esteban Dejesus.

Well this one wasn't all that "unclear"....from an objective viewpoint. The judges clearly got it right. IMHO

I thought the majority of fans in the arena got it right.

The majority of fans in the arena thought Pacquiao was robbed against Mayweather.

The majority of fans are emotional basket cases who don't know what they're looking at... They can't hear the commentators and just want the guy they're rooting for to win -- and when he doesn't sometimes the reaction of the fans is like the Hagler-Minter fight... Duck for cover cuz here comes another UFO.

Seamus wrote:I thought the majority of fans in the arena got it right.

I think the assumption of majority is an interesting one. Definitely a vocal group....as passion often dictates....and a sizable group clearly.....so significant...yes....majority? I don't think so. But as with you....it's only a guess.

If it were a majority, what does it matter??? ... A lot of biased Viruet fans made the 2-hour drive from New York and were bitterly disappointed.. So what??? You hear from a lot of boxers in the dressing room after their win got booed -- and they got booed back to the dressing room... "Fuk the fans. The fans can FO!!!"

Good folks can disagree on that one......and I do think Viruet was whistling in the graveyard on that one. He was not intimidating, impressing, or stressing Duran....but he did put on a good face...I just don't think he won the fight.........even if he gave a good "performance". The judges ruled on the fight....not the performance in this case.

ANYBODY that thinks that Edwin Viruet won that fight against the Hands of Stone gotta be biased, blind or DELUSIONAL. No way he won that fight. The judges got it right both times. You don't win a fight by running and acting like a big idiot. You gotta fight. And fight he didn't do. Just clowning the whole night. He got what he deserved: a loss. End of story!

I got the great Roberto Duran winning 6-4 in rounds and 96-94 in the first fight.