BoxRec

This came into my thought in some time and I was struggling to see what if the 5 Kings of Boxing of Wilfred Benitez, Roberto Duran, Marvelous Marvin Hagler, Thomas Hearns, and Sugar Ray Leonard would have been fighting in another era of great fighters like the 1940s and 50s decades.

Without any discrimination, foul play nor fixed fights, how these 5 greats would have done in that Golden Age of Boxing?

Wilfred BenitezHe became world champion at age 17 in 1976 besting a great champion like Antonio Cervantes of Colombia, who at 30, was still in his prime. The jr Welterweight division was deactivated from 1946 all the way to 1959. So, in no way he would have fought at that weight class, according to the time. So, he would have had to fight at Welterweight. The Super Welterweight division wasn't even created until 1962. So, let's say that Benitez started fighting at pro level in 1943 and was born in 1928. Would he become champion at age 17 in 1946 when the Welterweight champion was Marty Servo? How would he fared against contenders and champions like Holman Williams, Billy Graham, Kid Gavilan, George "Sugar" Costner, Fritzie Zivic, Henry Armstrong, Cocoa Kid, Freddie "Red" Cochrane, Charley Burley, and other black murderer's row boxers of the era. Would he come out on top with that talent that he had? Could he in your view would have been a triple crown champion or at least win 2 crowns in different weight classes? I am talking about Benitez at his very best against that kind of competition.

Roberto Duran: At Lightweight class in the 1970s, he dominated the division like nobody else had done it before. He held the crown for 7 years from 1972-79, and had 12 title defenses, all except one of them wins by knockout. By the end of the 70s decade, he was considered pound per pound the best fighter of the 70s decade. Well, let's say that he was born 1921 instead of 1951. He starts his career in 1937 at age 15 or 16.
Would he had a rougher time going up the ladder like he did in the 70s decade? By 1942, Duran is 21 years old. Would he had success with the Lightweight fighters of the time like Sammy Angott, Beau Jack, Willie Joyce, Ike Williams, Lew Jenkins, Lou Ambers, Henry Armstrong, Wesley Mouzon, Juan Zurita, Bob Montgomery and other good lightweights like Enrique Bolaños. Would he in your view would have been undefeated challenging Sammy Angott's crown in 1942? Or someone would deny him an entry to be a top contender? Who of those guys had a better chance against Duran? Would Duran beat them all to get to the very top like the great Williams did in the decade? Would he be the best fighter of the decade of the 1940s according to his style? Could he become Welterweight champion also in that decade and in the 1950s? I am talking Duran's very best against that type of opposition.

Marvelous Marvin Hagler: Marvelous in the 70s had a rougher time than all the other 4 Kings of Boxing when he was the #1 challenger and was ducked by the top contenders in the 1970s. Well, how about the 1940s? Would he be ducked like he was ducked in the 70s decade and become another member of the Black Murderer's Row? Look at the competition he would have to face at 160: Charley Burley, Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Eddie Booker, Tony Zale, Jake LaMotta, Rocky Graziano, Cocoa Kid, Jack Chase, Sugar Ray Robinson, Bobo Olson, Randy Turpin, Shorty Hogue, Marcel Cerdan, etc. Let's say that Marvelous was born 1924 instead of 1954 and became pro in 1943. With no ducking, nor fixed fights and all fdir things are in the perfect world. Would Marvelous become the last man standing in that level of competition? Would he become champion, let's say between 1948 and 1951 and defended it 13 times like he did in the 80s decade? Would he become champion with that style and talent that he had? I am talking about Marvelous at his very best.

Thomas Hearns: The Hitman was a freak of nature. At 6'1" and at 154lbs, he was at the very top of his game. The Super Welterweight division wasn't created back then. So, he would have been fighting at Welterweight, then at middleweight and possibly grow to 175lbs.
Would Tommy be considered a dangerous proposition with his height and reach in the 1940s or 50s against that talented era of Welterweights? Would he be able to knocked out the very best of that 1940s and 50s decade?
Let's say that instead of he being born 1958, was born in 1928 and started his career in 1947 at age 19. Would he, with that talent and height and reach would have been victorious against guys like Kid Gavilan, Billy Graham, Johnny Saxton, Gil Turner, Carmen Basilio, Eugene Hairston, Joe Miceli, Tony Janiro, Walter Cartier, Chuck Davey, Jimmy Dykes, Ellsworth "Spider" Webb, and fighting middleweights like Randy Turpin, Sugar Ray Robinson, Bobo Olson, Jake LaMotta, Laurent Dauthielle, Marcel Cerdan and others. With that talent, would he become champion and be the last man standing of that crop of fighters?

Sugar Ray Leonard: Leonard fought 7 or 8 top contenders before getting a crack at the Welterweight title. But, the talent in 1970s decade contenders and challengers were not as good nor talented as the 1940s or 50s decade. There were no Olympic Games in 1946, so, he is not winning a gold medal. He gotta start from scratch like the guys of the time did. That's not a problem, right? He was very talented to at least be undefeated in his first 20 fights. Let's say, that he was born in 1926 instead of 1956. He turns pro in 1947 instead of 1977. No gold medal, no lucrative TV deals, and no fanfare of winning in his first fight $40,000 dollars in his pro debut. This time, the road to the top is not as easy as when he did in the late 70s. Leonard is facing guys like Kid Gavilan, Carmen Basilio, Johnny Bratton, Ike Williams, and some good middleweights like Rocky Graziano, Holman Williams, Spider Webb, Gil Turner, Randy Turpin, Sugar Ray Robinson, George Costner, Billy Graham, and others. With that talent that he had, at his very best, would Sugar Ray become the fighter of the 1950s, like he was in the 80s? What fighter of that era would have given him the most problems. Would he become champion and be the last man standing in that era like Sugar Ray Robinson did?

Your take on these 5 kings in that era.

The huge money fights that the fab 5 were use too, wold not be there.
o they would have to do as the fighters of the 40's and 50's did and fight numerous times of the year and often on very short notice.
Duran had that ability. Hagler did that until he won the title. So those 2 would have the advantage of the other 3.
No Benitez would not of won the title at 17. Not because of his skill level but because he would not of gotten a shot that early.
Leonard and Hearn's skills would of been great match ups for Sugar Ray Robinson and would of had numerous bouts with him. Winning some and losing some.
Hagler would of been Middle champ on at least one occassion and would of dominated the division for the most part.
Leonard and Hearns like I said would of spent their tim with SRR and both winning some so they would of still been hall of fame fighters also.
Benitez in my opinion is the odd man out. He peaked early and was not at his best by 27 years of age. His career would of been even shorter with the schedule he would of had to of maintained.
Duran would of still been the greatest lightweight in any era

tiny_acres wrote: ↑23 Jun 2022, 09:43 The huge money fights that the fab 5 were use too, wold not be there.
o they would have to do as the fighters of the 40's and 50's did and fight numerous times of the year and often on very short notice.
Duran had that ability. Hagler did that until he won the title. So those 2 would have the advantage of the other 3.
No Benitez would not of won the title at 17. Not because of his skill level but because he would not of gotten a shot that early.
Leonard and Hearn's skills would of been great match ups for Sugar Ray Robinson and would of had numerous bouts with him. Winning some and losing some.
Hagler would of been Middle champ on at least one occassion and would of dominated the division for the most part.
Leonard and Hearns like I said would of spent their tim with SRR and both winning some so they would of still been hall of fame fighters also.
Benitez in my opinion is the odd man out. He peaked early and was not at his best by 27 years of age. His career would of been even shorter with the schedule he would of had to of maintained.
Duran would of still been the greatest lightweight in any era

Great analysis, tiny_acres.

When you see Wilfred Benitez record before winning the crown at 17, I asked myself, "Who did he beat to get a title shot?"

The 40s and 50s era would have been much more complicated and difficult for him to get a title shot. The talent was immense and incredible. I am not saying that he would not win some fights against some top contenders, but he really would have to go harder than in the 70s decade to win the title.

As for Marvelous, he probably would have had the same fate as in the 70s decade where nobody in their right mind would fight him. If Jake LaMotta, Charley Burley and Sugar Ray Robinson were ducked, put also Marvelous in the mix. He was a hardworking, hard-hitting switch fighter, with great boxing skills and stamina. A complete fighter than given credit for.

As for The Hitman and Sugar Ray, they would have some success, too

You've created a great thread-I especially like that you added the provision that the five kings would be developed in earlier eras and not merely matched against guys from past eras in a dream fight scenario.

Having said that, it makes for a very complicated question-we are not analyzing the kings as they were but as they would be under a hypothetical development scenario.

Kudos for the thought that you put into this.

They all would have had more fights, as that was how it was back then.
They probably would have fought other great fighters multiple times. Many of these fights would not have been title fights.
They would have had many more big wins. And many more big losses. Duran and Hagler would have had many more crybaby excuses.

There usually was only one champion per weight class in the 1940s and 1950s. There also was not a 140 weight or 168 pound weight class, and no 154 pound class until 1959. As a result, they would not have have been able to win as many titles.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑29 Jun 2022, 10:45 They all would have had more fights, as that was how it was back then.
They probably would have fought other great fighters multiple times. Many of these fights would not have been title fights.
They would have had many more big wins. And many more big losses. Duran and Hagler would have had many more crybaby excuses.

There usually was only one champion per weight class in the 1940s and 1950s. There also was not a 140 weight or 168 pound weight class, and no 154 pound class until 1959. As a result, they would not have have been able to win as many titles.

Why you always gotta diss Marvelous and Duran, man?