BoxRec

In their primes, who wins?

Ezzard wrote:In their primes, who wins?

I will go with Hearns, Curry was good but he didnt have that killer instinct.

Interesting match-up. So the Curry that destroyed Milton McCrory takes on the Hearns that destroyed Pipino Cuevas.

Always tough with Matchups involving The Hitman because he was a monster puncher who could be hurt himself. However, at 140lbs Hearns was a monster and a level above the Starlings and McCrorys that Curry made his name off.

Currys tight defence and sharp punching may well give Hearns many a problem, but the young Hearns had the boxing skill and knowhow to deal with that and the power and physical strength to take advantages when he finally finds an opening which over 15 rounds I believe he would.

Hearns wins TKO late?

ShoeShine wrote:

Ezzard wrote:In their primes, who wins?

I will go with Hearns, Curry was good but he didnt have that killer instinct.

Don't know how you can say that if you've ever seen the McCrory KO. The guy was a sitting duck, and Curry stepped in and finished him with a murderous shot that almost took his head off.

I'd give a prime Curry a good chance here - at his peak he was very hard to hit, and probably could have got Tommy in trouble with a counter from either hand. Similar to the first Leonard fight, Hearns might've got on his bike and outboxed Curry for awhile, maybe winning a close fight on points.

While Curry was a very good fighter, I think he lacked the foot speed to be able to beat Hearns, who was taller, faster and punched harder. Determining an outcome by comparing Curry to Leonard doesn't make much sense because of the difference in styles and Leonard's superior hand and foot speed, although the Cobra was probably a harder puncher.

I think the Hitman boxes cautiously and either takes a pretty comfortable UD, or catches Curry moving forward and drops him face down pretty much any time during the fight.

At WW - Hearn's KO's Curry - No doubt in my mind - Hearn's was a class above Curry (at WW) -

A peak Curry, that anialated McCrory, was in my opinion capable of beating any fighter.

Curry was a very very special fighter, who had a very short prime.

Curry (1985) v Hearns (1980)

Curry by KO.

Hearns was/is one of my favourite fighters because he was so exciting. He was always one punch away from losing but so rarely lost due to his amazing offensive skills.

Curry was a superb counter puncher with a water tight defence. he was never the same after Honeyghan mugged him but fir a while he was fast, defensively sound and with KO power in both hands.

I have to say that Hearns' obvious faults sometimes count against him more than they should. He was clearly ahead of Leonard in their first fight. And there aren't many people who can win more rounds than they lose against Ray. I think it's the 5th and 6th when Tommy really takes a beating but he got himself back into the fight and controlled Ray with his jab. He was very close to winning that fight. He was still great at 154 but by 160 his fragility really caught up with him.

Curry would be a very dangerous opponent for Hearns. His ability to counter punch would mean that Tommy was never safe. I think he'd look to weaken Hearns to the body and then take him later in the fight. I imagine that Curry would be halfway to succeeding with his game plan when, without any warning, a left hook to the ribs and then a right to the chin would leave Curry cold

Can't remember the exact words but Curry had an interesting comment about the defences of Kronk fighters being leaky, while talking with Larry Merchant after the McCrory execution. It was a good point.

For Hearns to win this fight he would need to move and not commit much, which would result in, as MightyWarrior says, a close decision.

If he did decide commit to two or three shots at a time - or even threw a lazy jab - Curry would be right in front of him with his foot primed, ready to deliver one of those big bomb counters. (Cobra, indeed 8) )

Curry by KO 4/5 or Hearns 115-113. Good fight.

Manos

I think you've got an interesting take on the fight... Your points tally is for a 12 rounder. Do you think Tommy would eek out the decision over 15?

Ezzard wrote:Manos

I think you've got an interesting take on the fight... Your points tally is for a 12 rounder. Do you think Tommy would eek out the decision over 15?

Good point, Ezzard. Manny Steward has always had a tendency to overtrain his fighters for important fights (seen recently with Harris - Maussa), it was this that cost Tommy in the first Leonard fight and also in the Hagler loss - though here he wasn't so much over-trained as trained badly (if they'd told him to jab the cut instead of fighting he may well have stopped Hagler by about the 6th).

This Hearns - Curry fight would be a good, tense fight for the boxing aficionados, but may be a mostly boring fight (bar the odd moment) for the man in the street. Because of the slow pace (I think) this bout would be fought at, I see Tommy having a little more energy left than he did against Leonard the first time, but I still see it pretty much the same way - Hearns by UD or Curry by KO.

I agree with that assessment; either Curry by KO or Hearns by decision, and a close one. Many, many opponents that Tommy faced said that they would be wary of his early power and right hand, and they'd come out with their own left twisted around their head and the right so awkwardly...well, one way or the next they ate that right hand early any way. I don't believe that Curry was that dumb, and remember that at 147 Hearns had not yet developed the left hook to the body that he had later in his career.

hearns by KO, i dont think curry could deal with hearns power, and honeygan left him a bloddy mess during there fight.

tiredoldngrey wrote:I agree with that assessment; either Curry by KO or Hearns by decision, and a close one. Many, many opponents that Tommy faced said that they would be wary of his early power and right hand, and they'd come out with their own left twisted around their head and the right so awkwardly...well, one way or the next they ate that right hand early any way. I don't believe that Curry was that dumb, and remember that at 147 Hearns had not yet developed the left hook to the body that he had later in his career.

Yep, that's the way I see it. I think it would be similar in a way to the Mark Medal fight, only Curry would be slicker, more accurate than Medal.

It is somewhat foolish for people to be acting like Curry's KO over McCrory is at all telling to how he'd fare Vs Hearns -

McCrory was not even close to Hearns (I'm from Detroit and grew up watching Kronk Fighters) -

Hearn's was head and shoulders above McCrory in every aspect -

I liked Curry quite a bit....but there is no way he beats Hearns at WW (8 out of 10 times Hearn's wins) - Of course in boxing there is always those "lighting strike" occurances ...which is why I say 8 out of 10 -

Curry would have had tremendous problems with Hearn's jab...and Tommy's right hand or left hook would have finished him - No way could Curry handle Hearn's power -

I have to disagree on the following grounds. First, Tommy at welterweight was not all that much unlike McCrory in terms of being gangly, tiring, not handling pressure well, and being vulnerable to counters. That he avoided them was due to opponents being unable to get past his reach or being afraid of the right. I don't think Curry would be in either position. Second, at 147 Tommy was a jab/right hand fighter, and not nearly as good as he became later when he developed a left hook to the body (and still later to the head- saw him score a ko with a hook) Again, his hook left him vulnerable but opponents were so intent on the right hand that they ended up eating the body punches, then the right anyway. Curry was very sound defensively and counterpunched well and with pop. Tommy never met a punch that didn't, upon connecting, lead him on a merry adventure. Hearns's best shot to win would be to not try and ko curry because he opened up carelessly and he'd get hit and then its a matter of time. His play would be to box like he boxed Hill but at 147 he wasn't capable of that.

tiredoldngrey wrote:I have to disagree on the following grounds. First, Tommy at welterweight was not all that much unlike McCrory in terms of being gangly, tiring, not handling pressure well, and being vulnerable to counters. That he avoided them was due to opponents being unable to get past his reach or being afraid of the right. I don't think Curry would be in either position. Second, at 147 Tommy was a jab/right hand fighter, and not nearly as good as he became later when he developed a left hook to the body (and still later to the head- saw him score a ko with a hook) Again, his hook left him vulnerable but opponents were so intent on the right hand that they ended up eating the body punches, then the right anyway. Curry was very sound defensively and counterpunched well and with pop. Tommy never met a punch that didn't, upon connecting, lead him on a merry adventure. Hearns's best shot to win would be to not try and ko curry because he opened up carelessly and he'd get hit and then its a matter of time. His play would be to box like he boxed Hill but at 147 he wasn't capable of that.

Please - Not able to box at 147 - He only clearly out boxed Sugar Ray for 13 rounds!! - And Sugar Ray was a better boxer than Curry ever dreamed of being -

Curry would not stand up to Hearn's power at all at 147 - Tommy's right hand was pound for pound one of the biggest punchers at 147 -

Again, Curry's performance over McCrory means nothing - McCrory was not a great fighter by any means and no where near Hearn's - To suggest McCory was like Hearn's at 147 is ridiculous - The only thing they shared was a "size comparision" slightly - and that McCory at times tried to "mimic" Hearn's low left hand....

Other than that they were not alike at all - Additionally Hearn's took a punch better then you are giving him credit for - He didn't have a great chin by any means....but it wasn't glass either (I've seen about 20 fights of Hearn's live and another 20 via TV) - he has taken good shots (many of times).

Hell he took plenty from Hagler before being taken out -

Curry couldn't out box Hearn's...and he couldn't out bang him - Curry goes out inside of 8 rounds Vs Hearn's -

Currys best chance would be the longer the fight goes on I think he could wear down Hearns with body shots. But I think Hearns would come out blazing at Curry and the rather stationary Curry would be a sitting duck for Hearns bombs... Curry wouldn't be able to deal with Hearns combined speed and power and I think would be out in 2 or 3 rounds.

Hearns KOs Curry easily. Curry wasn't that good. Curry was just all that could be offered at his time, which was medicore.

I've given this some thought and I can see Hearns winning by decision or KO as Curry could be hurt. I think Curry can only really win this one by KO. It is possible.

Hearns outboxed the boxer, Leonard, for 13 rounds the first time, then did it again when they fought the second time, the night the judges were apparently looking at something other than the fight.

I agree with Meade. Curry might win one of three. Maybe one of four. But Hearns had a physical advantage in nearly every important category as it relates to this matchup (much taller, big reach advantage, harder puncher, etc.), plus a great jab and good boxing skills.

If Hearns had Marvin Hagler's chin, would anyone have ever beaten him?

Hearns would have had no problem whatsoever with Curry. Hearns by KO within 5 rounds. They are two totally different levels of ability.

I'd say the Hearns who fought Leonard at welter would have taken out Curry before the 10th round in a good fight. I liked Curry, but I agree with assessment that Hearns was a solid level above the Lone Star Cobra.

Curry hadn't got the chin to beat Tommy. That's why Leonard beat Tommy, coz he had the chin......Tommy wins by early KO

Curry could give Hearns fits if the fight lasted the full distance, but it won't.Hearns kayoes Curry in four.