BoxRec

At Middleweight who wins?

At Middleweight I would certainly give Benn a chance but if Hearns boxed a smart fight unlike he did against Hagler then I think Hearns could probably win.

benn didnt have a great chin... hearns big tall and rangy... sounds like a quick night for the hitman.

benns not gona walk through shots like marvin hagler and iran barkley belieeeeeeeeve me.

.

.

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.

Tommy would kill him, he had the nastyest right hand and ben simply would not be able to get inside hearns long reach and overcome his power.

Nigel freaking Benn?

Are you serious...?

Hearns would KILL him.

Benn would leave the ring the same way Mcllelan did.

David Mills wrote:
Benn would leave the ring the same way Mcllelan did.

very bad taste mate. how old are you?

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

Hey Overhand,

I'm in my upper 20's, I didn't mean it in tasteless way or anything. I think Mcllelan was an amazing fighter who got cheapshotted by Benn all night and then screwed by a ref who let Benn get away with it.

I was just trying to make my point that comparing Hearns with Benn is a joke.

mcclellen was definately cheap shotted several times, but he was a time bomb. by many accounts he was damaged goods before the benn fight.

What do you mean he was "damaged goods"? Give me a little background on that theory. If I remember correctly, Gerald had pretty much destroyed everybody he fought up to that point.

julian jackson put lasting damage on him in their 1st fight in 1993.

I remember that fight..........there second one was better....

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.

Hearns was past his prime and Barkley was in his prime........In his prime Thomas would KO Barkley just like my boy Toney did.

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.