Home News Current Champs WAIL! Encyclopedia
The Cyber Boxing Zone Message Board
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 61 to 90 of 169

Thread: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

  1. #61
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,783
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    By the way, the comment about "mob informants" was repugnant and personal. It makes what I say about what was told to me seem like cartoon comics. I have told you guys that the guys I talked too were boxing guys, were guys high up in organized businesses and I was trusted in these conversations. Many of these conversations were in the presense of Hatchetman Sheppard a man I respect for his integrity and he NEVER disagreed nor interupted and in fact agreed and added his own imformation. They are in no way intended to be taken as comic, but only to inform. You are free to take it as you might and I have given them as I please, but they are in no way comic or given to me by "goof balls" or "knot heads" as sports fans are referred to by guys in the know. Reality is hardly ever black and white but shades of many colors as mature men know. So lets be mature fellas and keep it manly and friendly and opinion.

  2. #62
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,444
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    Rocky I have a question.

    You have made reference to informants stating that Hearns-Duran was a fix.

    I need clarification on this.

    Did Duran "take a dive" ie: purposely go down and stay down or did he purposely not try and allow himself to be hit flush and get legitimately KO'd?

    Ditto for Louis-Conn II.

  3. #63
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    I'm the one in the middle.
    Posts
    9,487
    vCash
    500

    Of Course Cotto Ko's Hearns

    Because there is so much to base the quality of wins on, that Cotto has had.

    Oh yes and EVERYONE knew DURING the bout, that Ray was going to catch up to stop Hearns.

    It was such a foregone conclusion that the bout lacked any drama and suspense. ANd Why the RIng would call it Fight of the Year? What for?

    And Of course Dundee knew Ray was going to stop Tommy, that's why he blew a gasket between the 12th and 13th rounds.

    Let me quote MYSELF from earlier in this thread:

    "This is more than misguided rationalization.

    This wreaks of a stubborn underlying bias that has thrown all logic out the window.

    Nothing else makes sense here to me."


    And as far as "comic" goes.......IMO this applies to a much broader range than just your "Double Secret Probation Wise Guy, In The Know, Informants" Rocky.

    Much broader.

    Hawk
    Last edited by hawk5ins; 06-12-2007 at 12:31 PM.

  4. #64
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,615
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    Tommy threw the Hagler bout, then, just as easily as Roberto threw the Hearns bout.

    We can do it with Monzon or Hagler. I'm confident that I can have Roy Jones beating Gene Tunney in no time if I sprinkle in some thinking that the bad things that happened were too strange for my taste, and focus on Tunney's wekanesses. To say nothing for how Roy can crush Monzon if we look at what Carlos had problems with and how one thing Roy does well will make him win that bout.. or is thew out saying automatically, before we look at things, Roy was worse than Griffith or whomever Moznon fought.. blandly and out of hand... preventing us from even looking.

    So let's focus on Marvin as I believe Monzon for certain reasons may be more painful to have go down in flames to Jones or, maybe, PBF.

    Rather than focusing on Tommy being not all that due to Roberto tossing the bout, Marvin without the Hearns win stands exactly where? As a guy who could be outhustled, didn't like to be crowded much and couldn't put Duran on queer street let alone stop him.

    so if Tommy KO's Duran, and Marvin KO's Tommy, Tommy tossed the bout I think is a possibility. Rather than working forward from Duran let's work backward from Hagler-Hearns.

    So, Tommy should have killed Marvin. But styles make fights and thus Tommy with no chin got creamed. Ok. Fair enough. But Marvin could be outboxed of course.. and what if the foe had a pretty good chin and had a better than good workrate? Sounds a lot like we are describing Kassim Ouma. Never mind his actual performances... focus on Marvin's weaknesses. Cotto is not like Leonard or Barkley or Marvin... so Ouma doesn't have to be like Leonard or Vito. He just needs to do one thing well that would win him the fight against Marvin..something Marvin was vulnerable against: being outworked and crowded.

    A welter beat Marvin, didn't he? Add in the physical aspect as well: Hamsho in fight one imposed his physical nature on him...and in fight two Mustafa just wasn't quite right or took a dive. Ouma is physical and punches a lot and has a very good chin. Marvin beat up Scypion. So what? No relation there. Look at the Roldan fight...but make Roldan toss more leather...you have Ouma. Ouma lost to Taylor but Taylor is not like Hagler.

    You type enough and anything is possible when X factors are tossed about on one end but not the other.

  5. #65
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,615
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    I respect Rocky's take. I for one think Ray and Tommy would lose to Carmen, but not making that mean they lose to any guy of Carmen's level from 1960 or earlier, btw. Carmen specifically.

    Anyway, my point here is that I am not contesting a take on Hearns so much as I am bewildered by his according to Cotto attributes and credit I think he utterly doesn't deserve as of yet.. what Leonard did is not, to me, easily applied as something Cotto not only could do, but to Rocky WOULD do.

    Hearns has way fewer questionmarks than Cotto does. Perhaps Cotto will show to be awesome as a welter. THEN we can pick him to win. Taking what Hearns did wrong or poorly or whatever and having Cotto do them... a Cotto we have no real idea how good HE is, let alone before we examine who he has done it TO in his real career, by the way.

    that is where I want someone to tell me to look: show me Cotto who is like Ray Leonard, the welter that beat Tommy, against an opponent even in the ball park of Tommy Hearns. Cotto is getting all the benefits of doubt, while what Tommy DID do is being skewed.
    Last edited by Sharkey; 06-12-2007 at 01:30 PM.

  6. #66
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    I'm the one in the middle.
    Posts
    9,487
    vCash
    500

    SHarks

    If one does not think Hearns beats even Cotto, we don't ever NEED to wander into Basilio or Griffith or Napoles territory. Sheesh.

    And I Personally have a very hard time respecting this viewpoint or take.

    I'm quite certain if I ever came out with equivilant nonsense, no one would have a hard time saying: "Hawk you are either biased or an idiot".

    I fail to see why I need to make sure I don't step on toes or hurt anyone's feelings with throw away "respect" comments. I wouldn't certainly mean it if I said it, so I won't waste my time or breath to try to win anyone over with "hearts and flowers" drivel.

    I think that the conclusions reached here as they pertain to Cotto beating Hearns are down right laughable and the only motivation behind it HAS to be a bias. NOTHING else makes sense.

    10-8, I'm sorry I missed your question earlier about Hearns's comment on Ray's power. Yes, he did say that: "On a scale of one to 10, I'd have to rate him a 10. THink about it. He has stopped Roberto Duran, Ayub Kalule, who never had lost, and me. Believe me, he can punch. He knows when he hurts you and he has the killer instinct to finish you off. He follows up well and doesn't let you off the the hook too many times. Wehn Leonard hurts a man, you'd better beleive he'll be in there trying to put him away. That's waht I like about Leonard."

    Hawk

  7. #67
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,615
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    Hey, one can think what one wants of Hearns. I am flabbergasted however how one can view Hearns as vulnerable and Cotto as solid at the same time.

    I recognize his right to his view of Tommy. I could understand it if I could figure out how the same person can have such a high opinion of Cotto, RELATIVE to Tommy to-boot...as a Welter...

    I'd gladly throw away a line to maybe get an explanation I can understand.

  8. #68
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    In the Barrio, In La Puente,Ca.
    Posts
    12,026
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    Imo Hearns is a proven all time great, where as Cotto is not, at this point in Cotto's career I would, as I said before pick Hearns by ko.

  9. #69
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    52
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    After seeing Chop- Chop Corley rock Cotto's World, I would seriously question weather he had a better chin than Hearns. Hearns by highlight reel knockout within 6 rounds.

  10. #70
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Louth, Ireland
    Posts
    5,150
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    Quote Originally Posted by TheMariner
    After seeing Chop- Chop Corley rock Cotto's World, I would seriously question weather he had a better chin than Hearns. Hearns by highlight reel knockout within 6 rounds.
    I agree and I also believe it may be a little futile to even compare their chins.
    Tommy competed at Welter thru to LH and was a natural 10.5-12 stone fighter who took shots from fighters in these classes. Cotto is to me at best a ten stone fighter and would not compete with the real welters of the 80's.
    He is just not naturally hard hitting or big enough. If we were to use p4p chin ratings which I would be reluctant to do, then maybe we could argue a case for Cotto. The main thing is that Cotto would not IMO have taken what Ray took in 1981, and Ray took some heavy shots and was rocked several times. He even said this. Ray had a super chin and was a real strong Welter.
    Cotto is NOT!!!

    I agree with Rocy to a certain extent reagrding Tommy being weak and having a suspect chin, but what I cannot agree with is that Cotto exposes it at Welter. Basilio, Robbie, Leonard, Griffith, Curry, Starling may definitely get to him late, but Cotto does NOT make it to the late stage!!

  11. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    I'm the one in the middle.
    Posts
    9,487
    vCash
    500

    Personally

    I think one can make a solid, yet debatable, argument for Hearns at 147, to beat Basilio, Griffith, Napoles and certainly Curry and Starling (who's jaw Tommy once broke in sparring).

    There is NO rationale arguement for Cotto beating Hearns.

    None.

    Hawk

  12. #72
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Louth, Ireland
    Posts
    5,150
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    Well personally I think Curry and Starling though very talented will lose to a peak Welter Hearns. I suppose I used them as a gauge as to why Cotto wouldn't come close to Tommy. Both Curry and Starling would take Cotto out at Welter too....

  13. #73
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Louth, Ireland
    Posts
    5,150
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    I forgot two more very good welters in Breland and Davis. They had some slugfest when they fought. A notch below Curry and Marlon I think but worthy mentions as why the Welters of yesteryear were just too good for the current crop...

    Oh and Honeygan as well. Man the 80's was so ahead of today

  14. #74
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    I'm the one in the middle.
    Posts
    9,487
    vCash
    500

    Agreed

    I think before we start matching up Cotto with Great Welters, we should discuss how he'd fare with the level just beneath Great.

    Yes. I consider Hearns a GREAT fighter at Welterweight. His best weight, where he performed at his absolute and most consistent best.

    Hawk

  15. #75
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Louth, Ireland
    Posts
    5,150
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    I'm not saying you are wrong Hawk beacuse you are obviously a big fan of Tommy, as am I. But I think you could be in the minority as chooosing Tommy's best era being Welter. I suspect a lot of fans and so called experts look to 154lbs as his peak fighting weight. Not that the minority is wrong, maybe a little less knowledgeable, I'm not too sure. But regardless of what weight he was at his peak, he was a damn fine fighter from 147-160. One of the top 20 ever I would say and streets ahead of Floyd, Oscar, Cotto, Hatton, Judah, Spinks etc etc......

    For the record I believe he looked more comfortable at 154, better I don't know. KO percentage you said was less, that's a strong indicator that 147lbs was his best era...

  16. #76
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,444
    vCash
    500

    Hawk

    Quote Originally Posted by hawk5ins
    10-8, I'm sorry I missed your question earlier about Hearns's comment on Ray's power. Yes, he did say that: "On a scale of one to 10, I'd have to rate him a 10. THink about it. He has stopped Roberto Duran, Ayub Kalule, who never had lost, and me. Believe me, he can punch. He knows when he hurts you and he has the killer instinct to finish you off. He follows up well and doesn't let you off the the hook too many times. Wehn Leonard hurts a man, you'd better beleive he'll be in there trying to put him away. That's waht I like about Leonard."
    Thanks for taking the time to reprint that.

    I knew my 25 year memory wouldn't fail me. For whatever reason I remember the particulars of that interview quite clearly as well as the cover of that issue which featured a shirtless, smiling Tommy sporting an impressive looking wrist watch.

    The scary thing is, I don't know if my wife wears a watch, remember nothing of our conversation this morning on her way to work although I'm pretty sure she was wearing a shirt and likely wasn't smiling.

  17. #77
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    I'm the one in the middle.
    Posts
    9,487
    vCash
    500

    10-8

    For the love of Pete, 10-8. I never noticed the watch until you NOW just mentioned it.

    The crease right in the middle of the cover I notice. THe fact that the cover is about 2 or 3 readings away from falling off I notice, but never paid attention to the watch.

    Walsh,

    As for me being in the minority about where I beleive Hearns Best weight was......When ever you read a bio of Hearns or read what weight he is most closely associated with, it's Welterweight.

    I think there is a reason for that.

    And please don't ever make the assumption that simply becuase Hearns is one of my favorite fighters, that he gets a pass on anything here with me. I think I am indeed being critical where criticism is justified with Hearns.

    If I were one to go out of my way to make exscuses for Hearns and cut him breaks, would it not make sense for ME to jump on the "over training, understrengthed" comments that others seem to afford Hearns in his bout with SRL?

    He got beat by Leonard becuase he was HURT by Ray and stopped, not becuase he "beat himself" or wasn't "strong enough" or "hit some wall". I also don't think Hearns was out in front of Leonard by a country mile when the bout was stopped either.

    Among the Big Four, I rate Hearns 4th. Yet Tommy is easily my favorite among the group.

    It seems many here think that I Allow my being a fan of Larry Holmes dictate my perception of him. Yet so many respected writers and boxing insiders have stated how they thought Holmes beat Micheal Spinks in thier first bout. "Holmes was Robbed". I have never stated that I thought Holmes won that fight. I thought he lost by at least 4 points.

    I despise Mike Tyson, yet there he sits among My personal Top 10 Heavies of all time.

    Likes and dislikes will NEVER cloud my judgement of a fighter. I do NOT allow biases to dictate how I rate a fighter or in judging what fighter beats who in a fantasy matchup.

    That may be some folks cup of tea. But it certainly is not mine.

    Hawk

  18. #78
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Louth, Ireland
    Posts
    5,150
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    Hawk, you are right, however I never implied you being biased towards Hearns. I just think that more people may see 154 being his best weight.
    They may overlook his achievements at 147 and I like yourself rate Ray above him and also believe Ray would beat Tommy at peak. I would go as far as saying that if Ray and Tommy had a 3 rd fight in 1981, Ray would find a way to win, even a 1 rd fight he would do it because Ray was that little bit more special and gifted. I would say you are being completely honest in your assessments of Tommy as a fighter and IF that's the minority view, so be it. It's your opinion and belief, and really it's a tough call to say what was Tommy's best weight. I think the fact that Hearns was so tall and skinny as a Welter, it deceives people into believing that he may have been really struggling. It's only to be expected really. I was one who believed this and it looks like I was off the mark.

    As for Tyson, I too dislike the chap but cannot get away from the fact that from 86-88 he could have beat any man in history. He was that good. But the flip side is that he also could lose to any decent heavy in history. He lacked that mental strength and character of the true legends.

    Holmes??...I don't like the guy, his arrogance and his nasty remark concerning Rocky. He got what he deserved in losing the title to a LH.
    I also believe he should NOT have taken the Ali fight, no matter what
    pressure he was under. He beat up on a desperate man, for what?
    He says that it killed him to punish Ali. I say bullshit Larry. Why do it if it's
    'killing' you?

  19. #79
    Roberto Aqui
    Guest

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    Quote Originally Posted by kikibalt
    Imo Hearns is a proven all time great, where as Cotto is not, at this point in Cotto's career I would, as I said before pick Hearns by ko.
    Agreed.

    Cotto has impressed me overall and has all the tools to beat a Hearns, but Hearns did it at a higher level which Cotto has yet to prove. Cotto has been rocked before, which ain't a good thing to put on your resume to fight a Hearns.

  20. #80
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    I'm the one in the middle.
    Posts
    9,487
    vCash
    500

    Cause if he didn't

    He'd get ridiculed by the public for not Fighting Ali.

    Unfortunately, Holmes listened to the critics far more than he should have.

    Those who NOW say It's a shame Ali fought Holmes, would have been lining up to bash Larry had he turned down the bout.

    Ali in many circles was still regarded as the champ even though he had retired. Becuase he didn't lose the belt in the ring, the only way for Holmes to WIN the title was to beat Ali.

    This may seem silly now, but at the time, that's the way it was.

    Holmes lost to Spinks. Father time gave Micheal a hand.

    Holmes comments about Marciano not being able to carry his jock were made out of frustration and seeing Rocky's brother at the press conference. The same brother who told the NY POST that his family was lighting candles to pray Holmes wouldn't tie or break Rocky's 49-0 mark. Talk about classy.

    Holmes was out of line for the comment and it was ill timed. But I always found it funny that when Holmes used that same line agianst Dokes, Cooney and Witherspoon, they were percieved as funny and NO ONE thought there was any racist intent behind them. Said about Marciano and all of a sudden there are "hidden" meanings to the phrase.

    But this is all besides the point.

    If you don't like Holmes for any of the above reasons, it is NOT reason enough to discredit him as a fighter. I feel FAR too many allow their PERSONAL feelings cloud their evaluations.

    We obviously have seen that in this very thread.

    Hawk

  21. #81
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Louth, Ireland
    Posts
    5,150
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    I brought the issue of Larry and Ali up before and it was a similar stance to yours. And yes no matter what he did, he gets criticised but I still feel had he said flat out "NO I will not be part of a fight against a 'has been' that could result in someones death or serious injury", today Larry would be respected so much more. As fighters go he was a great great champ, top 5. But he was an arrogant sod who really disliked all the credit Ali got. A jealous man. I watched the Champions forever DVD and his bitterness and arrogance really showed. As a fighter he was one of the best, as a personality he was NOT a likeable man IMO....

  22. #82
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    I'm the one in the middle.
    Posts
    9,487
    vCash
    500

    Whatever

    THis is not a Larry Holmes Thread.

    What one thinks about him personally, should have no bearing on him as a fighter.

    And getting BACK to the subject at Hand, I feel this is being done with Hearns. No other reason why anyone thinks Miguel Cotto would beat him.

    Hawk

  23. #83
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Louth, Ireland
    Posts
    5,150
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    Like I said, Larry is top 5....I too don't let personal views cloud my judgement.......... We will Leave Holmes for another thread.......

  24. #84
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,444
    vCash
    500

    Re: Cause if he didn't

    Quote Originally Posted by hawk5ins
    But I always found it funny that when Holmes used that same line agianst Dokes, Cooney and Witherspoon, they were percieved as funny and NO ONE thought there was any racist intent behind them. Said about Marciano and all of a sudden there are "hidden" meanings to the phrase.
    The racist overtones were made in reference to a computer fight between Marciano and Holmes that I believe had Marciano winning. Holmes addressed this in the press conference following the first loss to Spinks.

    "IF YOU REALLY WANT TO GET TECHNO ABOUT THE WHOLE THING, ROCKY COULDN'T CARRY MY JOCKSTRAP...PEOPLE WANT A WHITE HOPE. THERE WOULD NEVER BE A WHITE CHAMPION AS LONG AS BLACK FIGHTERS FIGHTING THE WAY THEY ARE...PETER (MARCIANO) IF I HURT YOUR FEELINGS BACK THERE SO (pause) FUCKING (pause) WHAT..."


    http://youtube.com/watch?v=32495vIK7l4

  25. #85
    MANAGING EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    In an undisclosed bunker deep in the weird, wild, woods of the Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    11,450
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    This thread has really gotten ridiculous. If anyone really believes that Cotto could beat Hearns then they really know squa-doosh about boxing.

    It's fine to be a fan of a fighter but one should be realistic also. I love Rafael Marquez as a fighter. That doesn't mean I believe he would beat a Becerra, Jofre or Olivares. That would make me as astute as the people who believe Cotto would beat Hearns..

    GorDoom

  26. #86
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,783
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    Im laughing as I read all of this. Hey its all opinion. Cotto shows me a tuff kid and hes a hell of a body puncher. Hes in shape. Hes got strong legs. He can shake off a shot. Does anybody disagree? Tommy Hearns a all time great? Well then so is Tippy Larkin and Vlad Klitchko. Marvelous offensive skills, but shaky in the chin, and stamina dept. Tommy had good skills, but everyone close to boxing in Detroit knew he had weak legs and against a stalking banger might not survive and get nailed. They also knew he had a weak chin. I KNEW IT AND WAITED FOR SUGAR RAY (surely not the best welter I have ever seen) to nail him and once he did he stalked him and found him and ended it. I KNEW IT WAS GOING TO HAPPEN once Tommys opening assault failed to take out the world class Ray Leonard chin JUST AS HIS OPENING ASSAULT FAILED TO TAKE OUT Marvin Haglers world class chin and the same with Iran Barkley. You nail him and he cant shake off the shot cause he was never blessed with that kind of strength. Yes he can take you out, but lots of guys dont get taken out (Basilio against Robinson, Ali against everyone, Marciano, etc etc) That is greatness. I saw every fight Tommy had as a welter and I knew not only would he beat Cuevas (a poor boxer and not a complete one) yet if Cuevas hit him he also might have won that bout. I also knew that the day would come when a world class welter would nail him. YOu can only put 147 on his frame a certain way when so much was up top. He lacked certain body strength etc etc. He just wasnt blessed with it. He could be beat.
    Cotto in my mind can go after him if he doesnt get taken out early and take him down. MY OPINION.
    Yes Tommy koed Roberto Duran ex lightweight and welter champ. Yes I was told he fixed the fight both by Americans, Mexicans, and Columbians in the know. Yes I believe it, cause Duran never behaved that way in a bout nor was he ever so easy to hit with a right hand.
    Yes I was told Billy Conn threw the second Louis bout. He was through after the war and wanted the money and Louis was in on it also. This came out of Billy Conn's running buddies and guys he made lots of money with most of it illegal. They have no reason to lie as they thought the world of Billy Conn.
    I believe it. Billy looked terrible and had no chance to ever win that bout.
    Its all about money I guess.
    You guys can say I know nothing about boxing and I probably dont. But you cant give a guy a chin if he dont have one and you cant give him legs and a body that can take big punishment and shake it off. Tommy went the distance at 147 with Alfonso Hayman and had hell with Harold Weston and got koed by Ray Leonard. He could be beaten. 147 is 147 and a champ today can beat a champ of yesterday. Cotto is a fine fighter. Hes beaten alll kinds of guys and alll kinds of styles. Maybe if guys cant see that they might not know as much as they think. If he fights Margarito or Mayweather and wins-then what?

  27. #87
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    1,783
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    By the way. Anybody can say anything they want. Its a free world and nation. BUT some guys can keep it sportsmanlike and non personal and non offensive and its called "class". Rocky Marciano had it. Larry Holmes never did. We all have a mouth but maturity teaches one how to use it and maintain manhood and class.

  28. #88
    MANAGING EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    In an undisclosed bunker deep in the weird, wild, woods of the Pacific Northwest
    Posts
    11,450
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    Rock:

    I want to apologise. The last guy i would want to insult is you. But while I may have gone overboard in the way I put it, the bottom line for me is that Tommy's size, boxing skills, drop dead power in both hands & the killer he was at welter make him superior.

    Cotto ain't perfect. I've seen him rocked more than once by fighters nowhere as powerful as Tommy. Cotto, Judah & Margarito who are probably the best today at welter in no way qualify as great.

    Floyd however, is a great fighter. But at 5'7 without a lot of power how does he beat Tommy? Classic casse of a great little dog going against a more powerful, great, BIG dog.

    Remember, Tommy's hand speed was as good as Floyd's at welter. & the size leverage & power seem just too much for Floyd. Floyd to me is a smaller Sugar Ray Leonard without the power or killer instinct.

    GorDoom

  29. #89
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Louth, Ireland
    Posts
    5,150
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    Quote Originally Posted by rocky111
    By the way. Anybody can say anything they want. Its a free world and nation. BUT some guys can keep it sportsmanlike and non personal and non offensive and its called "class". Rocky Marciano had it. Larry Holmes never did. We all have a mouth but maturity teaches one how to use it and maintain manhood and class.
    You said it right Rocky. There are far too many on here who are just plain arrogant and bullying on their views. I don't believe Cotto beats Hearns because of what a lot of things and a lot of posters do NOT believe it either.
    You have made some very good comments regarding Tommy and his strengths and weaknesses and I believe frimly that certain fighters will always beat him because of what you said. I just think Cotto is NOT one of them. If he was more a natural welter like Curry, Leonard etc, then YES he definitely has a chance

  30. #90
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Louth, Ireland
    Posts
    5,150
    vCash
    500

    Re: How Would Today's Welterweights Do Against Tommy Hearns

    Just listened to Larry on the clip...what an absolute asshole. No wonder nobody really liked the guy. He's a jealous bitter sad twat!!!!

    And he actualy says these things after losing to a light heavyweight...that shows how stupid he is too!!!!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
News Current Champs WAIL! Encyclopedia Links Home