Why is Leonard considered greater than Hearns?

[Dan...]

Just to make it clear there is no hate at all intended. Both are two of my favourite fighters.

Just wanting some arguments from you guys on why Leonard should be considered greater than Thomas Hearns.

Cheers.

[ИATAS]

probably because he beat hearns. And hagler.

[RayLeonard82]

Talent wize Hearns is right there but what seperates them is stepping up and winning the big fights. For Hearns his 2 biggest fights were against Ray Leonard in 1981 and Hagler in 1985 and he lost both fights. He also made a poor decision in strategy against Hagler fighting him toe to toe like that.

Leonard won his big fights and when he and Tommy fought the 1st time he ****** it up and finished Hearns off in the 14th round.

Ray has advantages when it comes to things like chin, stamina which is important in a tough long fight.

[them_apples]

he beat both Hearns and Hagler, Hearns lost both times.

[Dan...]

he beat both Hearns and Hagler, Hearns lost both times.

I take this point.

Having said that there is a bit more to it. Hearns clearly defeated Leonard in the rematch, it wasn't even close.

Also, Hearns fought and lost to a mean prime Marvin, whilst Hagler was nowhere near the same fighter when he lost the SD to Ray, in a fight many say Hagler actually won.

[wmute]

Many reasons.

1) Leonard accomplished more (prime for prime)

2) Leonard beat Hearns

3) Leonard was undoubtedly the more complete (and better IMO) fighter.

[RayLeonard82]

I take this point.

Having said that there is a bit more to it. Hearns clearly defeated Leonard in the rematch, it wasn't even close.

Also, Hearns fought and lost to a mean prime Marvin, whilst Hagler was nowhere near the same fighter when he lost the SD to Ray, in a fight many say Hagler actually won.

The rematch against SRL was when both fighters were far past there primes. Especially Leonard who had the 5 year layoff from 1982-1987. I thought Ray looked slow in the Hagler and Donny Lalonde fights compared to when he was at his peak which was 1979-1982 when he was active and fighting on a regular basis.

Also i dont think Hearns won the rematch with ease. Even though he had the 2 knockdowns Ray actually hurt Tommy more in rounds 5 and 12 more than when he knocked Ray down. Fortunate for Tommy Ray put on that extra bulk and couldn't put together his combinations like he used to.

As for Hearns fought a better Hagler. SRL was layed off 5 years so i think everything evens out. Plus Hearns fought a completely different style than Ray did.

[wpink1]

The rematch against SRL was when both fighters were far past there primes. Especially Leonard who had the 5 year layoff from 1982-1987. I thought Ray looked slow in the Hagler and Donny Lalonde fights compared to when he was at his peak which was 1979-1982 when he was active and fighting on a regular basis.

Also i dont think Hearns won the rematch with ease. Even though he had the 2 knockdowns Ray actually hurt Tommy more in rounds 5 and 12 more than when he knocked Ray down. Fortunate for Tommy Ray put on that extra bulk and couldn't put together his combinations like he used to.

As for Hearns fought a better Hagler. SRL was layed off 5 years so i think everything evens out. Plus Hearns fought a completely different style than Ray did.

Exactly my point..... How can any one with any boxing IQ even ask the question about hearns or leoanrd. In their peak Ray stopped hearns..but if you look at the fight, many leave this out..Ray everytime the had a meaningful exchange, HURT Hearns..rounds 6.7 13.then 14. Ray beat hagler, who stopped Hearns. To say Hagler was no where near the fighter is a joke. Based on what. What fight did he lose en route to Leonard. What slippage was there. I am not saying Hagler was at his best. but many simply dont want to accept hagler got beat, for the first time in 10 years.

Hearns simply does not measure up to Leonard on a pound per pound basis.

[Dan...]

Exactly my point..... How can any one with any boxing IQ even ask the question about hearns or leoanrd. In their peak Ray stopped hearns..but if you look at the fight, many leave this out..Ray everytime the had a meaningful exchange, HURT Hearns..rounds 6.7 13.then 14. Ray beat hagler, who stopped Hearns. To say Hagler was no where near the fighter is a joke. Based on what. What fight did he lose en route to Leonard. What slippage was there. I am not saying Hagler was at his best. but many simply dont want to accept hagler got beat, for the first time in 10 years.

Hearns simply does not measure up to Leonard on a pound per pound basis.

Hagler was slipping, it was clear as day. He even made comments to Ray that he was losing the mental focus. The Hagler fight was close also. I had Ray winning it by a point I think but plenty of reputable experts have argued the opposite. Bottom line, Ray fights the Hagler that Hearns fought and he gets beat.

I was not saying that Hearns should be above Leonard on a p4p basis either, I have Leonard above him. I just wanted to hear people's views.

[abadger]

I'm no expert, but from what I have seen, Leonard was a terrifically special boxer. Everyone knows about his speed and skill, but he also was powerful, strong and very tough, deceptively so given his relatively slight frame. Look at the way in his first fight with Duran he stood and fought with him, completely neglecting the slick boxing he was capable of, and nearly succeeded in beating him that way, then in the second fight humiliated Duran with pure boxing. I think he was a smart, mean bastard too, he had to KO Hearns to be sure of winning their first fight, and did so in quite some style.

Hearns was good too, but i don't think he was close to being as technically accomplished as Leonard and certainly wasn't as tough. His weapons were lightning quickness and true KO power, and he could both box and brawl but he wasn't in Leonard's class at either IMO. He also had slightly suspect stamina, especially later in his career and a suspect chin.

All that aside, you could just look at their records. Leonard beat Hearns prime for prime, beat Hagler and beat Duran easily after his initial defeat. Hearns by contrast got stopped by both Leonard and Hagler, and to be fair the Duran he beat and Leonard he beat but got a draw with were both past their best and at weights that were maybe a little too big for them in comparison to Hearns who carried the higher weights excellently.