Oscar De La Hoya vs Thomas 'Hitman' Hearns at 147lbs

tryingmybestt

'The Golden Boy' v 'The Hitman' at welterweight....

IMO a great match.....hearns with the power and reach....oscar with the boxing skills and great chin.....

below is my initial analysis:

Power: advantage hearns
Speed: slight advantage oscar
strength: about equal
Defence: advantage oscar
Boxing ability: advantage oscar
Footwork: about equal, both not great
Chin: advantage oscar
Versatility: advantage oscar
Size and reach: advantage hearns
Jab: equal
Right hand: advantage hearns, big advantage
Left hook: advantage oscar
Stamina: slight advantage hearns
Heart: slight advantage oscar

Who'd win????????????

walshb

No matter what the statistics, even if Oscar edges some of them, Hearns to me was a more natural WW. Oscar won't put enough hurt on Hearns to stop him, and no way does Oscar outbox Hearns. Oscar has decent pop, but not as good a hitter as a WW SRL, and that is what is needed to beat Hearns.

Hearns hits harder than Oscar. At WW his power is at least as good as Tito, and he is far the better boxer. Oscar won't look near as good in with Hearns as he did vs. Tito.

Oscar is simply outboxed for the night. He may see the final bell, but badly beaten. If Oscar was physically stronger than Hearns, and had heavier hands, then he has a chance. He doesn't have heavy enough hands, nor is he physically stronger.

Ike Quartey is no Hearns in most areas, and he gave Oscar a very close scrap. Oscar stays at bay and tries to out-box Hearns, he loses all night. He forces it, and he risks getting a bad beating, or knocked out. This is Tommy Hearns landing.

It took a heculean effort from a peak SRL to halt Hearns, and SRL is a different class to a WW Oscar.

tryingmybestt

oscar had very good power at WW, especially in the left hook....he had one of the best left hooks to the body in history.....he had one of the best jabs in history....

oscar's power was enough for mayorga and vargas at 154lbs !!....he could definitely bang at 147!...what did the hbo commentary say about oscar during the mosley fight....'his left hook to body is the most dominant weapon in the current WW division'...

i would say oscar's power was at least equal to leonard at WW.....his left to the body and left uppercut were top notch....leonards right was better....

i don't see hearns outboxing oscar.....oscar was smart with a great boxing brain.....oscars chin was one of the best ever......he had one of the best hearts e.g. vargas, quartey etc.

i see this as a close one.....

hearns wasn't a very strong fighter....he had savage power but his body strength wasn't great, especially his weak legs....at WW i would say oscar would be at least as strong if not slightly more.....hearns was much the harder hitter though

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

oscar had very good power at WW, especially in the left hook....he had one of the best left hooks to the body in history.....he had one of the best jabs in history....

oscar's power was enough for mayorga and vargas at 154lbs !!....he could definitely bang at 147!...what did the hbo commentary say about oscar during the mosley fight....'his left hook to body is the most dominant weapon in the current WW division'...

i would say oscar's power was at least equal to leonard at WW.....his left to the body and left uppercut were top notch....leonards right was better....

i don't see hearns outboxing oscar.....oscar was smart with a great boxing brain.....oscars chin was one of the best ever......he had one of the best hearts e.g. vargas, quartey etc.

i see this as a close one.....

If Shane Mosley at WW, and Tito Trinidad at WW can beat Oscar, then Hearns will, and will quite comfortably.

As for Oscar and SRL as regards hitters at WW. Not sure who hit harder, but SRL was all around a more complete hitter, and a better boxer, and he was behind vs. Tommy on all cards for 14 rds. No way is Oscar doing that well.

Sorry, Oscar is in big trouble in this one.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

If Shane Mosley at WW, and Tito Trinidad at WW can beat Oscar, then Hearns will, and will quite comfortably.

As for Oscar and SRL as regards hitters at WW. Not sure who hit harder, but SRL was all around a more complete hitter, and a better boxer, and he was behind vs. Tommy on all cards for 14 rds. No way is Oscar doing that well.

Sorry, Oscar is in big trouble in this one.

that old argument that because A beat B and B lost to C then A must beat C is bogus......it's the most used argument usually by ppl who don't know much

oscar beat tito for 8 rounds and should of won.....oscar v mosley was very close and oscar should have gotten the second one

styles make fights.....foreman lost to ali yet he destroyed frazier and frazier beat ali........this shows that argument is useless

styles make fights

tryingmybestt

i'm still undecided...need to think about this one more...

walshb

To me this has zero to do with, A-B-C. Styles do make fights. And, Hearns is a horrible style for Oscar.

It also has to do with Hearns being a better boxer, bigger, heavier hitting and simply too good for WW Oscar.

As for Oscar-Tito. Oscar pissed me off in that. Boxed very well, and then runs for 10, 11 and 12? What champion does that in the biggest fight of their lives? Yotu know, if Oscar had tried more he could really have done a number on Tito, who IMO is overrated.

No matter what Oscar does here I see him being beaten.

Again, fantasy, speculation, but from all the matches you have posted, this one to me is more clear cut.

tryingmybestt

the more i think about it the more i think it's a close fight.....hearns has the ability to end it quickly but oscar has one of the best chins ever.....

oscar is smart enough not to fight in hearns range....he would move and circle away or slip inside hearns jab and land hard left hooks and left uppercuts and then circle again....

oscar was the 'Golden Boy' but he was a brave tough tough man and one of the most determined fighters in history IMO

I could see both winning

cowzerp

I'd pick Hearns over Oscar-I think he wins the fight at long range, would be interesting.

As seen as Mosley was mentioned i think Mosley beats Hearns and has all the tools to do it.

2 great fantasy fights either way

tryingmybestt

definitely interesting and definitely clear cut

i think your right that if hearns can keep it at long range he wins but if oscar can slip inside hearns jab and work inside i could see oscar wearing him down with body shots and hearns could definitely be hurt and oscar definitely had the power to do it.....oscar was nearly as tall as hearns and oscars had a long reach, not near hearns but wasnt bad.....inside oscar was much better..

i agree that mosley and hearns would be a good scrap too....think hearns would win though because mosley had most trouble with rangey fighters with good jabs e.g. forrest and winkey

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

i agree that mosley and hearns would be a good scrap too....think hearns would win though because mosley had most trouble with rangey fighters with good jabs e.g. forrest and winkey

Yes, to me Mosley would have less chance vs. Hearns. He is a little smaller in reach and height compared to Oscar. Hearns I feel has a field day with Mosley. Forrest was very good, but not as good or as heavy hitting as Hearns, and Forrest was too good for Shane. Almost knocked him out. Hearns would dwarf Shane. Have him at the end of his jab, and would be ramming home power right hands.

Daroxtar

tryingmybestt wrote: »

definitely interesting and definitely clear cut

i think your right that if hearns can keep it at long range he wins but if oscar can slip inside hearns jab and work inside i could see oscar wearing him down with body shots and hearns could definitely be hurt and oscar definitely had the power to do it.....oscar was nearly as tall as hearns and oscars had a long reach, not near hearns but wasnt bad.....inside oscar was much better..

i agree that mosley and hearns would be a good scrap too....think hearns would win though because mosley had most trouble with rangey fighters with good jabs e.g. forrest and winkey

While i agree with some of what you say I just have to point out that oscar was nowhere near as tall as Hearns. 5'10" to 6'1". I dont think oscar is physically strong enough to be able to impose himself on Tommy but he did have the skill to work through that and get inside. If hearns keeps it at a distance he wins, possibly by stoppage. If Oscar gets inside he wins. Good match up though.

walshb

Daroxtar wrote: »

. If Oscar gets inside he wins. Good match up though.

How so? Is Tommy unable to fight on the inside, against Oscar? I see Hearns keeping this at bay, and if somehow Oscar wants to bully, I still see Hearns being more than capable of standing up to it, and what happens when Oscar's body is then in range for Hearns' hooks?

All we can do is look at both men and how they performed at WW. I saw Oscar flop vs. Tito, when he should have won. Tito is nothing great for me. Quartey gave Oscar a great scrap, nothing great for me. One can add in wins over blown up LWs Chavez and Pea, who were past their best days. Camacho? Well, past it and nothing above LW.

Hearns looked far better at WW. At least in the bouts I have seen.

Hearns would have brutalized any Of Oscar's foes at WW. Tito and Mosley and Quartey would pose some issues, but Hearns is a league above all at WW.

As for height. Tommy probably has two to three inches. We look at Hearns' chin and are quick to criticise it. But, look at what happened. SRL took 14 rds to stop Tommy. Hagler was a MW, and he wore him down and took him out. Brakley landed a monster shot to do the trick. The only real relevant chin issue for this match is WW SRL stopping Tommy, after 14 rds, and many good shots landed. Oscar to me just cannot put this beating on, and if he tries, he will eat so much and either be knoked out or saved. Oscar does not have the combination of pace and stamina and punching of a peak SRL.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

How so? Is Tommy unable to fight on the inside, against Oscar? I see Hearns keeping this at bay, and if somehow Oscar wants to bully, I still see Hearns being more than capable of standing up to it, and what happens when Oscar's body is then in range for Hearns' hooks?

All we can do is look at both men and how they performed at WW. I saw Oscar flop vs. Tito, when he should have won. Tito is nothing great for me. Quartey gave Oscar a great scrap, nothing great for me. One can add in wins over blown up LWs Chavez and Pea, who were past their best days. Camacho? Well, past it and nothing above LW.

Hearns looked far better at WW. At least in the bouts I have seen.

Hearns would have brutalized any Of Oscar's foes at WW. Tito and Mosley and Quartey would pose some issues, but Hearns is a league above all at WW.

As for height. Tommy probably has two to three inches. We look at Hearns' chin and are quick to criticise it. But, look at what happened. SRL took 14 rds to stop Tommy. Hagler was a MW, and he wore him down and took him out. Brakley landed a monster shot to do the trick. The only real relevant chin issue for this match is WW SRL stopping Tommy, after 14 rds, and many good shots landed. Oscar to me just cannot put this beating on, and if he tries, he will eat so much and either be knoked out or saved. Oscar does not have the combination of pace and stamina and punching of a peak SRL.

hearns can fight on the inside but oscar is much better...hearns arms are too long, he is not great on the inside...this is why if oscar can get to the inside he sould win

how hearns would do against oscar's foes at WW is not relevant IMO....the proposed match is against hearns and oscar.....hearns didnt always look great

IMO sugar ray fought the wrong fight...he tried to box hearns....he should have jumped on hearns from the start rather than boxing as hearns is too rangey and fast for sugar to box with him.....inside leonard dominated hearns....

hearns could be hurt to the body and oscars best punch was a left hook to the body....i'd give oscar a chance...nearly 50/50 IMO

also oscar fought the better opposition at WW consistently that is......i don't think hearns blast ppl like tito, vargas, quartey etc. so easy as you think...all tough fights

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

hearns can fight on the inside but oscar is much better...hearns arms are too long, he is not great on the inside...this is why if oscar can get to the inside he sould win

how hearns would do against oscar's foes at WW is not relevant IMO....the proposed match is against hearns and oscar.....hearns didnt always look great

IMO sugar ray fought the wrong fight...he tried to box hearns....he should have jumped on hearns from the start rather than boxing as hearns is too rangey and fast for sugar to box with him.....inside leonard dominated hearns....

hearns could be hurt to the body and oscars best punch was a left hook to the body....i'd give oscar a chance...nearly 50/50 IMO

also oscar fought the better opposition at WW consistently that is......i don't think hearns blast ppl like tito, vargas, quartey etc. so easy as you think...all tough fights

Well, if we are being strict on what is and is not relevant, then what has Vargas got to do with anything? That was at JMW. And, it's Fernando Vargas!!!

Leonard IMO fought the best fight he could, against the style in front of him. The guy became the hunter from rd 5 onwards, and still it was the end of 13 before he finally got to Hearns, whilst being behind on all cards. Really, I cannot see how Oscar can impose that on Hearns to beat him. He is just not strong enough or hard hitting enough at WW.

He will need to do something intense to get to Hearns. I think any half knowledgeable fan would agree that from the outside Oscar loses all night. I know you agree on this. So, yes, he has to rough Hearns up, get inside and make this a fight, not a boxing match. Now, to me he hasn't the stamina, power or roughness to do it.

Hearns IMO always looked good/great enough to beat Oscar. Like I said, heavier handed Oscar, with better stamina, and a little more naturally a WW, then this is close. Oscar at 135-140 is great, at WW and above I rate him good/very good.

As always, enjoying the debate.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Well, if we are being strict on what is and is not relevant, then what has Vargas got to do with anything? That was at JMW. And, it's Fernando Vargas!!!

Leonard IMO fought the best fight he could, against the style in front of him. The guy became the hunter from rd 5 onwards, and still it was the end of 13 before he finally got to Hearns, whilst being behind on all cards. Really, I cannot see how Oscar can impose that on Hearns to beat him. He is just not strong enough or hard hitting enough at WW.

He will need to do something intense to get to Hearns. I think any half knowledgeable fan would agree that from the outside Oscar loses all night. I know you agree on this. So, yes, he has to rough Hearns up, get inside and make this a fight, not a boxing match. Now, to me he hasn't the stamina, power or roughness to do it.

Hearns IMO always looked good/great enough to beat Oscar. Like I said, heavier handed Oscar, with better stamina, and a little more naturally a WW, then this is close. Oscar at 135-140 is great, at WW and above I rate him good/very good.

As always, enjoying the debate.

Vargas was relevant when making the point that oscar could hit hard....i.e. he knocked vargas out at 154lbs....vargas was a strong beast...

oscar had serious ko power in his left at WW...IMO he definitely had the power to hurt and ko hearns...

oscar was also strong...look how he stood up to strong guys like vargas and quartey etc.....he was very strong at WW

yes hearns wins at long range purely because he can hit you and you can't hit him...physics

if oscar can slip inside and weaked him to the body oscar could slow him down and win...

IMO oscar having the enough power is not the question as he undoubtedly does.....it's whether oscar can get close without taking too much punishment on the way in.....that's the big question

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

Vargas was relevant when making the point that oscar could hit hard....i.e. he knocked vargas out at 154lbs....vargas was a strong beast...

oscar had serious ko power in his left at WW...IMO he definitely had the power to hurt and ko hearns...

oscar was also strong...look how he stood up to strong guys like vargas and quartey etc.....he was very strong at WW

yes hearns wins at long range purely because he can hit you and you can't hit him...physics

if oscar can slip inside and weaked him to the body oscar could slow him down and win...

IMO oscar having the enough power is not the question as he undoubtedly does.....it's whether oscar can get close without taking too much punishment on the way in.....that's the big question

Ok, but you bringing in Vargas at 154 and Oscar showing power to knock him out at 154, then I assume you have no issue with me bringing in Tommy's power at WW and above? Your thread, your call.

I have no problem debating this strictly at WW? If so, then no, I have seen nothing from Oscar at WW to impress me to the point where I think he can possibly beat Hearns. I would give him 1 from ten victories.

And, seeing as you brought in Vargas, again, to me he was never great, nor approahing great. It's nothing special to beat him.

Also, who at WW did Oscar knock out? This WW power you speak of, I don't think it's near good enough to KO Hearns. I mean, Pea, Camacho, Tito, Mosley all must have at some stage felt the power, and what happened? Twice he lost, and twice he won on points. No, Hearns has little to fear here as regards Oscar's WW power.

And, Pea and Mosley and Camaho may have had better chins p4p than Hearns, but all three were not near as natural WWs as Hearns. So, that argument holds little conviction, if one were to use it.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Ok, but you bringing in Vargas at 154 and Oscar showing power to knock him out at 154, then I assume you have no issue with me bringing in Tommy's power at WW and above? Your thread, your call.

I have no problem debating this strictly at WW? If so, then no, I have seen nothing from Oscar at WW to impress me to the point where I think he can possibly beat Hearns. I would give him 1 from ten victories.

And, seeing as you brought in Vargas, again, to me he was never great, nor approahing great. It's nothing special to beat him.

yes the thread is at WW....i mentioned 154lbs to make a point about oscar's power at 147lbs....my point was that if oscar had good ko power against strong guys at 154lbs then he had good power at 147lbs.....do you not get that point?

vargas was a strong bull and it took power to hurt him...oscar had that power

oscar had great speed, chin, power, toughness and boxing skills

i'd definitely give him a good chance

my point earlier about being relevant was that you were saying hearns would beat quartey, tito etc......unless i'm missing something i don't see the relevance of this in relation to this thread. am i missing something there?

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

yes the thread is at WW....i mentioned 154lbs to make a point about oscar's power at 147lbs....my point was that if oscar had good ko power against strong guys at 154lbs then he had good power at 147lbs.....do you not get that point?

I debated in in my post above. At WW I did not see any power that I would consider real dangerous for Hearns. Didn't see it.

At 154 he knocked out Vargas. Again, I see nothing special here.

And, as you brought up a 154 lb Oscar, as a side note just to be clear, Hearns @ 154 IMO knocks out a 154 lbs Oscar.

tryingmybestt

hearns wasn't a great WW...who did he beat to win the title ...Jose Cuevas...exactly who is he

then he defended 3 times against Primera, Shields and Baez....again who are they

then he was ko'd against leonard and then he moved up in weight

oscar had 8 title wins at WW against much better opposition such as Quartey, Tito, Pea etc.

Oscar definitely has a chance to beat hearns...not a favoutite but i'd say 4/10 times

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

hearns wasn't a great WW...who did he beat to win the title ...Jose Cuevas...exactly who is he

then he defended 3 times against Primera, Shields and Baez....again who are they

then he was ko'd against leonard and then he moved up in weight

oscar had 8 title wins at WW against much better opposition such as Quartey, Tito, Pea etc.

Oscar definitely has a chance to beat hearns...not a favoutite but i'd say 4/10 times

We sure can debate this and speak about it all night. Usually I watch them at 147, both, and from what I saw in the ring, Hearns should dominate. Bigger, as fast, heavier hitting, every bit as good a boxer, and strong enough to withstand anything Oscar brings.

If it's peak night vs. peak night, at 147 bs, then I will take Hearns from Cuevas, or Leonard, and to me that is a league or two above Oscar's best night.

Yes, he lost to Leonard, but for 14 rds he was ahead on all cards against one of the best fighters in history, and a WW that is IMO clearly better than any 147 lb verison of Oscar.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

If it's peak night vs. peak night, at 147 bs, then I will take Hearns from Cuevas, or Leonard, and to me that is a league or two above Oscar's best night.
.

I don't understand how you can pick a peak hearns over a peak leonard at 147lbs when they did fight at 147lbs, both in their peak, and leonard ko'd hearns????

to me surely leonard proved he's the better man at that weight and in their peak

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Yes, he lost to Leonard, but for 14 rds he was ahead on all cards against one of the best fighters in history, and a WW that is IMO clearly better than any 147 lb verison of Oscar.

you think hearns getting ko'd by leonard shows that hearns would beat de la hoya

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

I don't understand how you can pick a peak hearns over a peak leonard at 147lbs when they did fight at 147lbs, both in their peak, and leonard ko'd hearns????

to me surely leonard proved he's the better man at that weight and in their peak

What? Think our wires are crossed.

I said I would use that Hearns and pit him against the best Oscar. Yes, Hearns was stopped. I said this.

Just in case our wires are crossed. SRL @ 147 lbs proved to be better than Hearns. I know this. Never said he was not. I don't know how you infered this in the first place. Please, if you can find anywhere where I said Hearns was better than Ray, show me. I said he was ahead on all cards at time of stoppage. That is a fact. But, I never said that Hearns was a better WW than Ray.

So, Hearns from 1981, the version that Ray met, I would pick this version of Hearns over any version of Oscar at 147 lbs.

And, it all goes back to my point that it TOOK a herculean effort from Ray over 14 rds to beat Hearns, and IMO, that version of Ray is clearly a better fighter than any 147 lb Oscar. Clear! That version of Ray could be argued as the best WW ever. Argued I might add. And, Hearns was ever so close to winning. He was ahead on all cards.

You know Hearns at his best at 147 was probably in a fight he lost, to Ray. But, that version no way loses to Oscar. I am sure you can accept this line of thought. Losing to Ray after a great scrap, and being ahead, does not mean that this version loses to Oscar, or that one cannot use this version of Hearns to fight Oscar.

Same way Frazier who lost to Ali in 1975, still most likely too good for many heavies that came after him. Just to use an analogy.

Or, Foreman in losing to Ali. I would still back that Foreman to beat many other heavies. That is the point.

The Hearns who lost to Leonard was a hell of a WW; he simply lost to one of the sports greatest WW fighters, and p4p greats, in a very good fight, where he was ahead at the time of stoppage.

walshb

Anyway, I wish others would give input. It seems always to be me any you. Not that this bothers me, but would love to hear some more thoughts on this match.

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

Oscar definitely has a chance to beat hearns...not a favoutite but i'd say 4/10 times

Ok, so if Oscar maybe wins 4, then am I to assume that you believe Hearns can win at least a share of six?

If so, can I ask, what version of Hearns at WW would you be selecting to beat a 147 lb Oscar?

Would you discount the Hearns who met Ray in 1981, just because he lost to Ray? Bearing in mind that it was SRL, #1 or #2 on most peoples's list of best ever WW fighters, and highly ranked all time p4p. And, when looking at Hearns in the atual fight, he fought brilliantly, and was ahead on all cards up to 14 rds.

This is just to clarify. And the reason I ask is that you seem to think it odd that I would select Hearns from the Ray fight in 1981 to be too good for any version of Oscar at 147 lbs. Is me selecting this version of Hearns to be too good for 147 lb Oscar, odd? If so, why?

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Ok, so if Oscar maybe wins 4, then am I to assume that you believe Hearns can win at least a share of six?

If so, can I ask, what version of Hearns at WW would you be selecting to beat a 147 lb Oscar?

Would you discount the Hearns who met Ray in 1981, just because he lost to Ray? Bearing in mind that it was SRL, #1 or #2 on most peoples's list of best ever WW fighters, and highly ranked all time p4p. And, when looking at Hearns in the atual fight, he fought brilliantly, and was ahead on all cards up to 14 rds.

This is just to clarify. And the reason I ask is that you seem to think it odd that I would select Hearns from the Ray fight in 1981 to be too good for any version of Oscar at 147 lbs. Is me selecting this version of Hearns to be too good for 147 lb Oscar, odd? If so, why?

it seemed to me you were making the point you'd pick hearns against leonard or cuevas.....you've clarified that

i'd pick any version of hearns during his WW title reign to beat oscar 6/10 times....

i thought hearns way great in losing to leonard....this hearns probably would beat oscar...

i don't think it's as clear cut as you make out....thats why id give oscar a chance

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

it seemed to me you were making the point you'd pick hearns against leonard or cuevas.....you've clarified that

i'd pick any version of hearns during his WW title reign to beat oscar 6/10 times....

i thought hearns way great in losing to leonard....this hearns probably would beat oscar...

i don't think it's as clear cut as you make out....thats why id give oscar a chance

Thanks, mate. Yes, I was simply picking the Hearns who fought Leonard and Cuevas as the one I would selet to beat Oscar 9/10 times.

Oscar: I would select most likely the Quartey version, and maybe the Tito version, even though he really annoyed me in this fight. For 8-9 rds he looked to me to be the better fighter, and then he runs for three.

Oscar is a very good fighter. I just didn't see anything all that good/great when he went to 147 lbs and beyond.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Thanks, mate. Yes, I was simply picking the Hearns who fought Leonard and Cuevas as the one I would selet to beat Oscar 9/10 times.

Oscar: I would select most likely the Quartey version, and maybe the Tito version, even though he really annoyed me in this fight. For 8-9 rds he looked to me to be the better fighter, and then he runs for three.

Oscar is a very good fighter. I just didn't see anything all that good/great when he went to 147 lbs and beyond.

for me oscar's performance against quartey was a great performance

also he totally outboxed tito for 8 rounds....tito is IMO a top 20 WW of all time.....oscar on the bad advice of his corner decided to run for the last 4 rounds and that cost him the fight....

look at what oscar did to gatti at WW...an annihilation....for me oscar gives anyone a tough fight

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

for me oscar's performance against quartey was a great performance

also he totally outboxed tito for 8 rounds....tito is IMO a top 20 WW of all time.....oscar on the bad advice of his corner decided to run for the last 4 rounds and that cost him the fight....

look at what oscar did to gatti at WW...an annihilation....for me oscar gives anyone a tough fight

Gatti? No demeaning him, but he was never a WW, and was a great warrior, but never in the elite league at that time. He was always getting an ass whupping off the likes of Oscar.

Quartey gave Oscar a very close fight. Quartey is a good fighter. Good win for Oscar. Still believe that Hearns is a league ahead of Quartey, and a league above Oscar.

As for Tito. Oscar ****ed up. He was the better boxer, and clearly. Just showed a complete lack of real championship commitment that night. Running for the last 1/4 of the fight? That stunk.

Another fight at 147 lbs was Oscar-Mosley. Great fight that one could argue for Oscar. It was that close. Again, never sold on Mosley as a great WW. Forrest showed that a true WW, with size and skill is too good.

You also say Oscar gives anyone a tough fight. Well, assuming you mean WW, I disagree. I think SRL and SRR both beat him without too much trouble. I would also fancy Curry, Starling, Simon Brown to beat him, in closer fights, but beat him nonetheless.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

Gatti? No demeaning him, but he was never a WW, and was a great warrior, but never in the elite league at that time. He was always getting an ass whupping off the likes of Oscar.

Quartey gave Oscar a very close fight. Quartey is a good fighter. Good win for Oscar. Still believe that Hearns is a league ahead of Quartey, and a league above Oscar.

As for Tito. Oscar ****ed up. He was the better boxer, and clearly. Just showed a complete lack of real championship commitment that night. Running for the last 1/4 of the fight? That stunk.

Another fight at 147 lbs was Oscar-Mosley. Great fight that one could argue for Oscar. It was that close. Again, never sold on Mosley as a great WW. Forrest showed that a true WW, with size and skill is too good.

yeah gatti usually lost to the best but nobody destroyed him like oscar....floyd beat an over the hill gatti but floyd didint really hurt gatti like oscar did, floyd more sickened him with clear rights over and over.......oscar devastated gatti with far less punches and gatti was at his peak...

mosley gives most ppl a problem at WW....so fast, great chine, great feet and nice power....also had a good reach for his relatively short body....

walshb

tryingmybestt wrote: »

yeah gatti usually lost to the best but nobody destroyed him like oscar....floyd beat an over the hill gatti but floyd didint really hurt gatti like oscar did, floyd more sickened him with clear rights over and over.......oscar devastated gatti with far less punches and gatti was at his peak...

mosley gives most ppl a problem at WW....so fast, great chine, great feet and nice power....also had a good reach for his relatively short body....

But, watch Forrest vs, Shane. At WW Shane's chin suffered badly that time He was almost out. That was Forrest. Imagine Hearns or SRL or SRR in there? p4p Shane's chin was very good, but moving to WW and getting whacked by Hearns I would not be at all confident that it survives.

tryingmybestt

walshb wrote: »

But, watch Forrest vs, Shane, at WW Shane's chin suffered badly that time He was almost out. That was Forrest. Imagine Hearns or SRL or SRR in there? p4p Shane's chin was very good, but moving to WW and getting whacked by Hearns I would not be at all confident that it survives.

that was 1 fighter that had shanes number....shane recovered from very clean punches right on the button....shanes has one of the best chins ever IMO

yeah he might los against the sugars but no way does he get blown away especially against SRL.....shane would give them problems and give SRL a very good fight.....at peak shanes speed was as fast as anyone ever, great chin, great feet, nice defence....he had it all and if he stayed at lightweight he could have been the greatest lightweight of all time

who stands up to hearns right on the chin at WW...probably nobody if its a clean shot....if someone could id say shane could....his chin was as good as any