Boxing Forums banner

Who was the greater WELTERWEIGHT

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

· Registered
Joined
·
6,403 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I was just having a think about this one. Which of these two were greater at 147? While Hearns may be favoured to beat Duran like he did at Light Middle, does Duran's win over Leonard propel him above Tommy here?

I'M NOT ASKING YOU WOULD WIN, IM ASKING WHO WAS THE GREATER FIGHTER AT 147

Duran's Welterweight career: 8-1 (everything post De Jesus 3)

Aldolfo Viruet W UD
Munroe Brooks W KO8
Carlos Palomino W UD10
Gonzalez W UD10
Ray Leonard W UD15
Ray Leonard L TKO8

Tommy Hearns: 32-1 (30 KOs)
Pedro Rojas W KO1
Clyde Grey W KO10
Muangsurin W KO 3
Cuevas W KO2
Randy Shields W KO12
Ray Leonard L KO14
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,403 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Duran.

Although when you ask who's greater, it all depends whether you are looking at their resume's at the weight, their actual talent or a bit of both.
I tend to look at 'greatest' as:
1) resume
2) achievements
3) Skill set
4) prime losses
5) longevity (which doesn't really apply here)
6) head to head ability

Some may have a completely different ranking system tho, so it'll be good to see why people choose Duran or Hearns
 

· Registered
Joined
·
22,444 Posts
Tough one, Hearns has a better body of work at the weight and a lot more fights their. he was also more destructive at the weight.

Roberto however, easily has the best win of the two at the weight and its not even close.

I'd probably edge for Hearns as a better overall welterweight but the Leonard win is hard to argue with in regards to achievements.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,648 Posts
Hearns had a far, far longer career in this division. That's 33 fights to Duran's 9. There's no question the win over Leonard is greater than anything Hearns has to offer at any weight, even less so at welterweight.
Meh, it's pretty difficult to decide. I'm just going to say Duran.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
738 Posts
Hearns because I can't overlook a head to head match up. Hearns was a welterweight beast, not many would have beaten him there. Duran has the best win at the weight but I can't ignore who I believe was the better fighter AT WELTERWEIGHT.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,307 Posts
Hearns was a great fighter who fought in the WW division but I'm not sure I'd call him a great WW.

his best win by a mile is over Cuevas. Whilst that is a very good win, it is completely undermined by the duet of fights Leonard and Duran had there. In almost any other era I think Hearns would have been a great WW for a number of years but in the era he did fight in, he didn't achieve greatness at 147 for me. Never saw himself rise to the top and whilst I reckon he'd have still starched Duran had he got the fight instead of Leonard, the fact is he didn't. A h2h force certainly and someone I'd favour over pretty much any WW in history but I'm not sure I can call him great based on what he did there.

Any decent argument against me? I'd like to be convinced otherwise.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
21,884 Posts
Hearns was a great fighter who fought in the WW division but I'm not sure I'd call him a great WW.

his best win by a mile is over Cuevas. Whilst that is a very good win, it is completely undermined by the duet of fights Leonard and Duran had there. In almost any other era I think Hearns would have been a great WW for a number of years but in the era he did fight in, he didn't achieve greatness at 147 for me. Never saw himself rise to the top and whilst I reckon he'd have still starched Duran had he got the fight instead of Leonard, the fact is he didn't. A h2h force certainly and someone I'd favour over pretty much any WW in history but I'm not sure I can call him great based on what he did there.

Any decent argument against me? I'd like to be convinced otherwise.
You make a decent point. Can't really argue with it.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,648 Posts
Hearns because I can't overlook a head to head match up. Hearns was a welterweight beast, not many would have beaten him there. Duran has the best win at the weight but I can't ignore who I believe was the better fighter AT WELTERWEIGHT.
It's not about who's the better fighter though, it's about who's greater. Most of us will pick top middleweights today to beat Fitzsimmons, doesn't mean they're greater than him.

EDIT: Also, why take their actual fight into account if it was done at middleweight?
 

· The Bobsledinator
Joined
·
32,790 Posts
It's one of them questions which forces you to make the answer you're reluctant to make. If you look at the resumes then the answer is Duran, but it just sounds crazy because we all know that Tommy was the more celebrated welterweight of the two, and although their fight was at 154, it was so one sided that you have to expect the same man to win if they did it at 147. If they had fought each other at 147 then there's no doubt in my mind that Tommy would likely get the win which would put him above Duran in this debate. But I can only go on the evidence we have and the answer is Duran imo. Only one loss, to a man who he beat, and that man was Sugar Ray Leonard, who was also a man that Hearns lost to and did not beat. Also, a win over Palomino> a win over Cuevas. You could argue that Palomino was ever so slightly over the hill but I don't know, he was still a world level fighter and all film suggests that he was a very good one.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,648 Posts
It's one of them questions which forces you to make the answer you're reluctant to make. If you look at the resumes then the answer is Duran, but it just sounds crazy because we all know that Tommy was the more celebrated welterweight of the two, and although their fight was at 154, it was so one sided that you have to expect the same man to win if they did it at 147. If they had fought each other at 147 then there's no doubt in my mind that Tommy would likely get the win which would put him above Duran in this debate. But I can only go on the evidence we have and the answer is Duran imo. Only one loss, to a man who he beat, and that man was Sugar Ray Leonard, who was also a man that Hearns lost to and did not beat. Also, a win over Palomino> a win over Cuevas. You could argue that Palomino was ever so slightly over the hill but I don't know, he was still a world level fighter and all film suggests that he was a very good one.
I agree that Hearns would beat Duran at 147 but the problem is he didn't. :conf
I agree with you 100% though.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,403 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Hearns was a great fighter who fought in the WW division but I'm not sure I'd call him a great WW.

his best win by a mile is over Cuevas. Whilst that is a very good win, it is completely undermined by the duet of fights Leonard and Duran had there. In almost any other era I think Hearns would have been a great WW for a number of years but in the era he did fight in, he didn't achieve greatness at 147 for me. Never saw himself rise to the top and whilst I reckon he'd have still starched Duran had he got the fight instead of Leonard, the fact is he didn't. A h2h force certainly and someone I'd favour over pretty much any WW in history but I'm not sure I can call him great based on what he did there.

Any decent argument against me? I'd like to be convinced otherwise.
Yeah I pretty much agree with all of this. Greatness is usually defined by who you beat, or total domination. While neither dominated the division, Duran's win over Ray pushes him above Hearns here. As others have suggested, Hearns would have beaten him at 147, but he didn't.

It's interesting tho. In a poll I did about a yet ago, Hearns was rated the 6th greatest WW ever, beind Robinson, Leonard, Napoles and Armstrong. Duran was 9th, behind Joe Walcott, Rodriguez and Griffith
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,648 Posts
:lol: This is exactly my point.
I'd say Duran would be more competitive though. Maybe last a couple more rounds or something.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,307 Posts
Yeah I pretty much agree with all of this. Greatness is usually defined by who you beat, or total domination. While neither dominated the division, Duran's win over Ray pushes him above Hearns here. As others have suggested, Hearns would have beaten him at 147, but he didn't.

It's interesting tho. In a poll I did about a yet ago, Hearns was rated the 6th greatest WW ever, beind Robinson, Leonard, Napoles and Armstrong. Duran was 9th, behind Joe Walcott, Rodriguez and Griffith
Yeah I've no idea where I'd rate Hearns at WW to be honest, his best win over cuevas is again another man who was never better than palomino at the weight.

I mean I'm not sure where to draw the line with Hearns at WW.

for example, as ludicrous as this sounds now, is he any greater than Forrest at WW who twice beat Mosley? It's a hard one to rationalise based on what he did compared to what he's consensually capable of.
 

· The Bobsledinator
Joined
·
32,790 Posts
I'd say Duran would be more competitive though. Maybe last a couple more rounds or something.
I don't think he could get any less competitive than he was in their actual fight, so yes I think it's a given that he would be more competitive. If he wasn't then I'd be very fucking worried about him, seen as though he is my favourite fighter of all time.

The only way he would be less competitive is if he got shot.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,403 Posts
Discussion Starter · #18 ·

· Registered
Joined
·
20,274 Posts
Hearns has more depth there. Duran beat Ray, which is huge of course. Palomino fight superb!

Some of Tommy's boys were better at 140 but still decent scalps (Curry, Saensak) the big win over Cuevas and Espadas as well.

Hearns, just. A fight at welter is more competitive between the two IMO but I'd go with Tommy there as well.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
20,274 Posts
I was just having a think about this one. Which of these two were greater at 147? While Hearns may be favoured to beat Duran like he did at Light Middle, does Duran's win over Leonard propel him above Tommy here?

I'M NOT ASKING YOU WOULD WIN, IM ASKING WHO WAS THE GREATER FIGHTER AT 147

Duran's Welterweight career: 8-1 (everything post De Jesus 3)

Aldolfo Viruet W UD
Munroe Brooks W KO8
Carlos Palomino W UD10
Gonzalez W UD10
Ray Leonard W UD15
Ray Leonard L TKO8

Tommy Hearns: 32-1 (30 KOs)
Pedro Rojas W KO1
Clyde Grey W KO10
Muangsurin W KO 3
Cuevas W KO2
Randy Shields W KO12
Ray Leonard L KO14
Curry and Espadas are more notable wins for Tommy. In better nick than Muangsurin as well :good
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top