Nigel Benn vs Thomas Hearns at 160!

**Jake** · 10-01-2010, 12:24 PM

Originally Posted by broadwayjoe

Yep. I agree. Plus Benn's stamina was suspect at 160. Outside of potential fight ending power, Benn is all wrong to get a win against Hearns at 160.

I was going to mention stamina as well, but being that I agree with the premise of it being doubtful that it lasts three rounds either way, I didn't figure it would be an issue in this fight.

I don't dislike Benn at all. I don't think as highly of him as you obviously do. Don't try to paint me as some sort of hater just because you are a big fan of his. One does not equal the other. Somehow you have morphed my opinion that Benn was, despite being a title belt holder, not an elite fighter into this convenient notion that I have some grudge against him. Which is not remotely true.

And...Barkely isn't the first (or last) fighter to hurt an opponent while he himself was hurt. So it's entirely possible that Barkley was more hurt than you are suggesting. And I'm not the one with a horse in this race. But...I know you will go on forever about this, so this is it for me. Please feel free to get in one last condescending post, because there is no way EVER to get the last word in a discussion with you. So have at it, but I'm not going to read it

hey now, you said you were only reconsidering it, not that you'd actually go there

**broadwayjoe** · 10-01-2010, 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by Jake

I was going to mention stamina as well, but being that I agree with the premise of it being doubtful that it lasts three rounds either way, I didn't figure it would be an issue in this fight.

hey now, you said you were only reconsidering it, not that you'd actually go there

1. True, it's likely an early ending fight, but if somehow no one is KOed in the early rounds, Hearns could win the fight with his boxing skills, but Benn didn't really have a plan B. I keep thinking back to Benn throwing a gazillion punches in the Watson fight and then running out of gas and getting decked by a jab. I do think Benn became a better fighter later in his career at 168.

2. I really wasn't referring to Sly there. I use that expression all the time in my non-message board life. Not every horse reference is about Sly. If the day comes where I decide to go there, there won't be a doubt.

**slystaff** · 10-01-2010, 12:52 PM

Benn did indeed become a better fighter later in his career....broadwayjoe...but he didn't have the same explosive one punch power that he did at 160lbs.

Hearns..for all his boxing skills...had shown time and time again that he would brawl with a fighter who came at him...especially a shorter dangerous fighter.

As such...forget boxing...Benn will attack Hearns like a madman..for that is all Benn knew how to do in those days..and Hearns would respond in kind. Who's the better fighter almost wouldn't apply here....it would be who could survive that war.

Someone's going early and it could just as easily by Hearns IMO...

**meetthefeebles** · 10-01-2010, 01:04 PM

Originally Posted by Jake

Roberto Duran should've been DQ'd for punching Ken Buchanan in the balls. Instead, it jump started what many insist as the era of the greatest LW in boxing history.

Nobody knows for sure how Forrest-Mosley I plays out if Shane doesn't get headbutted in the second round - leading up to the only two KD's he's ever suffered in his entire career.

Some results, you just have to accept at face value.

Precisely. Or perhaps we can just discount every single fight where someone ought to have been DQ-d in spite of what actually happened?

MTF

**meetthefeebles** · 10-01-2010, 01:08 PM

For what it is worth, I wouldn't give Benn more than a puncher's chance here. As big a fan of him that I am, I couldn't seriously favour him here, even given Duran's relative decline in abilities at this higher weight. Benn proved pretty damn effective at KO-ing rubbish, but when faced with overall better fighters (Eubank, Watson) he struggled badly at 160.

IMHO Duran wins eight times out of ten, all of which inside a few rounds.

MTF

**meetthefeebles** · 10-01-2010, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by broadwayjoe

I don't dislike Benn at all. I don't think as highly of him as you obviously do. Don't try to paint me as some sort of hater just because you are a big fan of his. One does not equal the other. Somehow you have morphed my opinion that Benn was, despite being a title belt holder, not an elite fighter into this convenient notion that I have some grudge against him. Which is not remotely true.

And...Barkely isn't the first (or last) fighter to hurt an opponent while he himself was hurt. So it's entirely possible that Barkley was more hurt than you are suggesting. And I'm not the one with a horse in this race. But...I know you will go on forever about this, so this is it for me. Please feel free to get in one last condescending post, because there is no way EVER to get the last word in a discussion with you. So have at it, but I'm not going to read it.

How is the view from that high horse?

MTF

**slystaff** · 10-01-2010, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by meetthefeebles

For what it is worth, I wouldn't give Benn more than a puncher's chance here. As big a fan of him that I am, I couldn't seriously favour him here, even given Duran's relative decline in abilities at this higher weight. Benn proved pretty damn effective at KO-ing rubbish, but when faced with overall better fighters (Eubank, Watson) he struggled badly at 160.

IMHO Duran wins eight times out of ten, all of which inside a few rounds.

MTF

Duran?

**Jake** · 10-01-2010, 02:44 PM

Originally Posted by slystaff

Duran?

You say Leonard (in another thread) but meant Duran.

He says Duran but meant Hearns.

I guess we need to start a new MM to find a way to accidentally work in Hagler.