Nigel Benn vs Thomas Hearns at 160!

If they fought ten times...all ten fights end inside the distance..perhaps inside 3 rounds...both men would be KO'd at least 3 times.

So in my poll I've included no other options but a KO for each man.

This is a true pick'em...regardless of the fact that Hearns is the overall more skillful fighter. If Benn catches him clean..he's gone. Same can be said in reverse.

Gimme Benn in the upset...climbs up off the canvas to KO hearns in the 2 round shootout. A prime Benn never lost to an American fighter (Barkley, McClellan etc)...and so that's my hunch.

 

I'll go with Hearns.

I think his shots get there first and Benn wouldn't be able to survive enough of them before landing his own bombs.

 

Ugh. This one AGAIN???

Hearns wins. He's simply the much better fighter.

And before I have to hear about "If Barkley could do it, blah, blah, blah..." Benn does have a puncher's chance, but that's about it. I was never all that impressed with Benn at 160. At Middleweight he was a puncher with a crappy defense and worse stamina.

And I don't give much credence to the Benn-Barkely fight because Benn should have been disqualified for his cheap shot while Barkley was down.

 

Hearns in 3.

 

BTW - only reason Benn never lost to an American was because he never fought a top one(Nunn, Toney, Jones).

 

Funny that you editted your post many minutes later just to add... "Ugh. This one AGAIN???"....then skipped a line and then inserted.. ""And before I have to hear about "If Barkley could do it, blah, blah, blah..." "

::

Tell me, how did this edit add value to your post?Tells me alot about you that you would spend the time to edit your post just to add those two meaningless/irrelevant statements.

Face it..you're a childish instigator.

 

Hearns, Hearns, Hearns

the gulf in class is gigantic

 

Hmmm...wasn't Barkley coming off the back of a tight decision loss to Nunn when Benn iced him? Was McClellan not in The Ring top ten P4P when Benn near killed him? :dunno:

MTF

 

That's a nice, convenient way to gloss over the fact that he won by first round, three KD stoppage.

MTF

 

Gloss over, my ass. I know you're a huge Benn fan, but he should have been DQed in that fight.

 

Face it, you are talking out of your ass. And don't try to PRETEND that you haven't used that tired line multiple times in MMs with Hearns involved.

Has your obession with me reached the point where you need to discuss edits to my posts? Very sad, Stafford. Very sad...

 

Not to take sides in this 30-year war between you two, but why is it that whenever you do the same, it is "you were just having fun and baiting, don't fall for it so easily", yet when somebody else does, it is childish and ruins discussions?

 

He should have been, but that doesn't really have any impact on how the fight went afterwards. The point would have been infinately more valid if Benn had smashed Barkley when he was down AND Barkley was unable to fight because of the illegal punch. Then you could have glossed over the eventual result, citing unfairness and that the fight was completely changed by the illegal punch. But that wasn't the case at all. Barkley got back up in fairly short order, was pretty much okay and then almost flattened Benn himself before being knocked down a couple more times and duly losing by TKO in a single round (via an admittedly stupid rule).

The illegal punch had absolutely no bearing on the way that fight evetually panned out for the purposes of considering it in a MM. Yet you just want to ignore it because Benn threw a cheap shot.

MTF

 

give me an example where I've done that exact same thing: editting my post 10 mins later just to add "bait".

 

Please. You haven't even tried to deny it because you know it's true. Your idiot editing to add nonsense has been exposed here.

 

Poor Stafford. So very desperate. So very sad.

And btw, it's funny to see you ASSuming that what I edited. But then again, it's not like you're a fan of the truth.

 

Spoken like a true Benn fan. The bottom line is he should have been disqualified for the flagrant foul. And you DON'T know how badly Barkley was hurt from the cheap shot. You can assume he was just fine, because that works for Benn, but you really don't know.

And you can go on and on and on about it (and I have no doubt you will), but that's my take on it.

 

Don't try it (and still you haven't denied it)...as I saw the original post, you just didn't realize this. I remember exactly what was written...then I go into the thread 15 mins later and see your edit. ::

Anyway...it's all good. Now I know that your nonsense is calculated and not just impulse.

 

Blah, blah, blah, more stupidity from Stafford. It is funny how far how much of an Ass you are willing to make of yourself in your futile attempts to get one up on me.

 

You STILL haven't denied it. Just admit it and move on old man...

 

Wow. This is boring. You're being such a repetative mindless douche today in your fruitless attempts to get under my skin that I am reconsidering my whole take on horse names, not because it is funny or at all useful...just because I KNOW that gets under your skin.

And if that happens, no complaining from you...because you asked for it.

 

Draw

 

Benn on PTS

 

Seeing as Barkley got back up in short order and almost laid Benn out a mere matter of seconds later, it is more sensible to assume that he wasn't especially hurt. He certainly didn't look especially hurt either. This version of events (i.e. the one that occurred) is more plausable than your presumptions.

The reason why I am going 'on and on' about it is because you simply disregarded a fight because you dislike Benn, you especially dislike the fact that Benn won and gave a bullshit reason for then disregarding what actually transpired.

MTF

 

If you do the horse thing...you'll only hurt your own reputation of being above that type of thing. So go ahead. This actually proves that you know that I am correct in my observation about you editting just to add childish irrelevant to boxing nonsense.::

 

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.

 

I'd be far more inclined to pick Benn in a fight at SMW.

At MW, he was a bit too reckless and I don't see his chin holding up long enough or beating Tommy to the punch.

 

Nah. The only thing it "proves" is that you really enjoy the sound of your own voice and you will go on and on endlessly, no matter how stupid you sound.

 

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.

 

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.