Thread: Kelly Pavlik and Tommy Hearns

The obvious comparison is that Kelly Pavlik at middleweight, like Tommy hearns at welterweight is a tall, skinny fighter who generates HUGE power despite the long limbs and lanky appearence. Also it is noted that both fighters are reputed for the respective string of KO victories. (a large difference being that Tommy was fast.)

Could this mean that Kelly like Tommy could bound forward into higher divisions?? or that he will be beat by the olympian??
Anybody else able to draw paralells between the 2

Except for the size and knockout power there totally different in boxing style and the way they fight.

I actually wouldn say totally different, Pavlik evidently isn't as gifted as Hearns, but when he uses the jab at a long range i see it being thrown as a slower version of hearns' and when he throws a straight it seems to travel similarly to Tommy's. Although Pavlik doesn't cock it like Hearns did.

yea very minimal comparisons.... Tommy was an excellent boxer with a propensity to brawl even when it wasnt advantageous to go along with a questionable chin... He is a 1st ballot hall of famer for sure and an alltime great who fought the best of the best. Kelly isint established himself yet to really hit stride enough to make any lasting comparisons.

True enough JT, hope you guys dont think im a Pavlik Fan its just something that occured to me as i was on youtube last night. I was watching hearns as always, thought how in physique he was similar to Pavlik n then thought what a force Pavlik would be were he graced with some speed.

Originally Posted by hitmandonny

True enough JT, hope you guys dont think im a Pavlik Fan its just something that occured to me as i was on youtube last night. I was watching hearns as always, thought how in physique he was similar to Pavlik n then thought what a force Pavlik would be were he graced with some speed.

I am Pavlik fan and don't mind admitting it hopefully he can beat Taylor and get some excitement back in Middleweight division its been lacking excitement with Hopkins and now Taylor.

I thought that the Taylor Wright fight was entertaining, decision overshadowed a ggo contest and to be honest i feel JT did enough. (Albeit im a Taylor fan.)
Granted his showing against Spinks was poor, but i think its a bit early yet to be wishing him gone.

Originally Posted by hitmandonny

I thought that the Taylor Wright fight was entertaining, decision overshadowed a ggo contest and to be honest i feel JT did enough. (Albeit im a Taylor fan.)
Granted his showing against Spinks was poor, but i think its a bit early yet to be wishing him gone.

His fight with Ouma and his fight's with Hopkins were as boring as watching paint dry the division needs some excitement.

His fight with Ouma i wouldn say was boring. The fight was undoubtedly set up so as a knockout would be provided for the Arkansas faithful, but Ouma trained himself into unbelievable condition and made a decent (if not spectacular) fight of it. All props to Ouma.
As for the Hopkins fights, i do agree that they made for tedious viewing, but do you honestly feel that fact can be attributed to Taylor. He was the exciting fighter u[p until that fight. Hop hasn't been exciting in quite a number of years.
The Pavlik fight will not only prove as a stern test it will also offer a huge opportunity for redemption and will earn taylor a huge amount of admiration should he win andquite the repuatation should he stop Kelly.

It is a sad day for me when Kelly Pavlik is even mentioned in the same breath as Tommy Hearns ( at least in this stage of his career)...

IMO there is no real comparison.

Kelly Has a shaved head.... Tommy wore his in an Afro type style then Gerri curl for a moment

Kelly is from Ohio...Tommy is from Detroit

Tommy fought out of Kronk...Kelly got into a fight watching Krunk

Nothing close at all about them.......











I fear I am half retarted for even coming up with such things

Both huge power guys. Pavlik is from Youngstown and Hearns is from Detroit, America's two most dangerous cities. I think Pavlik is more powerful because he can throw devastating punches without cocking back and reaching for the power like Hearns did. Hearns was clearly the better technical boxer than Kelly. Two different styles. Hearns had better foot work than Kelly dose now. One thing for sure is that I think Pavlik is extremely balanced and never looks off balanced. He plants his feet and fight very flat footed. Thats his style. He wants to stand in a do damage. Both of them are good in the chin area.
Hagler could knock anyone out on any given night. Pavlik really took it to the chin from Miranda like a champ. Three to Four flush shots would floor just about anybody at 160 but Pavlik stood in there and
really got some respect. Two different fighters ,very different but do have similarities. I hope we can
talk 20 years from now about another young up and comer and compare him to Pavlik.

Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING

Originally Posted by hitmandonny

I thought that the Taylor Wright fight was entertaining, decision overshadowed a ggo contest and to be honest i feel JT did enough. (Albeit im a Taylor fan.)
Granted his showing against Spinks was poor, but i think its a bit early yet to be wishing him gone.

His fight with Ouma and his fight's with Hopkins were as boring as watching paint dry the division needs some excitement.

I would rather sit with my 86 year old grandma and watch the Lawrence Welk show on PBS.
The Spinks fight was terrible too. Here is Lawrence Welk if you don't know what I'm talking about .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ak22m1Mc82w

No where close to being similar in styles.

Tommy Hearns was smooth and had a great jab. With his jab alone he tore Ray Leonards eye up. Tommy came close to ending Ray Leonards career.

I said the kid from Youngstown was nothing but hype but after further review, he has a lot of heart and he is coming into his own. I believe he has what it takes to beat Taylor. I personaly felt that the Ghost was slow and sort of one dimensional but he is not as slow as I thought nor as one dimesional as I thought either. He has decent hand speed and he throws leather from very odd angles. He gets inside and has a nice long upper cut that is also coming from an odd angles like outta no where. Kid has a decent chin too. Comparing him to Tommy? I can't. But the kid from Youngstown looks like he is destined for greatness. Like Arum said, he will be good for boxing. I believe him.

I think the only thing these two have in common are their height.

Danny totally respect ur opinion, really do, no mistake. And i repect Pavlik.
But he is a very very slow fighter.

Originally Posted by hitmandonny

Danny totally respect ur opinion, really do, no mistake. And i repect Pavlik.
But he is a very very slow fighter.

We shall see how slow he really is.

Cotto is said to be slow. He looks slow but his punches still land.
I believe this is the same case with Kelly Pavlik. Looks can be decieving and I hope after this fight, we hear Taylor say: "Kelly is faster now then when we faught at the Olympic trials."

Sort of like what Quintana said about Cotto when he quit on his stool.
'He is too fast for me"
After the fight, he also said:
"He is faster than I thought"