Kelly Pavlik v. Tommy Hearns

**Taeth** · 10-08-2007 06:34 PM

Its hard to say, both had the power or in Tommy's case the punch to ko the other guy. It really depends on who hurts who first. I am guessing 90% of the time if would be Hearns, but Pavlik has a great 1-2 that I think could catch Hearns because he keeps his hands down, and he never had great footwork. If Pavlik had Hearns backing up Hearns used to jump too much for him to get all his power behind his punches, and the true power of his punch(hiding his right hand) was almost nullified when he went backwards.

**RozzySean** · 10-08-2007 06:47 PM

Tommy would have the ability to both outbox Kelly and end the the fight with one punch. I would bet Hearns in this fight. That being said, Kelly absolutely has the power to KO Hearns and if Hearns let himself get caught, has Hearns often did, he would be out cold. Part of what made Hearns so great to watch was knowing he could spark just about anybody, but that he had that flawed chin and willingness to expose it. He was always on the verge of losing to a good puncher, even if he was winning.

**OumaFan** · 10-08-2007 07:01 PM

Its funny how we put older fighters on a pedestal and just assume they're unbeatable. Hearns would more often than not beat Pavlik mainly cause he's so much quicker and would get there first but Pavlik's power could bother Hearns, Hearns is one of my favorites but the guy wasn't unbeatable.

Well do the same thing with current stars in twenty years or so that we do with older fighters. Some young guy will come around at say 130 and look great and somebody will make a thread about a mythical matchup between him and MAB or Pac and everyone will automatically say are you kidding me, he doesn't have a chance, Pac was just too good.

**Taeth** · 10-08-2007 11:57 PM

Another funny thing is that Emmanuel Steward stated that Hearns doesn't even punch that hard, but he is sneaky with it, and the opponent can't see it. Pavlik is the harder puncher here, even if he doesn't truly spark guys out like Hearns did. Hearns didn't punch as hard going back, and if Pavlik got him going backwards it wasn't all that hard to break Hearns down, but getting him to go backwards is like trying to control a great white shark underwater with your barehands.

**boozeboxer** · 10-09-2007 02:37 AM

a gross display of ignorance is taking place.

**Mr140** · 10-09-2007 03:41 AM

Man get off it i hate when people take it so serouisly give Pavlik a break he is good and we will see how good he turns out to be till then lighten up

**boozeboxer** · 10-09-2007 06:36 PM

Originally Posted by Mr140

Man get off it i hate when people take it so serouisly give Pavlik a break he is good and we will see how good he turns out to be till then lighten up

You talking to me?

**Mr140** · 10-10-2007 05:32 AM

Well it all depends on what you meant by your comment i might be misjudging if my bad but if you meant that it is gross display because people are talking about Pavlik competeing with Hearns i think you are being to closed minded and taking it to way to seriously and that all i got to say