Rodrigo Valdez vs. Thomas Hearns - 154lbs

[Manassa]

Now think about this one carefully.

Hearns, of course, was one of the most visually impressive fighters, and there was a lot of substance behind it as well - he had an old school boxing education and would land to the head and body with consistently (important word) sharp hooks. Or uppercuts, or straights.

On paper you'd think Hearns would win. But Valdez, being notoriously rugged and hard hitting at 160lbs, would surely be an even more powerful unit (relatively) at the lower weight where he wouldn't mind shedding a few pounds.

Now I can see Hearns turning this fight into a seemingly one-sided beating for perhaps the first three rounds. Valdez, renowned for his slow starts, would struggle to land anything, especially being a head hunter. Hearns would motor around the ring, fully aware of his opponent's massive strength - and his own weakness.

Now I'm not one of those people who think Hearns would crumble from the first decent shot he takes, but Valdez would take a piece of life with every landed punch. Hearns has no business catching punches from a man who knocked out Bennie Briscoe. I wouldn't go out and say Valdez was one of the very greatest punchers, but if he had a target he could inflict a massive amount of punishment that would register on the richter scale, relative to weight, alongside Ike Williams.

What happens?

[teeto]

Valdez has a very good chance, simply because he was a quality fighter and as already mentioned, durable. He would have the capability to stop his opponent, but i'm favouring Hearns, mainly because i feel he was more rounded and composed at 154 than at 147. I reckon he could come through a truly deserved winner.

But you better believe i'd be throwing a few coins on Valdez by stoppage in round 14.

[Duodenum]

At 154, Valdez-Hearns is a challenging proposition. Over 15 rounds, I think Rodrigo would probably pull out a late stoppage win when he needed to. Although he was a superb boxer who schooled a young and undefeated Vinnie Curto, nobody decisions a peak Tommy Gun at this weight (or any other weight for that matter). If he's standing at the final bell, Hearns wins. I expect that Valdez would know that as well, and he'd aim to wear Tommy down for an eventual coup de grace.

Given a 12 round limit, it's pick-'em as to whether Valdez stops Hearns late, or Tommy hangs on for the win. Over ten rounds, Hearns takes the decision.

[MRBILL]

I still pick Hearns at 154 over anybody ever there if Hearns is matched while he was peaked from late 1982 to 1984.............. The Hearns who last fought at 154 in the summer of '86 against Mark Medal had a hurt right paw and said 154 had become a strain to make by then...........

The Hearns of '84 would box and KO anybody who ever held the Jr. Middle title........... The Hearns who KO'd "Duran and Freddie Hutchings" was in his prime...........

Hearns pounds the piss outta Roddy Valdez at 154 pounds in a time machine............
:hey:good
MR.BILL

[dpw417]

Very interesting fight. It's a funny thing but alot might depend on what type of mindset Hearns brought to the ring...When Hearns outboxed Benitez (perhaps due to broken right hand) he looked to box from the outside, against Duran and Hutchings,, he was the "hitman".
Being the "hitman' gets Hearns into trouble against this opponent...but he is more than capable of throughly outboxing Valdez from a distance.
If forced to make a pick.
Valdez by 6th round KO in a war.

[laxpdx]

I'd say Tommy, being a fast starter and lethal puncher at 154, gets Rocky out relatively early, or...Valdez wears him out late.

Hearns also might win a decision if he boxed, but I don't think that's foolproof against Valdez, who's surely not the best MW, but a solid one.

[bodhi]

Hm, I don´t think this will be a boxing match. Valdez would make Hearns fight his fight and Hearns would just be too willing to get into it I think. Of course Hearns has the chance to get Valdez out there early but I don´t think he will. Valdez will get to him in the late rounds but would have to take some punishment to do so.

If Hearns boxes him he gets the decision.

[MAG1965]

I think Hearns of 1984 wins a hard fought decision.

[mcvey]

Now think about this one carefully.

Hearns, of course, was one of the most visually impressive fighters, and there was a lot of substance behind it as well - he had an old school boxing education and would land to the head and body with consistently (important word) sharp hooks. Or uppercuts, or straights.

On paper you'd think Hearns would win. But Valdez, being notoriously rugged and hard hitting at 160lbs, would surely be an even more powerful unit (relatively) at the lower weight where he wouldn't mind shedding a few pounds.

Now I can see Hearns turning this fight into a seemingly one-sided beating for perhaps the first three rounds. Valdez, renowned for his slow starts, would struggle to land anything, especially being a head hunter. Hearns would motor around the ring, fully aware of his opponent's massive strength - and his own weakness.

Now I'm not one of those people who think Hearns would crumble from the first decent shot he takes, but Valdez would take a piece of life with every landed punch. Hearns has no business catching punches from a man who knocked out Bennie Briscoe. I wouldn't go out and say Valdez was one of the very greatest punchers, but if he had a target he could inflict a massive amount of punishment that would register on the richter scale, relative to weight, alongside Ike Williams.

What happens?

Not sure if we are meant to , judge these guys chances on what they accomplished at that specified weight ,or, at their best ,and having boiled down.
For a big puncher Valdez didn't stop many names at the weight, in fact he didnt stop many names period .His claim to fame as a banger is koing Briscoe once in three fights.Obviously a fine acheivement,in fact a unique one.
Guys like Ralph Palladin,Pete Toro and Cassius Greene went the route with Valdez .
Greene was 8-10-11, at the time, and Palladin [16 fights ], and Toro beat him ,Toro's ko % just over 20%, he
had him down.

Valdez floored an aging Monzon,stopped Bobby Cassidy on a cut eye scored a late tko over Tonna and tkod Cohen,that's about it .

Film proves Valdez could bang ,so why did he not get more kos over the better guys?
It's not as if he was a crude slugger .

Hearns has better wins at the weight imo.
The Hit Man would take a points dec, though he might visit the canvas at some point.

[Manassa]

Not sure if we are meant to , judge these guys chances on what they accomplished at that specified weight ,or, at their best ,and having boiled down.
For a big puncher Valdez didn't stop many names at the weight, in fact he didnt stop many names period .His claim to fame as a banger is koing Briscoe once in three fights.Obviously a fine acheivement,in fact a unique one.
Guys like Ralph Palladin,Pete Toro and Cassius Greene went the route with Valdez .
Greene was 8-10-11, at the time, and Palladin [16 fights ], and Toro beat him ,Toro's ko % just over 20%, he
had him down.

Valdez floored an aging Monzon,stopped Bobby Cassidy on a cut eye scored a late tko over Tonna and tkod Cohen,that's about it .

Film proves Valdez could bang ,so why did he not get more kos over the better guys?
It's not as if he was a crude slugger .

Hearns has better wins at the weight imo.
The Hit Man would take a points dec, though he might visit the canvas at some point.

Ike Williams has the same problem on his record. He was a great puncher.

[Flea Man]

Valdez was notoriously tough and a hard banger. From what I've sen of him, he took rounds off at times (though obviously had the ability to turn things on when he wanted, putting punches together or throwing crisp yet bludgeoning single shots) but I feel Hearns would grit it out.

At 154, I feel there's every possibility that Tommy blows Valdez away early. I go for Valdez's toughness to pull him through, I think he would damage Hearns at certain points but that Hearns (if he's in multi-faceted mood rather than hagler-esque tear-up mode) would win on points.

[JimmyShimmy]

I dont' like the difference in physical strength. Valdez had a nice guard like say Luigi Minchillo and the power and cobinations to go with it. Of course he is naturally bigger as well.

I don't like Hearn's chances!

[PowerPuncher]

Valdez can be outboxed and had slow plodding footwork, I see Hearns fully exploiting this. Hearns would also possibly be the biggest puncher Valdez faced. Down the stretch and in a war Valdez is a threat, but if Hearns boxes smart and is ready for the full 15 it really shouldnt be a massive problem for him

Also lets not forget Valdez was very much pre-prime when he fought at or below 154lbs. Or are we assuming a 156-157lb Valdez can make 154? If not he is way way out of his depth

[mcvey]

Ike Williams has the same problem on his record. He was a great puncher.
I know, I beleive I have been a fan of Ike's a trifle longer than you M.
Film evidence proves that Valdez was a hitter,but how come he lost to Palladin and Toro? Anyone of that standard beat Hearns?
Toro was 26-11-3 , really a big welter. and Valdez was in his 33rd fight ,at the age of 24 he was not a kid.
Greene went the distance with Valdez and he was only a welterweight.Palladin beat Valdez clearly ,so what's with all these lapses?
Did Valdez find his groove ? Maybe he was a latterday Walcott, who after gaining direction and focus , began to show what he was capable of?
I dont know the answer,but I lean towards Tommy who could out box him imo.
Fact is, Valdez never beat a great fighter ,and he lost twice to Corro ,one of the weakest Champs imo,and he was still only 32 when he did so.
His rep stands on 2 close fights with a 34 and 35 year old Monzon,both of which he lost ,and 3 wins over Briscoe,the 2nd one by ko ,but let's not forget that Briscoe also lost his next fight after this defeat, to a nearly 36 year old Emille Griffith, he was sliding a bit.
Its entirely possible we give Valdez too much props for game efforts in fights that he lost, and multiple wins over a man who ended up with 24 losses on his record.
Just playing around with this really.

[Mantequilla]

Palladin was actually quite a good obscure fighter, just one of those guys who didn't seem to have the support or breaks sometimes needed to get anywhere.He had a very awkwarad style and could box or brawl equally well.

he was no match for the counterpunching finesse of a young prime Kalule though.Watts had his number too.

[MRBILL]

Hearns' left jab was as wicked as it gets south of Larry Holmes in the early to middle 1980s...... In 1984, at 154 pounds, Hearns at age 25 / 26, beats all mo-fo's whoever fought between 149 to 154 pounds, in a time machine...... Peace...

MR.BILL

[Manassa]

I know, I beleive I have been a fan of Ike's a trifle longer than you M.
Film evidence proves that Valdez was a hitter,but how come he lost to Palladin and Toro? Anyone of that standard beat Hearns?
Toro was 26-11-3 , really a big welter. and Valdez was in his 33rd fight ,at the age of 24 he was not a kid.
Greene went the distance with Valdez and he was only a welterweight.Palladin beat Valdez clearly ,so what's with all these lapses?
Did Valdez find his groove ? Maybe he was a latterday Walcott, who after gaining direction and focus , began to show what he was capable of?
I dont know the answer,but I lean towards Tommy who could out box him imo.
Fact is, Valdez never beat a great fighter ,and he lost twice to Corro ,one of the weakest Champs imo,and he was still only 32 when he did so.
His rep stands on 2 close fights with a 34 and 35 year old Monzon,both of which he lost ,and 3 wins over Briscoe,the 2nd one by ko ,but let's not forget that Briscoe also lost his next fight after this defeat, to a nearly 36 year old Emille Griffith, he was sliding a bit.
Its entirely possible we give Valdez too much props for game efforts in fights that he lost, and multiple wins over a man who ended up with 24 losses on his record.
Just playing around with this really.

Too many double standards.

[mcvey]

Too many double standards.
You will have to illustrate them for me.
At under 155lbs ,
Hearns beat
Shields
Cuevas
Singletary
Geraldo
Benitez
Minchillo
Duran
Hutchins
Thats three Champs,two of whom are ATG's,and six contenders.
Who did Valdez beat at the weight?
At 160lbs I go for Valdez,but that was not the question.

[Manassa]

You will have to illustrate them for me.
At under 155lbs ,
Hearns beat
Shields
Cuevas
Singletary
Geraldo
Benitez
Minchillo
Duran
Hutchins
Thats three Champs,two of whom are ATG's,and six contenders.
Who did Valdez beat at the weight?
At 160lbs I go for Valdez,but that was not the question.

It's just things like 'a man who ended up with 24 losses on his record' as though that actually means anything. Point is, Valdez beat Briscoe at his own game and punched the shit out of him.

That's one example.

[jowcol]

Valdez can be outboxed and had slow plodding footwork, I see Hearns fully exploiting this. Hearns would also possibly be the biggest puncher Valdez faced. Down the stretch and in a war Valdez is a threat, but if Hearns boxes smart and is ready for the full 15 it really shouldnt be a massive problem for him

Also lets not forget Valdez was very much pre-prime when he fought at or below 154lbs. Or are we assuming a 156-157lb Valdez can make 154? If not he is way way out of his depth

That's my problem with this matchup. Valdez never fought in these newly created classes (which IMHO have ruined boxing) Why not just talk a Rodrigo-Tommy Middleweight scrap?

[mcvey]

It's just things like 'a man who ended up with 24 losses on his record' as though that actually means anything. Point is, Valdez beat Briscoe at his own game and punched the shit out of him.

That's one example.
Well. thats a valid point ,three fine victories but he didn't weigh 154lbs when he acheived them .
I am no doubt obtuse and looking at this from the wrong angle.
Are you taking Valdez at his best ,and then boiling 6 lbs off him ?
If you are, do you feel he wil be as strong ?
I was looking at what he and Hearns acheived respectively at under 156lbs.
My take on Briscoe is that he was a very good fighter for a long time a police man of the division,if you like, but he lost to Griffith and Rodriguez , two ex welters,albeit great ones.
Is three wins over Briscoe enough to make him favourite here?
I suppose that is what I am mulling over,because if you take Briscoe off his record it doesn't look that special imo.
I am not looking to disagree for the sake of it,its more like I am thinking out loud.

[MRBILL]

The Hearns who parked James Shuler in March of '86 was peaked at 160, and he was recovering from another busted knuckle incident too......... For the record, Hearns popped his knuckle on his right paw twice before against the heads of "Benitez & Hagler."

Hearns then dropped back to 154 to TKO Mark Medal in the summer of '86 in a dreadful showing on PPV......... Once again, Hearns said he his hand was tender and brittle in that fight.......

I'm not trying to make excuses for Hearns, but I do believe Manny Steward saying that Hearns had sore and somewhat damaged knuckles in his right paw for several key fights in the mid-to-late 80s.......

Steward said he took Hearns to a specialist in the early 1990s prior to them reuniting as a team and a doctor found that Hearns did indeed have a small bone that was improperly healed which cause discomfort and pain....... Upon being fixed, Hearns came back and score several quick KO's over decent fighters........... Andrew Maynard being one victim of note............

A healthy Tommy Hearns is / was too much for Roddy Valdez between 154 to 160 pounds, in my book......

MR.BILL

[mcvey]

The Hearns who parked James Shuler in March of '86 was peaked at 160, and he was recovering from another busted knuckle incident too......... For the record, Hearns popped his knuckle on his right paw twice before against the heads of "Benitez & Hagler."

Hearns then dropped back to 154 to TKO Mark Medal in the summer of '86 in a dreadful showing on PPV......... Once again, Hearns said he his hand was tender and brittle in that fight.......

I'm not trying to make excuses for Hearns, but I do believe Manny Steward saying that Hearns had sore and somewhat damaged knuckles in his right paw for several key fights in the mid-to-late 80s.......

Steward said he took Hearns to a specialist in the early 1990s prior to them reuniting as a team and a doctor found that Hearns did indeed have a small bone that was improperly healed which cause discomfort and pain....... Upon being fixed, Hearns came back and score several quick KO's over decent fighters........... Andrew Maynard being one victim of note............

A healthy Tommy Hearns is / was too much for Roddy Valdez between 154 to 160 pounds, in my book......

MR.BILL

I think the injury incurred in the Benitez fight was caused by his fist landing on Wilfred's elbow,which can be clearly seen in the fight , also his comment when he comes back to his corner is clearly audible .

[MRBILL]

I think the injury incurred in the Benitez fight was caused by his fist landing on Wilfred's elbow,which can be clearly seen in the fight , also his comment when he comes back to his corner is clearly audible .

Its possible.... I do have the fight on tape from '82............ A long, kinda' boring and tactical 15 rounder, but I was rooting for Hearns.....

I recall Hearns tagged Benitez in around the 6th round and Benitez stumbled for a second......... I noticed after that Hearns became a pure boxer mere jabbing like hell............

MR.BILL

[Manassa]

Well. thats a valid point ,three fine victories but he didn't weigh 154lbs when he acheived them .
I am no doubt obtuse and looking at this from the wrong angle.
Are you taking Valdez at his best ,and then boiling 6 lbs off him ?
If you are, do you feel he wil be as strong ?
I was looking at what he and Hearns acheived respectively at under 156lbs.
My take on Briscoe is that he was a very good fighter for a long time a police man of the division,if you like, but he lost to Griffith and Rodriguez , two ex welters,albeit great ones.
Is three wins over Briscoe enough to make him favourite here?
I suppose that is what I am mulling over,because if you take Briscoe off his record it doesn't look that special imo.
I am not looking to disagree for the sake of it,its more like I am thinking out loud.

Okay, well, as I said, Valdez beat Briscoe at his own game. I think those three wins, particularly the knockout, prove a lot, because not many people could hang with Briscoe at mid range. Slick skills could avoid his punches and pick him off, but Valdez took the best from the scariest middleweight contender since Hurricane Carter.

Valdez has no other wins, aside from maybe Gratien Tonna who was a nasty puncher, which are as telling as the Briscoe fights. He has the two against Monzon, which he ultimately lost.

But this is a case of me believing in Valdez' potential. People often pick Hagler to beat Greb despite the gulf in level of opposition. Sometimes you just see something special in a fighter who probably didn't always live up to his potential, but who has a couple of fights where everything came together better than most.

I mean, Valdez' punching display against Briscoe on film is probably one of the top twenty performances I've seen.

[Raging B(_)LL]

If Tommy strictly boxes and doesn`t look to engage he can win, but there is always the threat of the fight coming to an end with a single, sudden fight ending blow by Rodrigo who has the power to do so with both fists.

But as mcvey pointed out Valdez had trouble against movers and both Ralph Palladin and Pete Toro, both fights which I have on film, outboxed him comfortably and Valdez didn`t land much of anything against either man, and Tommy was superior in every respect to both of those guys.

The one thing here that I can see getting Tommy in trouble is his fighting pride, he may get a bit too overzealous at times and admire his work a bit too much as well, he can`t do that against Valdez without risking getting kayoed. I reckon Tommy will be well aware he has to play it safe against a foe like Valdez and would have outboxed him although he would probably endure a scare or two along the way.

[red cobra]

Valdez pushed Monzon to the limit..twice...he would have been far too lethal, far too much to handle, even for Hearns, who was hurt and decked by far less serious customers than Rocky Valdez.

[MRBILL]

Valdez pushed Monzon to the limit..twice...he would have been far too lethal, far too much to handle, even for Hearns, who was hurt and decked by far less serious customers than Rocky Valdez.

Hearns was only parked like a Cadillac at 160 pounds by "Hagler & Barkley" in 1985 and '88.................. No shame there......... Both of them dudes had power to KO middleweights..........

Tommy Hearns was also dropped by James Kinchen in 1988, but by then both Hearns and Kinchen weighed a solid 165 and 166 pounds...... Again, No shame in getting decked by the right-cross, left-hook combo that Hearns ate in round 4...... Hearns got up and held Kinchen for dear life......

So, I can see Hearns at a solid 160 pounds with much better skill and technique snapping and ripping up Valdez' face from long range and crossing over with numbing rights to Roddy's jaw to win this match.......

Hearns had TWO major drawbacks...... 1.) A glass-jaw....... 2.) A brittle right hand after 1982.......

However, if you cannot get to Hearns' jaw in a fight and his right paw is healed up, Hearns is therefore very lethal.........

MR.BILL