24.09.08 – by James Slater: Both Ronald Hearns and Julio Cesar Chavez Junior are young fighters attempting to follow in the footsteps of their all-time great fathers. Happy to be keeping the family name going, the two unbeaten light-middleweights also very much want to make their own mark in the sport of boxing. Hearns, currently 20-0(16) has won each of his pro bouts with little or no trouble thus far, whereas Chavez, currently 37-0-1(29) has struggled in a couple of his fights. It could be argued, that even though neither guy has been matched too tough yet, 22-year-old Chavez has met the slightly better competition. But who is the better prospect of the two, 29-year-old Hearns or the even younger Chavez?
There has been talk for quite a while suggesting the two sons of boxing legends may actually meet one day, and this would be the most complete way in which to answer the question this article asks.. Bit in the meantime, which boxer has looked the more talented, the more gifted and the best bet of the two to capture a world title? For my money, though he’s had far less bouts, Ronald Hearns gets the nod.
Faster than Chavez Junior, appearing to have a better boxing brain and seemingly possessing more punching power (although, so far, no way near looking as powerful as his awesome father), “The Chosen One,” as Hearns wishes to be known today, looks more of a natural than the Mexican. The jury is still out as to which fighter is the best in the opinion of most, and it’s true neither has done too much yet. But Hearns, with his loose boxing style and his very quick hands, has the look of a more polished boxer at this still early stage than does Chavez – even though Hearns has been a pro seven months less than Chavez and has had considerably fewer fights.
Many people felt Chavez Junior was lucky not to have lost to both Carlos Molina and, later, Matt Vanda. Neither fighter is top class and Chavez should not have had the tough times he had with Molina and, in his last fight, Vanda. Yes, Vanda is a better fighter than anyone Hearns has met, but not overwhelmingly so. Chavez is easier to hit than Hearns and though he’s shown he can gut it out in a tough fight, where Hearns has not yet, he shouldn’t have had to against the calibre of fighters he’s been matched with.
It would have been/will be very interesting to see Hearns in there with Vanda, to see if he could handle him better than Chavez did. I for one feel he would have done so and boxed his way to a points win or perhaps late stoppage without half the fuss Chavez had in grinding out his split decision victory. It seems clear Hearns is a better boxer than Chavez – consider the also hard nights Chavez had with movers like Jose Celaya and Giuseppe Loriga – but is he a better FIGHTER? On this score, with the ability to take some hurt and prevail, the nod must go to the Mexican.
We haven’t yet seen what Hearns’ chin is made of, whereas Chavez taken a few good punches and not gone over. But in terms of overall skill, boxing ability and sheer talent, Hearns looks a better shot to emulate his father by becoming a world champion than does the quite limited (albeit brave) Chavez.
This is just this writer’s opinion, obviously, and as stated above the only sure way to prove it would be for the two unbeaten 154-pounders to meet. Hopefully this will be the case one day next year. A match-up between two sons of what can almost be described as boxing royalty would surely be something to see. It may even conjure some of the glorious memories of the great fights the original Hearns and Chavez gave us.