Originally Posted by Nightcrawler
really? on a p4p sense? interesting but honestly his post 160 career as you pointed out may well do it. hagler has a spot in my heart (hagler hearns is the first fight i ever watched and his fight with sibson is magical) but hopkins wins against pavlik, tarver and pascal may tip him over (**** the wright win)
That Wright win never did anything to you.
It's decent, ok? Nothing great, but it's a decent win.
Not much either way in terms of resume. Hagler has one really, really great win and a series of solid, respectable ones. Hopkins has a few moderately great wins and a series of solid, respectable ones.
Not much either way in terms of dominance/consistency. Nard held the title for longer and made more defenses, but Hagler beat every man he ever faced bar Leonard. They both had a decade without a loss.
Each guy was a brilliant, absolutely fantastic fighter at their best. If you want to know, I'd favor Hopkins over Hagler, honestly, but they're right there with each other so no edge on this one, either.
Longevity is what splits the difference. Hagler's whole career spanned 14 years and he was done by his early 30's. Hopkins has been a championship level fighter for nearly 20 years and remains a quality Light Heavyweight just a few birthdays from 50. The fact that he's doing all of this after a jump up in weight, something Marv never attempted, only serves to seal the deal.
Monzon's a bit trickier, but I could see a case there, too.