Originally Posted by PowerPuncher
FFS Watch some 90s Hopkins, or even the Trinidad version, you're comparing a past prime Hopkins. Hopkins in his prime had a higher output than Hagler.
And Hopkins went 12 years without a MW loss and 19years without a clear loss, Hagler only went 11 years without a MW loss. How many losses would Hagler have had at MW if he fought their until the age of 40 or 48?
PowerPuncher, how many losses Hagler would have had if he kept fighting is not relevant. Beating up Tito is vastly different than trying to beat up Hagler... Hagler was much more physical and a much better fighter than Tito, he of suspect chin .