Floyd Patterson (195lbs) v Marvin Hagler (165ish lbs)

[McGrain]

Who and why?

[Minotauro]

Floyd would win his major weakness was his chin but against Hagler it wouldn't be a problem plus his blend of speed and power would be too much for Hagler.

[Vantage_West]

if this was at super-middle i would of given floyd by his amazing hand speed he still hand lightning hand speed at heavy/cruiser (maybe the fastest handed heavywieght champion of all time? maybe) but at middlewieght he was amazing i have footage of him fighting don grant and man those combo's were tight. body to head everything. against hagler he is the bigger man the faster man and the harder hitting man his boxing abilty was better than people say if you see the george chuvalo-floyd patterson fight there is a moment when floyd knows he aint gonna ko him and bounces on his toes with a tyson like guard while throwing these machine gun like jabs...

ud for floyd, hagler is maybe the best middlewieghts of all time but he just isnt gonan beat the heavier 195 pound floyd

[Nemesis]

Patterson would be far, far too fast for Hagler

[NickHudson]

and far, far too strong.

Originally Posted by Nemesis

Patterson would be far, far too fast for Hagler

[mcvey]

Originally Posted by McGrain

Who and why?

Dont really see the point of this matchup,but Floyd by ko,why,he is a world class heavy weight fighting a middleweight.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by mcvey

Dont really see the point of this matchup,

It's to see how highly people rate Hagler, and if anyone was brave enough to make a pick in this case.

I'm intrigued by Hagler. I guess I want to call him a punch-boxer. Anyway, it seems reasonable, in my opinion, to pick Greb over Walcott who is a top 20 heavy, it is reasonable top pick Calzaghe, whos is a SMW over Peter who is a heavy - reasonable, mind you, not neccesarily correct.

I was wondering if people would think it is reasonable to pick Hagler over Patterson...he is certainly greater than Cal and as great as Greb. Many have him at no.1

Anyway I was hoping that those who picked for him (no takers!) would provide insight into how he would have done at a higher weight and why he never stepped up and that those who picked against him might explore his limitations a little bit.

So everybody who has picked Patterson; why not Hagler? Concentrating upon Hagler's shortcomings when up against this big/skilled fighter as opposed to Patterson's strengths.

[Nemesis]

McG, why didnt you put the matchup at Hagler 165 vs Patterson 175, as Patterson was a great LtHeavy too

[g0tpHo]

Floyd Patterson wouldn't even be a heavyweight in our day, which is amazing when you consider that he held his own pretty well. Patterson at a lower weight would have been amazing, I read somewhere that Cus said that they would have a middleweight on their hands if they didn't make him eat.

[Rattler]

I give Hagler a better chance than most would.

Patterson chin is that delicate - and Hagler knew how to put a weakened fighter away when he needed to.

Now, granted, that Patterson has the size advantage over Hagler, but I think handspeed is about equal - Patterson was extremely fast for a HW, but not amazingly so for a MW.

It takes patience and precision to defeat somebody who fights Patterson's style. Somebody who knows how to take advantage of that style. Somebody who can throw a lot of punches, from a lot of directions.... most preferrably with either hand.

That sounds an awful lot like Hagler, who is tough enough to take a solid amount of punishment (he's got a better leg base than Patterson did, I think) and also work against Patterson's style effectively. He wouldn't KO Floyd, but he could cut him up (which of course would be a major problem for Hagler too).

I favor Patterson by decision, but it's not gonna be a blow out.

[Nemesis]

Originally Posted by Rattler

Patterson was extremely fast for a HW, but not amazingly so for a MW.

Yes he was!

you obviously havent seen the footage of Patterson as an amateur

[Rattler]

Originally Posted by Nemesis

Yes he was!

you obviously havent seen the footage of Patterson as an amateur

So, that handspeed is going to carry over with 30+ pounds of extra weight?

Again.... 195 lbs. Patterson - not 165 lbs. Patterson.

[achillesthegreat]

Not a better fighter but a bigger man. Hagler would have nearly no advantages.

[enquirer]

I fail to see how calzaghe would beat peter? By this logic hagler could beat patterson....Remember,when a guy has NEVER campaigned at well above his weight then it is kind of unknown how he would fare against much bigger opponents....Maybe hagler could compete at lt heavy,but not at heavy.....Some fighters are made to compete at much higher weights than their original divisions by virtue of their boxing skill/power /physical make up and their being big for their original division....Duran,,de la hoya and hearns being some examples...Its unknown what marvin would be like at even lt heavy,he had the chin,skill and such like but we dont really know.....No one could have predicted jones and toney campaigning successfully at heavy all the way from middle...Although in jones' case he only had one fight so we cant say he was truely successful at heavy...

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by Nemesis

McG, why didnt you put the matchup at Hagler 165 vs Patterson 175, as Patterson was a great LtHeavy too

He would have been a top 5 Light-Heavy in my opinion, if he'd hung there apart from the odd step up...fair point. But as I said, i'm interested in how Hagler might do v a small Heavy.