just watched Haglar vs Hearns for the first time. FTW!!!!

One of the more illustrious moments in boxing history. To say they both put it on the line is a massive understatement.

Part of Hagler's stretch run of taking out #1 contenders: Hamsho II, Hearns and Mugabi. Some will be quick to point out Tommy and Beast moving up, but it's hard to deny a man's greatness when he's taking the highest level of opposition available at the time. At 160 anyway. Hagler wanted Monzon's record.

 

Got to appreciate what you have today or just watch MMA or something.

 

Love the FOTY selections, '79 to '90:

79: Leonard
80: Hearns
81: Leonard / Sanchez
82: Holmes
83: Hagler
84: Hearns
85: Hagler
86: Tyson
87: Holyfield
88: Tyson
89: Whitaker
90: Chavez

 

This content is protected

 

the strongest man won, no excuses, thats for god damn ***s.....

 

do you appreciate felix sturm vs ronald hearns ? nothing wrong pointing out when something sucks.....

 

i've seen that fight several times, and it's honestly one of the greatest fights of all time, but you cant say boxing has gone to **** because of the quality of the action in that fight compared to modern day fights. there are great battles in modern times that at least come close to that one and some would argue, surpass that one. I think the reason people can say boxing has gone to **** comparing that fight to others, is the way that fight was covered at a high level in the american media back then. there's not one fight in modern american boxing staged between two americans that can come close to the attention that hagler-hearns garnered. boxing, at least from an american perspective, has lost its relevance.

 

:dealR. Hearns vs Sturm wasn't so bad....Okay it was.

 

Dundee, Futch, Benton, Pacheco, Marv ALpert on that old NBC TV boxing show all said it was the greatest fight of all times.

 

I've seen better fights maybe, and maybe even better rounds tan round 1 of this one, but it was special, that's for sure. The fact that the two highest-profile and perhaps the two best fighters in the world were the ones causing that level of carnage made it all the more cool.


Hand or no hand, Hearns wasn't beating Hagler that day. The hand had nothing to do with it; it was his legs that caused his downfall.

Still, ya gotta love Tommy for being so ****ing fearless; that guy would fight anybody. That's the difference between boxing then and now. Great fights were actually made with regularity, whereas te focus now is on keeping that zero at all costs. Totally different ballgame now, and it's a damn shame.

 

If you break your hand on a guys chin you are in deep ****.

 

shane mosley, antonio margarito, aruturo gatti, erick morales, marco antonio barrera, bernard hopkins.........plenty of current they fighters who represent the "throwback warriors" in modern times. I would like to act Pac to that list bc..he might have some stipulations during negotiation process but overall, aside from Floyd, this lil midget makes the fight happen.

 

Mayweather is certainly not a throwback warrior, he's indicative of everything wrong with todays boxers. But Pacquaio is certainly not either, making sure opponents are weight drained (De la Hoya, Cotto, Margarito) and fighting old and shot opponents (Hatton, Mosley) not to mention a blown up 38 year old Marquez who beat him! When asked a question on a prospective fight 'talk to my promotor Bob Arum'. The guys had the most carefully selected opponents over the last 3 years, to make him look greater than he is. But his refusal to submit to Floyd's testing, and then all this talk of fighting Marquez again...

 

FYI not all matches back then were as exciting Hagler-Hearns did. They did have boring fights as well.

 

Hearns was at ringside and they showed him many times between rounds and afterwards while sturm was detsroying his son.
Makes me wonder what Tommy was thinking, knowing how easily he would have destroyed sturm in a few rounds.