Tommy Burns vs. Marvin Hagler

Highly intruiging match up.I'm sure the majority will unhesitatingly pick Marvin but at super middle Burns has a shout , I'll be ridiculed for this but imo.

 

that's ridiculous marvin would hammer him

 

As a super middle weight Burns beat many of the top heavyweights of his day.Hagler drew with Antuofermo ,went the distance with an old Duran, yet he is going to hammer Burns?

 

yes !!!

 

We differ. I don't say he won't win , but I think Burns could give him a very good fight.

 

Who says this is a mismatch ?

Burns was a much bigger hitter, fought much bigger men, was stronger, very cagey, had an excellent chin and a ton of heart .. Hagler never fought a guy anything like him ..

 

A major factor might be how Burns handles a south paw, they weren't that common in his day,don't know if he ever met one.

 

Burns could well have taken it. Let's not forget that he was competitive with men much heavier than he was and Marvin's best weight was the 160 lb level.


It would have been a very good fight.

 

Outside of having fought bigger men, which was the norm for fat middles of his time, can we really say he was stronger, a heavier hitter or more cagey than Hagler.

Or does this matchup underscore the paucity of heavyweights when Burns "ruled the roost"?

 

could be a good fight but gotta go with Hagler on this one

 

I think we can say with confidence he was a more proven hitter since he kod quite a few heavyweights ,whereas Hagler never did.
As to the "paucity of heavyweights during Burns time two questions
1.Who did he miss?
2, Hagler's major fights were against Hearns,[ex welter,]Leonard,[ex welter,] Antuofermo,[ex light middle,] Mugabi,[lightmiddle] and Duran,[ex lightweight] does this underscore the paucity of middleweights during his time?

 

Number on if you look at the photos of him v.s.Flynn, O'Brien or Johnson he was far from fat. He had large legs unlike the beanpoles of Hagler, Hearn's, Monzon and many others.

He defeated a young , prime Jim Flynn by KO and Flynn was one tough SOB. He diced up Marvin Hart easily and we can all say whet we like but he did so easier then Jack Johnson did. He lasted 14 rounds against a prime Jack Johnson was put up a game performance. He defeated a prime Jack O'Brien who is one of the box masters of all time at light heavyweight. He knocked heavyweights out cold with his punches ...

I love Hagler but he would never even consider taking on a light heavyweight while he was a top contender or champion. I think Burns was the mentally stronger fighter and could have a hell of a shot to pull this one off ..

 

He had a fine set of birthing hips. I'm sure he could push an enormous brood out.

Yeah, I've seen footage of what passed for heavyweight excellence in that era. Color me less than impressed. An ordinary modern light heavy would be a heavyweight king in those times. In my opinion, boxing hadn't been invented yet.

Burns was a one trick pony who weighted 168 for the biggest fight of his life. Hagler would slaughter him.

 

Burns would eat his cornflakes out of Haglers skull.

Not taking anything away from Hagler, but Burns was an absolute monster for his size, and his size is probably a category above Haglers.