Marvin Hagler vs Roberto Duran compared to Bernard Hopkins vs Oscar De La Hoya

I think Hopkins's win is the better result, since it was a KO. Hopkins was also the older fighter while Marvin was younger. He probably also had less of a size advantage.

On the other hand, Oscar didn't do much at MW while Duran went on to beat Barkley five years later...

 

****

 

Nah. Hopkins never came in heavy. He was a vocal opponent of boiling down too much.

He was 163 against Jones Jr, and even against Taylor he came in at a record 168

 

As previously said, Hopkins wasn't that huge in the ring. Oscar, on the other hand, boiled down to make WW not to mention LW. He was probably around 160 in the ring against Hopkins and would have trouble making a lower weight with a same day weigh-in. Unlike Duran he was a tall guy that could carry 160 lbs without looking bloated.

 

No way was DLH close to Hopkins in natural size, they're at least 2 differences of natural size between them.

DLH was seriously bloated against Sturm, he looked much more fleshy at 154 than he did earlier in his career too. When he went up in weight he gained bodyfat.

 

Hopkins often offered to do same day weigh ins to get smaller fighters to fight him or come down in weight to 154. The guy made 156 and 157 several times when he was past 30 years old. He could have made 160 on same day weigh ins. To try to give Marvin a leg up in the argument by claiming Hopkins wasnt a natural MW is disingenuous.

 

As bloated as Duran? I think not. DLH was clearly the bigger man naturally than Duran was while Hopkins, despite being taller, was a natural MW.

 

Oscar was obviously just flat out of shape against Sturm.Seemed to think he could just turn up and win.

He was a **** middleweight and an ordinary junior middle that quit against Hopkins as soon as the going started to get tough.The little show of punching the canvas in frustration after he'd been counted out almost made me want to wish cancer to every cell of his body.

Definitely a bigger man than Duran though.Just ****e above Welter.

 

I think Hopkins went to that guy Mackie Shilstone to bulk up when he decided his career was going to be at 175. It is a bit rich to say he was a natural L / Heavy. He wasn't.

On topic Haglers win was better, because he was down on 2 of the cards after 13 rounds.

 

It seems ridiculous to me someone would try and deny Hopkins was a natural middleweight.

I think the guy has been very overrated for his 175 exploits at an advanced age, i'd rather he retired after the calzaghe loss so i didn't have to sit through his second rate spoiling against fighters that had no clue what to do against anyone remotely technically savvy, but you've got to be honest man.

 

I think Haglers win.was better, simply because in my opinion, Duran was a better all around fighter than Oscar...

Styles make fights, Durans style gave Hagler fits, i don't know why folks thought Hagler was just gonna have a field day with Duran, hell Duran beat Leonard, and violently knocked out Moore, and Barkley...

 

Duran didn't look bloated to me against Hagler, he looked in damn good shape..

Duran never did have a muscular physique, which in my opinion is an advantage, big muscular guy's tire out quicker sometimes because all those muscles require oxygen, but you could tell in the ring Duran was strong as hell...

 

That may very well be true, but not compared to Hagler he wasn't. Funny thing is that if Duran had been in the same shape he was when he fought Barkley he very likely would have beaten Hagler.

 

God no.The Duran that fought Barkley would have been magnetised on the end of hagler's jab all night.His reflexes had clearly diminished between the two fights.