Which fight was more entertaining: Hagler-Hearns or Hamed-Kelley

Hagler vs Hearns Simply because those two fighters are A.T.G'S .

 

Kelley was way past his prime when he faced Hamed. I guess it's exciting for some to watch a guy bounce off the canvas many times. Once Hamed faced a really good prime champion type, he got exposed.

 

It was exciting for the fact that both guys on and off the canvas and that it could have ended with either man being KOed.

 

Hamed-Kelley. Hagler-Hearns was too one sided.

 

Hagler hearns was better because in the lead up to the fight no could predict what was about to happen.when it happened it was a war.

 

:verysad

 

Hagler Hearns by a universe.

 

Hagler vs Hearns two superstars acting like they had nothing to lose!

 

Hagler v Hearns for the reason that it was two of the all time titans of the sport. Hamed v Kelley because I really, really wanted to see Hamed get ktfo

 

Hagler vs. Hearns, just because it was two ATG's going all out.

 

I remember watching both fights live. Kelly was soooooo sure he was going to KO Hamed. He could have pulled off the trick but in his excitement and carelessness ran square into a KO blow.

 

both were very entertaining no need to be militant

 

If Kelly wasn't past it when he fought Hamed, then he wasn't as good as we thought in the 1st place because in the 2 1/2 years leading up to the Hamed fight, he was stopped by good, not great Alejandro Gonzalez and he had 2 draws against good, not great fighters: Tommy Parks and Clarence I forgot his last name. Banks maybe?

 

Yes but Hagler Hearns was a fight of 2 atgs. Hamed Kelly wasn't.