And won? So the way Hearns fought Marvin, whilst certainly entertaining,was not sustainable.( Unless Marvin s cut stopped the fight). But can you think of any one fighting Hagler in much the same way and having any success?
Hagler forced Hearns to fight that way it wasn't out of choice that Hearns fought the way he did vs Hagler. Hagler had real fire in his belly and came out unusually very aggressively like a whirling dervish. Jumping on Hearns not allowing him to use his reach that was the gameplan as Hagler stated himself. So it wasn't like Hearns had much of a choice Hagler dictated how the fight was going to go from the opening bell which was an absolute war. And Hagler had confidence in his durability that he could walk through Hearns's artillery to get the job done. If Hagler had fought in his usual manner which was a boxer/puncher he was more technical than a lot of people realise. Then I'm sure Hearns would've tried to keep it at range using his jab/right hand in more of a technical type of a fight. But as I said Hearns wasn't allowed to do that because Hagler didn't allow him to do it.
Nah. Guys who had the power (like GGG) were far too technical. Guys who could hit like Hearns and ultra aggressive (like Julian Jackson or McClellan) did not have the technical skills. It would take someone with the power and durability of a GGG with the aggressive mentality of a Hearns to have any success and i am afraid such a middleweight just does not exist.
Toney would probably have the best chance if he would actually be allowed to move his head, parry, and roll with punches.
