Who ranks higher, Hagler or Hopkins

So what? What fact does that change?

Hopkins KO'd both Trinidad and ODLH, in case you weren't aware.

 

And he's being used as some kind of example of Marvin as this unbeatable guy, when in fact he got knocked the **** out against a very pedestrian fighter very soon after. So what if Marvin looked good against him? And for the record, no, I don't see a lot of difference. Hagler hadn't declined much at all when SRL beat him. It's a myth that's debunked by simply watching the fights.

 

I will ask myself, if we could put them in a time machine and if I have to bet money. My money will def. be on Hagler, that being said I will rank Hagler higher.

 

Absolutely incorrect.And you must look at the fights with an honest,open mind.Hagler's downward slide was evident against Roldan as he was getting tagged regularly against a fellow that would not have laid a glove on him just a couple of years before.Even Merchant mentioned the beginning of the slide.It's astonishing you can't see the difference in the 82 version and the 87 version of Hagler.Now,for the 3rd time because you simply refuse to answer the question.Publicly,Leonard has admitted that he chose to challenge Hagler when he did upon watching the Mugabi fight after discussing fighting Hagler for years.Again,if Hagler wasn't shot,why did Leonard choose to challenge Hagler when he did?

 

I'm fully aware,as is everyone on these boards.And that's the best on B-Hop's middleweight resume-a fighter that won his 1st title at 130,arguably beat Ike Quartey at 147,lost twice to Sugar Shane and got a gift against Felix Sturm just before B-Hop?Or a fighter whose best win at 160 was against William Joppy,whose best win was against a shot Roberto Duran?Nothing against Tito and Oscar as they were both terrific fighters,but they certainly were not great middleweights.And Hagler wouldn't have ko'd both Oscar and Tito?

 

how does Hopkins come out so far ahead? He lost to Taylor and Calzaghe. Because he is old people give him credit for losing. Hagler lost to the great Ray Leonard and Hopkins to Taylor. Even Hopkins handpicking didn't work with Taylor and Calzaghe. Hopkins is great, but a Hagler quality he is not. And Toney is further from Hagler than Hopkins. People truly forget how great Marvin was and how dominant.

 

on observation many things helped Marvin's decline. He had 67 fights and almost 400 rounds boxing. I think the Hearns fight was his last fight where he came in sharp and active and motivated. He fought his heart out, he came in all pumped up and was hit with some hard punches and he put out his all. After that he lost the motivation and was out for a year and then fought Mugabi, who he was rusty for and took some punishment. He then talked of retirement, yet took the Leonard fight and another year later fought Ray and came in 158 pounds and underweight and lost. It was uncustomary for Hagler to be inactive, and this was 2 years in a row only one fight a year. Hagler for Leonard was not close to the guy who fought Hearns. You can tell the way he was in the corner before each fight. With Hearns he looked ready to go and in shape-the last time he looked like this. With Leonard he looked muscular but tight and dry and older. Very different.

 

the poll numbers speak for themselves.

 

The quality Hagler fought were leaps and bounds over Hopkins opposition with all due respect. Srl, Duran,Hearns,etc doesnt get better than that

 

Hagler never lost to no white boy.

 

I haven't answered it because it's stupid and unimportant. Fighters are sometimes gracious. SRL says that, he also says he lost to Tommy, Ali says he's scared of Tyson. It doesn't mean **** and isn't worth the time I just wasted replying to you about it.

 

Hardly the best fight on Nard's resume, but that just backs up the original point. NO welterweight is coming up and jacking Nard's title, and the fact that Nard beats up smaller men who try it doesn't mean those smaller men aren't badasses. It just means that, unlike Hagler, Hopkins is much, much bigger and badder than they are. In fact, Hopkins might not even have HAD his best win yet.

Hagler might have KO'd them, he might not. Already been proven beyond doubt he goes life and death and sometimes gets beat by welterweights, isn't it?

 

Yep, Hopkins handpicked for 15 years straight, handpicked himself a HOF SMW and a big, strong, young MW challenger to get robbed against didn't he? What a GENIUS to manage to only fight handpicked foes for most of two decades. He must be the smartest boxer AND matchmaker that ever lived.

 

Yep, and Duran had to **** too bad to keep fighting and Pryor didn't know about the 'mixed' water.

The three amigos of overratedness.