Why is Sugar Ray Leonard ranked so much higher than Hagler all-time?

I just cant picture Hopkins beating Hagler. No way. Hagler was too intense.

But it's all speculation. No one can be wrong or right in such a debate.

 

I think a lot of it has to do with Leonard's media-savvy. I think Leonard got a gift decision against Hagler.

 

I hear you Robbi. Still vehemently disagree with you on the speed comparison. A peak Hops would beat the Hagler who fought
SRL, but not by a huge margin. Peace

 

if you are talking 1987 of course Hopkins not only could win but would win. he was just a shell waiting to be knocked off but prime for prime this is no contest, just a good workout or tuneup for bigger game

 

So this man who was "just a shell" was good enough to beat Leonard? Hagler wasn't anywhere near being completley shot. He was past his prime.

Hopkins' style isn't ideal for Hagler, who was at his best when fighters had limited ability or came forward. Thats why he chewed up fighters like Minter, Hearns, and Mugabi over the second half of the contest.

You can't see anything positive at all in Hopkins. He's a superb mover around the ring, laterally, in-and-out, and can also come forward. Do you deny that he wasn't a skilled ring general? Hagler was superb at his best, but he wasn't superman. Hagler would need to force the fight and try to get Hopkins into a war, even then he risks being countered to death. I can't see him out-boxing and out-hustling him in a tactical affair. Hopkins' defense, counters, and punch economy is a tad better than Hagler's.

A prime Hagler never looked convincing against Duran, who came out of the fight as the moral winner. Everyone had Duran down for a knockout defeat. Hagler's prime always gets knocked back a year or two by his sternest followers, usually 81-82, due to his unconvincing showing that night. He looked as good as ever against Sibson earlier the same year. So good that many see it as the best all round performance of his career.

 

Hagler and Hopkins is a very close fight, IMO.

 

Did you see the article I posted about 79 year old, Don Familton, who seen Hopkins training at the Wild Card gym last year and also gave his take on Hopkins' performance against Pavlik?

Familton knows the game well. He's seen Arguello training also, Jouis, Laguna, Williams, Frazier, Duran, Bivins, H Johnson, etc. He's seen them all. Not just in training, but fighting in world title fights. He said Hopkins is closest to being as technically flawless as any fighter he has ever seen.

 

http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/showthread.php?t=98576&highlight=familton

There you go Rooster. Just a guy giving an honest opinion. Manassa, you will like that article. A fair bit reading.

 

Remember, you're talking to the guy that saw Hagler both in his prime and past it during his sparring sessions and concluded that before the fight even started that he was shot. If my evaluation of his condition upsets you that is regrettable but unavoidable. I only speak the truth and only the truth. My word is law

And I didn't say there was anything wrong with Hopkins. It's just that Hagler was simply a higher class athlete even as Joe Frazier was of a higher class than Ron Stander, as Ray Leonard was a higher class than Pete Ranzany or dangerous Dave Green or Andy the dove Price or as Terry Norris was of a higher class than not so sugary Ray Leonard

Sure he had skill-coupled with modest abilities but if he really belonged in the elite dont you think he could have done better with a weight drained, one handed Roy Jones?

My prediction: Hagler breaks him apart in 8 one sided rounds

 

You're probably the only person on this entire forum who sees the fight going that way.

Hopkins wasn't at his best for the Jones fight. Mind how Hagler was past his prime for the Leonard fight. Roles reversed with Hopkins. He wasn't in his prime for the Jones fight. He was probably better against Eastman 12 years later when he gained experience. And even in 2005 he'd have given Jones a better fight. Jones probably always beats Hopkins at their best.

Will you not give Hopkins some room here and admit he wasn't at the peak of his powers around the time he fought Jones? Just before you give your opinion, everyone on planet earth who's knowledgeable about the sport knows Hopkins wasn't in his prime for the Jones fight. You may want to go against the grain though.

 

My apologies I had no idea he meant that much to you. Hopkins posseses the longevity of Archie Moore. What more needs to be said?

 

Rooster. Whats all this 'apologies' regarding exactly?

Archie Moore had over four times as many fights as Hopkins. Not really a fair comparison, huh?

 

Hopkins doesn't mean as much to me, as Hagler does to you. Thats obvious.

I like Hopkins and Hagler. Just look at my avatar. Although at times my avatars can be rather misleading when it comes to my favs. I had one of Frazier a few days ago. Not because I like Frazier, more so on the photo itself.

And what was all this 'Leonard fans' earlier in the thread. Because people have Leonard over Hagler P4P, does that automatically mean they are fans?

Personally, I dislike Leonard. He has cheeky face that needs punched. And his two titles from seperate divisions in one fight against Lalonde is an outright disgrace to himself and the sport.

 

Let's not pretend. That's J T's angle. Anyone with his chin doesn't deserve a high ranking. A more suitable replacement would be Terry Norris

 

A trilogy between them would end 1-1-1 I think. Hopkins himself said he doesn´t know who would win out of them but he was sure that both would be done after this.