Confirm/Deny: Hagler-Hearns is overrated.

This fight was so important in so many ways. It was a fight between boxing's elite. Tommy had gone from invisible man to boxing's hottest star.

It was a contest betweens Hagler, two time p4p king vs. Hearns, 1984's fighter of the year

This fight also had significant meaning to most fans. This fight would prove which of the two was of higher caliber skills all along; was it those hearns-leonard types or those in the middleweight division led by Hagler, which we suspected all along?

Those of us who were around at the time had to wait three years for the answer. Originally it had been scheduled for 1982. Tommy claimed a hurt finger but I think it was really a lack of confidence. I can always tell when another fighter is trying to back out or is hesitant.

Tommy had come a long way since his only loss and now the public's perception of the fight had turned around. The contrast beween both Marvin and Tommy's performance vs Duran had been so striking, it was almost as though Marvin had lost to Duran.

besides that, Duran had lost to Benitez and Benitez had lost to Hearns and ray was too scared to come out, claiming his eye kept him out of action. SO the only fight that really mattered was between Hagler and Hearns.

A loss to Tommy and ray leonard fans would claim that Leonard would have also done so, ignoring Tommy's giant leap in improvement. It would have been all over for marvin.

Tommy himself said in an interview that both he and Leonard would beat Hagler easy, that both were in a different class than Marvin and that he would stop him in three.

it's different when you already know the outcome. many, especially leonard fans doubted that Hagler even belonged in the ring with Tommy or Ray since both were so much more well known. And none of Hagler's p4p titles carried much weight with the fans.

Marv Albert and many other of the know-it-all press said, Hearns would take him out early. Benny Georgino, the manager/trainer of Little Red Lopez said that Hagler would run from Tommy becuz he had been a great champion and didnt want to go out a loser by knockout.

there is no doubt in my mind that had this bout been held today, that 80% of those in the forum would choose Tommy to either win a lopsided decision win with hagler holding on late to avoid being stoped or that Marvin would lose early with the refereee stepping in to stop the onslaught.

Overrated? No. THis was the last of the great bouts until the Chavez Taylor match five years later. Hagler Hearns was the most highly anticipated of the big fights but not only did you have to have been there, you also had to follow the sport very closley with a main interest in the middleweight division otherwise, who cares? It's just a good action fight and why would you care who wins?

The first round went the way it did on account of Hagler making the fight, of carrying the fight to Tommy, something which most people accuse him of not being able to do. But in fact, does it better than anyone since a fighter named Dempsey.

After that first round which, nobody else could have possibly kept up, Marvin also proved he was the better BOXER by outscoring Tommy from long range and outlasting the younger man. As I said, only Hagler was capable of keeping this kind of pace up and would have out-Fraziered Frazier himself.

He easily won the second round by calling upon some of his other skills the media did not suspect he had.

The third round confirmed his all around skills as a great finisher.

Those in the media were understandably bitter. Hagler went back to his usual high performance standards and it cost Tommy. Before the fight it was the same story how "Duran took him the distance". Let's see how Marvin handles that speed" and that Tommy would "knock out peanut head". After the fight, all the doubters had changed their tune to "no one can beat Hagler!"

So Hagler was once again the posrts p4p fighter, and now 1985's fighter of the year and the big question had finally been answered in decisive fashion.

 

Man I love this place.This is the best boxing website by far.You guys are streets ahead of anything else out there..for knowledge,eperience etc..

That out of the way....I was gutted for Tommy in this fight.Much as I hated Marvin(and I would have my pound of flesh when Ray outwitted him a few years later)he outmuscled Tommy in this fight...the heart on Marvin was unbelievable...those right hands he took would have knocked out an elephant...but he stood right there and returned fire like a warrior...finally downing Tommy inthe 3rd.

Tommy Hearns will alwayz be one of my ATG favourites..period.But Marvin wrote his name in folklore with this win.

 

In response to the thread question - It really depends on who is doing the rating.

Its not the no1 fight in history but IMO it produced thee best rd in history, rd1 & one of the best rds in history, rd2... it would likely be my all time favourite fight if it wasnt so short, 3 rds of MMH/TH aint as good as 12 rds of EM/MAB I or Chacon-Edwards II for eg.
It was over too soon, far too soon for my liking but it still makes my top 10 best ever fights, no problem.

:good

 

It can't be overrated simply because it only went three rounds, surely. I don't see at all how it can be overrated at all. The first round was one of the best ever. Voted the best ever by The Ring magazine. It was 100mph with heavy punches landed by both fighters over the course of most of the round. The second round was still damn good without being quite as good as the first. One of the best short fights ever. And one the most exciting fights ever, period.

 

I like a bit of give and take, changes in momentum in my truely great fights and Hagler-Hearns just didn't have that after the first 90 seconds. Great occasion, great first round, very good fight but still overrated IMHO.

 

It is overrated if you're spouting it as the best, most intense fight ever, but no one here is claiming that, I don't think. It is what it is: a very, very good, entertaining fight and a sure candidate for top ten.

 

Not so much on here but if you ask what the best fight ever was, "Hagler-Hearns" seems to be an almost automatic response for some people. I can honestly say it wouldn't get in my Top 10.

 

Ah, then I would have to disagree with them.

You're right though. I may have made that comment a bit too rashly. I can't say that it's a sure candidate now that I've thought about it more.

 

Deny. It was a great fight between two all time greats that gave the fan's their money's worth.

 

Maybe knowing the result before watching played a part in that eh ?

Live would have been special.

 

Deny
two world champions 3 round slug feast.

 

Yes... & for ME this fight does, I dont agree the result was never in doubt as soon as the 1st rd, it doesnt look that way to me, I only felt that way when Hearns hit the deck & I doubt anyone watching live felt the fight was as good as over before that KD.

:good

 

WOW, what a great fight it was, but i wouldnt say its over rated. Its one of the brutal fights out there and a great fight, but i would rate the Gatti Ward trilogy in higer regards now, that was savage.

 

What he said.