Antonio Tarver vs Marvin Hagler

Nobody knows what Hagler would weigh in at fighting at 175lbs, but probably around 175lbs. Presumably, for a fight like this, both men weigh in under the same rules with access to the same training regimes. There is absolutely not way Tarver would come in 30lbs heavier than Hagler, that is absolutely ridiculous.

I checked, and they are listed as identical for reach. His jab would be plenty useful.

You've confused me with Boxrec again.

 

That's not actually an answer that is very helpful.

I put Marvin Hagler in my profile picture the day he died. The fact that you are trying to make an issue of it tells us more about you than me.

Yeah, which can matter, but given that Hagler is one of the single greatest boxers every to have lived by common consensus, the idea that his jab will "not be so useful" to use your (awful) words, is nonsensical. Hagler has one of the best jabs there is. His jab will be plenty useful, as it was in literally every fight he fought that went any distance.

The idea that Tarver neutralises Hagler's jab without a reach advantage is horrific.

He's pretty much the same size as Canelo but with a much bigger reach.

Irrelevant, given that he fights at 175lbs here. But I don't care about that, i'm just pointing out that your claim that Tarver is "30lbs heavier" is spurious, irrelevant, and key to revealing your inherent bias.

My guesses that Hagler would weigh in between 167 and 171, before resting and coming in at about 175-178lbs giving up around ten pounds. The idea that one of the greatest fighters in all of history would lose due to a ten pound deficit is literally laughable. I'm guessing at these weights though he could come in a rock solid 175/180, that's certainly not a problem given the wonders of "modern nutrition."

Nore total fantasy. At best speculating that one of the consummate 15 round fighters in history would have "poor stamina" after gaining ten pounds demonstrates a pitiful understanding of how professional weight gaining and making works. But of course, we know it's not a best case scenario, it's just you being embarrassing and biased.

The idea that Hagler would have "poor stamina" because he gains ten pounds Awful. The worst thing you've written in a series of absolutely atrocious posts. I reject it out of hand, will not address it again, and have seen literally no evidence for it in all of the history of boxing where the very best fighters are concerned. As far back as Gene Tunney, very elite trainers were gaining ten pounds with zero problems for either speed or stamina.

YDKSAB.

 

So you're matching a 160lb Hagler versus a 175lb Tarver?

 

Irl, if a handicap like this was in place I probably wouldn't be able to make a pick. Hagler is astonishing but giving away two weight classes is kind of an unknowable unless you are talking about a huge puncher.

I will say that people always forget that fighters from "the past" come in heavier than they weighed in at too. Even in 1902 with ringside weigh ins, where they were difficult guys were probably gaining a broth pound before bell.

 

The problem wasn't the cut, the problem was the recovery. Ray Robinsonw as a fighter who used steam to cut a lot of weight, but it was recovering from the weakening in the shorter spell without modern aids.

If you go back that far, Gans is a good example. He could make 135lbs with discipline and 133lbs without issue, but he couldn't do 133lbs then get straight into the ring and fight. So it was about the compensation versus how much you hurt your man.

These days guys can cut to the point where they are literally too weak to make a fist and be elite athlete again by bell.