ATG Ranking...... Marvelous Marvin Hagler vs. Bernard "The Executioner" Hopkins

going a little far with that one...:nono

 

LOL, werent we just talking about this kind of stuff!!!

 

seriously we went from "based on the evidence, hopkins has a better atg ranking than hagler" to "hagler lick's hopkins ass". what the ****...

 

:rofl

 

I don't think you can rank Hopkins higher just because he has gone up in weight successfully. He is a spoiler, a big MW, who has done everything in his power to bully other fighters, not outbox them. At MW, Hagler is definitely a greater fighter based on who they fought and a comparison of their abilities head to head.

 

Hopkins doesnt outbox fighters? Umm, how many Hopkins fights have you seen bro?

Have you seen the Tito fight? Or the Johnson fight? Or the Pavlik fight? Or the Tarver fight? Or the Eastman fight? Or the Oscar fight? Or the _____ fight? (fill in the blank with your own opponent)

There is a post floating around here that asks who the best technical boxer is...and overwhelmingly people chose Bernard over and over again. Your post couldnt be more off bro...sorry.

:-(

 

I never said it was a fluke and I dont know what your talking about even suggesting that. he BEAT ANTUOFERMO THE FIRST FIGHT. and Tarver never was a middleweight whats the sense of including him. I dont know if pavlik could beat ANY of the guys I just mentioned. they're all cut from different cloth than Jermain Taylor, with heart AND the ability to persevere. your ****ing bugging out about that last comment too. overrated? so wins over viable all time greats mean nothing to you? going over to england to snatch the middleweight title from minter in front of a bloodthirsty crowd?...shut the **** up

 

forgot to read first thread content before i voted. if hopkins beats adamek, then he's probably higher for me in the way of ATG status. hagler still has the better resume at MW.

 

B-Hop outboxes people, this is true...but you disregarded the second half of his comment, that hagler is undoubtedly the better MW because of his resume, and his ability.

 

No, he DREW the first Vito fight, and it was no fluke. Boogaloo Watts was losing to 0-0 fighters 10 fights into his career. Look up the rest of those guys and you'll see similar stories. You don't know what the **** you're talking about. At all. YOU shut the **** up. Hopkins whoops like Hagler like it's another day at the office.

 

Except that you're an idiot, and should probably STFU about now.

 

you dont know **** either good job lookin at boxrec ***. now you know ****? gtfoh:yep. guys like bennie briscoe, watts, munroe and hart, the guys who Hagler fought coming up, are known to this day in Philadelphia for paving the way for Philly boxing and being some of the guys who firmly cemented the aura of the Philly brand of fighter. you clearly are the one who doesn't know what in the **** he is talking about.

hopkins whoops like Hagler like it's another day at the office? HUH?


...SHUT THE **** UP:hi:

 

Pavlik whips all those guys. So does Winky Wright. So does Jermain Taylor. So do a half dozen other guys on Hopkins resume.

Dumbass.

 

And you should try boxrec someday. It keeps you from doing things like exposing yourself as a tool who knows ****-all while you're trying to pose as if you're an expert on the subject.

 

I wasnt refering to the second half of his post...so I didnt feel the need to address it. But since you mention it...why not?

I think you are going a bit overboard with using the word "undoubtedly"...but again, you are misreading the point of this post. He didnt ask who the better MW was, he asked who would be higher ranked on an ATG scale if Bernard beats Adamek.

And if you go back a few pages, you will see my argument to Hopkins side. I agree that Hagler's resume is better (in fact I dive into the paralells between the two resumes)...but I disagree with the ability aspect of your argument. As I said in my post. Hagler was a wonderful boxer (I hate it when he gets lumped in as a brawler because of the Hearns fight...he was a great boxer who could brawl, not the other way around, but I digress)...but many consider Hopkins to be among the best ever in many areas of the sport. Ring intellect, ring generalship, timing, accuracy, technique, footwork, movement, balance, use of angles, defense, etc. As much as I love Hagler (which trust me, he is one of my all time favs, hands down), he is not clearly the better boxer than Hopkins. In fact, I think its the other way around.

And what about the other criteria outside of just resume and ability? What about h2h ability? What about accomplishments? What about longevity? More goes into choosing slots in an ATG sense then just who they beat and how they looked doing it.

And please, dont take anything I say about Marvin to EVER be a slant against him. He is one of my all time favs, as I said. He IS my dad's favorite fighter, and I grew up a few cities over from where he grew up, during his prime...meaning I was raised to believe Hagler sparred regularly with Jesus (sorry, I know I already used this joke...)...which he did BTW.

I hate threads like this where you are forced to unfavorably compare one of your idols...but I honestly always try my best to post without bias...this is one of those times that makes doing that tough.

:good