ATG: Who Ranks Higher? Pacman or Hitman?

Yet Hearns got fighter of the year 2 times and Hagler only one time.

 

Yes but accomplishments are not how many titles you win but who you beat to get those titles. Hearns beat Cueves and Benitez and Hill for 3 of those titles. Those are 3 HOF fighters in 3 divisions. Then he had 3 more wins for titles against Roldan,Kinchen and Andries, but no one compares them to Cueves, Benitez and Hill. But those 3 guys are much better than probably anyone Floyd has ever beaten, since Oscar certainly is in that class but was far past him prime when he fought Floyd, and those 3 when they fought Hearns were in thier prime or near it and champions of coarse. When Hearns stopped Duran, Duran was champion.

 

Hearns was prime in age but not in weight. Many people will say Hearns was 6-1 1/2 so he was a natural middleweight, but I do not think so. Someone posted Hearns/Sutherland on youtube recently. Look how small Hearns legs are at middleweight. He does not look like a big middleweight at all. I love Marvin but I do know that if Duran or Hearns would have been more natural at middleweight they would have maybe beaten Marvin. Strength had a lot to do with Marvin's wins in those two fights. Marvin was a strong middleweight physically. Very good power but physically strong also. With Ray, Marvin was starting to slip from inactivity. I am just saying, if Marvin Hagler were a welterweight in 1985 and Hearns was 154 pounds and Marvin moved up to fight Hearns, do you really think Hagler stops Hearns? I think Hearns stops Hagler early. The weight had a lot to do with Marvin's success and he knew he had to swarm Hearns.

 

Hearns is so much higher in class than Mayweather because of opposition and being in so many iconic fights. I do not think Floyd compares to Hearns. Amount of titles? That is all I can see.

 

Marvin was pretty sharp when he fought Hearns I agree, and Marvin beat Tommy. regardless of all the other details.

 

A fighter is not better than one fighter just because he beat that fighter. That would make Barkley better than Hearns or Randall better than Chavez. And we know that is not the case.

 

Marvin Hagler was not Barkley. Marvin had a good middleweight reign and won his title the same year Hearns did. They were evenly matched in 1985, both having had about 10 title fights. Hearns and Hagler were much better fighters than Barkley, but neither man is much greater than the other one. Opposition and historical Hearns wins out all time, but for chin and not being knocked out, Hagler deserves credit. The right hand Hearns landed on him in round one should have knocked him out. He stood up and kept throwing bombs.

 

i have pac by an eye-lash, but very close

 

message boards are like this. The younger fighter gets the nod. The other thread about Chavez and Hearns is more of an equal comparison. Both are retired, but Pac. vs. Hearns? Hearns is ahead.

 

I think a poll between active fighters is not as accurate. The Hearns/Chavez one is fair in a way. Who knows. A really accurate poll is very hard to have . Hard to say who is a greater fighter sometimes unless they really fought.

 

Polls are accurate with the fans on ESB. What is an accurate poll than Mag? A poll is just polling the people who can vote.

 

There's seems to be over 100 *******s who mysteriously pop-in every time there's a poll involving PAC.

 

polls can be like that. Also older boxing fans will not come to many message boards I wouldn't think.

 

This poll would be better in 10 years.