Bernard Hopkins vs Marvin Hagler.

Good solid post ... Hopkins had done some great work post middlweight. Which certainly moves him up the ladder

 

My friend Hopkins has losses at middle... You should watch the Allen fight (#1) And hate to burst your bubble, there is a BIG difference to what you call being pushed in a fight and actual losses...And at middle, Ex had actual losses... Do you actaually belive that Hagler would let Ex fight comfortable, and with a low punch output keep Hagler at bay ???

 

You mean Hopkins is taller, right ? But bigger ??? Hagler was bigger through the shoulders, biceps and legs. I mean using your criteria, Hearns ws `bigger` than Hagler. Picking Hagler has nothing to do with the `older` guy theory. Hopkins, while having good footwork, isn`t a fleet-footed speedster. So, I do feel that Hagler would walk him down with Pressure and cut the ring off as well. Dictating a fight isn`t always about a guys ability to move, poke out some cute shits and box carefully to a decision. I am saying that Hagler moving in aggresively, walks Hopkins down and is busier than Hopkins. I mean prime `82 ` Hagler. You assume that Hagler `lets` Hopkins slow the fight down, and fight it at Hopkins pace. I say that Hagler too had great boxing skills and the physical equipment with tenacity to match to grind Ex down. And prime Hagler was in amazing condition, so he could keep the pressure on for 15 rds if needed. Plus Hagler would go hard to the body, and I think he would muscle Hopkins (who isn`t as strong as Hagler) inside. Hopkins legend has grown as his body did in his later years. But, if you took prime Hopkins at 160 matched against `82` Hagler. Hopkins is NOT keeping Hagler off of him...

 

FFS Watch some 90s Hopkins, or even the Trinidad version, you're comparing a past prime Hopkins. Hopkins in his prime had a higher output than Hagler.

And Hopkins went 12 years without a MW loss and 19years without a clear loss, Hagler only went 11 years without a MW loss. How many losses would Hagler have had at MW if he fought their until the age of 40 or 48?

 

Hopkins was the natrually bigger man. Hagler was more compact, but weight, height and length all belong to Hopkins thus making him the bigger guy.

Hagler struggled to dictate a fight to a blown up Duran, who's lateral movements limited Marvin's opportunities. Hopkins possesses that same skill, but also commanded a far more natrual swiftness of foot as his peak.

Where is the proof that Hagler is stronger than Hopkins? Because his muscles looked shinier? atsch Give me some proof man. Do you think Hagler has the same understanding of positioning and foot placement as Hopkins does? THAT stops him from dictating the fight to Nard. Hagler is not the ring general in this fight.

Who the hell ever walked Hopkins down? If he hits Hagler, Marvin will stop and take note, it's just a fact of life. If a 180lb man punches you in the face, you feel it.

Younger Hopkins (As opposed to the current version that I think you're using) was also much more offensively efficient, and would work both to Hagler's rib cage and head. God forbid Marvin turns southpaw, in which case he loses a lop sided UD, as maybe no better fighter in history has existed as Hopkins, when it comes to left handed opponents.

 

PowerPuncher, how many losses Hagler would have had if he kept fighting is not relevant. Beating up Tito is vastly different than trying to beat up Hagler... Hagler was much more physical and a much better fighter than Tito, he of suspect chin .

 

Imust ask if you did see the first Allen fight ??? And Hagler, was far superior to any of the southpaws Hopkins fought ...

 

I've seen all three.

This is a hypothetical match up, so we take the peak version of each fighter.

So? How does that translate into a Hagler win?

 

Hopkins would hurt Hagler ??/ There goes your credibility. I have to alugh at you genius`s who say that said fighter would `hurt` Hagler. Who was never decked and had an anvil of a chin. Thats like saying if Ali got hit just so, he would have been knocked out ! Hopkins is not making Marvin take notice. You night sell me on Hop beaing able to outbox hagler... But outfight him and being a bigger nager or hrting him?/ Thats just delusional on your part. Nobdoy hurts Hagler or beats him in a war of attrition. And he didn`t look for `outs` in his fight either ...

 

Hagler is better than Tito and Hopkins is better than anyone Hagler's beat. I'm not sure on your point

 

Okay smart guy, I'll concede the entire argument if you can point out a single use of the word 'hurt' in my original post.

My point is that Hopkins hit hard enough to get Hagler's respect, just like Ray Leonard managed to get it.

 

Well, I've spent part of my evening reviewing some of Hopkins 90's fights. Just in case I forgot something or would pick up some nuances. Nah, I take it back, Hopkins doesn't deserve to be ranked ahead of Hagler in an ATG sense. Although his acting skills in the first Allen fight were already finely tuned. That first time might have been believable if he didn't subsequently try some **** against Jones (2nd fight), Calzaghe, Dawson. He was a little too content to take his "out" when **** got tough and collect a payday. That **** wouldn't fly against Hagler. **** Hopkins. He couldn't beat Hagler.
Hopkins workrate wasn't ever all that against someone who could fight.

 

Because he fought in the 70s that's why :tong

 

So about a decade or more later atsch

 

What are you talking about, blown up WW Tommy Hearns rocked Halger badly in their fight, there's no doubt Hagler's chin was Iron but to try and say he was never hurt is stupid. And there's not much of a chance of Hopkins getting dragged into a war of attrition I doubt he'd look to KO Hagler as part of any gameplan.