Totally agree with Lloyd Honeyghan TKO6 over Don 'the Cobra' Curry. Curry was a superstar at the time and was being lined up to fight Hagler in his next fight, for which he was considered the favourite in many quarters. Honeyghan went to the US and totally dominated Curry who was never the same fighter afterwards. Whilst a tragic outcome, Benn beating McClellan was a massive win too.
My vote goes to Douglas over Tyson. Another fight not mentioned but I think should be, is Duran over Barkley. That's a way bigger win than Hagler over Hearns, since Hagler was a middleweight and expected to win the fight. (Hagler - Hearns is probably the most entertaining fight, but not the biggest singular win) Duran was 38 and beat a guy who had just stopped Hearns. The same Hearns who KO'd him a few years earlier. And it was fight of the year. But the Douglas fight was an even bigger upset.
Good call! my second choice would be Honeyghan-Curry...huge upset at the time....i didn,t give Honeyghan 1 %! first choice is however Douglas-Tyson
Well one fighter is a natural middleweight and the other a lightweight. I think a middle weight beating a very good light middle or welterweight is far less impressive than a lightweight beating a middleweight, but to each his own.
Like I said to each his own. Hagler did essentially want was expected of him, ie to beat the fighter moving up in weight to fight him, (albeit in spectacular fashion) and Duran did the unexpected, which was to beat a full fledged middleweight who had just beaten Hearns, the same Hearns who had previously KO'd Duran himself long after he out of his prime and fighting several weight classes higher.
Hearns was a 26 year old middleweight. At that time he was a natural at the weight class. Guys complete filling out around 25. Hagler was supposed to win because he was perceived as a better fighter. Which was accurate because he is indeed the better fighter. I'll give an example. Pacquiao was a 4 to 1 underdog to Barrera. What was the biggest reason for the big spread? It was because Barrera was thought to be a better fighter and of a different class. They thought he could handle Ledwaba but could he make the leap to ATG's? Hagler being favored doesn't take away from his win. He won because he was better. He was favored because he's the better fighter.
All true but that doesn't make it the best singular win for exactly the reasons you pointed out. If a fighter wins and is expected to win, how is that better than a fighter who most think has no chance of winning but manages to find a way? The obvious answer is that it's not.
No, but that is not the question. The question was what was the best win in the last 30 years? Douglas knocking out Tyson was about the best win all time. Maybe there was one better, but I cant think of one off hand. It was huge, nobody thought Tyson could be beat and it literally shook up the whole world. All the kids in my school were shocked that Tyson was beat. Pavliks win was not as good, but non the less one of the best wins of all times.