Better jab: Marvin Hagler or Thomas Hearns?

Hearns is a bit better, honestly, from a boxing standpoint. More versatile, different speeds, brilliant setup.

But I would rather eat a few of his then one of Hagler's. Marvin threw that jab like a cross, watch his feet.

 

x2
I think this covers it.

 

:thumbsupA great post that.

 

This content is protected

Always have loved this pic because to me it clearly demonstrates why no fighter in history, from welterweight to middleweight, has much of a chance of outboxing Hearns and even less of a chance of outjabbing him. We're talking a sharp, cutting, lightning fast jab coming from a heavyweight's wingspan.

Both Marvin and Tommy score a perfect 10 in the jab dept. If there were a 10-plus Hearns would get it.

 

Nicely put :').

 

hard to argue in favor of either. Both Hearns and Hagler's success in boxing was due to their jab. Both jabs were excellent. Hearns was maybe just a little more impressive in this category of great jabs.

 

Hearns' jab edges it for me.

 

Id have to pick hearns jab on this one. Tho haglers was no joke and had an atg jab aswell. If hearns only had the chin he could have been a srr type fighter. Big if tho lol

 

More like a giant version of Sandy Saddler :smoke

 

Both had excellent jabs, but Hearns had more variety to his, (he could flick or smash with it, jab better to the body) and between that and the speed and reach advantage Hearns had if I had to pick I would take the Hitman's.

Of course, in his prime Hagler was a jabbing boxer-puncher machine who could dissect with it, so that's not a put down or dismissing of his jab at all.

 

Thomas Hearns had a better jab than Marvin, his boxing ability is simply superb.

 

Marvin Hagler's jab was very quick, very hard, extremely accurate and perfectly timed.
In my book, you can't get better than that.

 

I can't add to what's already been said, I agree with the consensus.