Gene Fullmer vs Marvin Hagler

Not really. Fullmer was the fighter of the year in 1961 with three consecutive impressive victories and then lost his first fight in 1962 to Tiger. I really don't think he showed any sign of slipping until the Tiger fights. He was 31, kind of old, but Tiger was 33.

 

This would be a competitive and very tricky stylistic fight for Marv (Fullmer is one tough hombre), however he has the tools, power and edge in abilty here, enough to take a close, but clear UD on the cards (edging out the late rounds).

9-6 in rounds, Hagler. :good

 

but thats OLD for the style Fullmer did. He was no boxer, Fullmer had a style that didnt last long. He had been in wars with Robinson, and Carman, among other people. That swarmer style was not relly ment to do well pass 29.

Marciano, Dempsey, Fraizer were pretty much done at 30, and over the hill at 32.

 

Gene Fullmer lacks a win over a natural middleweight. His top 3 wins are over welterweights and lets face it, he got ko'd by an aging robinson. I mean hagler has beat antuofermo, minter, briscoe, hamsho, sibson, roldan. Besides paul pender, what other middleweight has fullmer beat that even compares to these guys. Tiger and Lausse both got the better of him.