Hagler vs Hopkins. 15 rounds.

I'm a old guy from the northeast who has saw Hagler fight for a long time. He was easily ouboxed by Monroe, and Watts early in his career, (neither were big punchers) The Vito draw was much later (it was very close, Hagler faded badly in that fight). To be honest he never really changed his style over the years. He just got better at it. Hagler has devestating power? Where is the proof of that? Name one name fighter that he took out with one shot, or even two shots? Never happened, he used to grind his guys down. He landed dozens of shots on Hearns before he dropped him. He couldn't drop SRL, Duran, Vito, or Minter at all, and he had to hit Roldan, Hamso, and Mugabi with dozens of shots to stop them. Not a one punch guy. I just think Hopkins (who I am not a big fan of by the way) has the perfect style to beat Hagler. Not stop him, just win on points. Hagler rarely fought much as a southpaw if you look at each fight. Though he was left handed and could switch when he needed to.

 

Some points...

- Hagler did drop Antuofermo in the rematch

- And in the first fight, most observers would agree Hagler deserved the decision

- He fought most of the time as a southpaw

- Hagler arguably beat Watts in the first fight

- You're being picky with who Hagler could drop and couldn't; he didn't fight like Tyson, he wasn't always chasing the knockout

Hagler hit hard.

 

I agree Hagler hit hard, but a devisating puncher, as it was quoted? I don't agree with that, especially as it was made as a point to why he could beat Hopkins. I disagree that Hagler didn't chase the KO, he did. That was his style. I thought Vito's corner stopped the second fight, don't remember the KD, Not that it didn't happen. Hagler faded very badly in the first Vito fight. he did win the early rounds. I can't say exactly how many rounds he fought as a southpaw, but he constantly switched around. Never always a s lefty. I don't think its an advantage for him vs Hopkins anyhow. I'm glad to discuss Hagler in any way, however in the end I think Hopkins would win in a boring fight, with Hagler pushing it all the way.

 

I agree that Hagler wasn't a one punch knockout artist, but he wasn't far off it; he certainly possessed more power than most. He destroyed his fair share of opponents.

I would estimate Hagler to have adopted a right handed stance 15% of the time he was fighting.

Antuofermo was knocked down before the stoppage, perhaps in the second round, shamefully I've neglected my Hagler footage over the last few months. But there was definitely a knockdown, courtesy of a well-timed left cross that plonked Antuofermo on his arse.

I won't disagree with anyone who picks Hopkins because he was a great fighter in his own right, but I can't have anyone mixing up their facts when talking about Hagler.

 

if youre not going to admit that Hagler was not shot (leonard) and the end of his career youre being disengenuous.

Look at the Hearns fight the second Hamsho fight, Lee, rematch with Obel, Hamani, Watts.

If you really watched Hagler then u would know this. But then maybe youre thinking I watched Haglers last two fights and dont much about him.

Its lucky for Minter the ref stepped in otherwise he Hagler was going to keep up the bombardment until he did drop. It was only the third round with 12 to go.

And what do you mean Hagler raely fought as a southpaw in his fights? Now I know you are being disingenuous because Hagler only occasionally switched stances to orthodox but and much better lefthanded.

For all the fluff I seen described in concocting a safe but close points win going either way, no has addressed the problems this would cause Hopkins.

Since you think Bernard has the perfect style to beat Hagler then tell why

 

I don't see how Minter could have come back from that third round if he surivived it. Maybe against Julian Jackson or Florentino Fernandez, but not Hagler.

 

Slightly off topic question here, but I`d like to know if anyone here believes that had Tommy not broken his right hand so early in the first round wether he may have landed a hail mary to stop Hagler? I know, I know, Hagler has an iron jaw and all but he did get shook to his boots by a single right hand from Tommy, whos to say Tommy couldn`t have hurt him again and made him reassess his fightplan slightly?

Before anyone starts slinging mud in my direction let me add that I still think Hagler would have come out on top broken hand or no, but I don`t think it is beyond the realm of possibility that he may have taken his foot of the gas pedal had he been stunned a few more times by Tommy`s right in the first round. Anyways, I await the inevitable onslaught that is sure to come for voicing what I just said, but I`ve got my guard and I`m ready to rumble.

:bbb

 

Hagler would never have been stopped. What does 'shook to his boots' mean exactly? RB, Hagler wasn't staggered; his legs didn't go, he was barely even jolted. He took a flurry after the right hand in question, closed the distance, stopped Hearns from hitting him anymore and just seconds later we hear 'and a good punch by Hagler!'

Hagler was hurt so rarely that whenever there was a slight hint he might have been human, it turns into some big event.

 

I disagree that Hagler wasn`t hurt by that right hand, it literally stopped him dead in his tracks and he walked right into it which doubled the force of the blow. He also ate an uppercut a moment later that combined with the right hand that landed a second earlier forced him to clinch Tommy for a few seconds to clear his head... his legs may not have buckled from the blows, but that doesn`t mean he wasn`t rattled by them. I am not trying to make a big fuss about it, just want to hear other peoples thoughts are on this.

 

BTW, was Marvin Hagler "cherrypicking" when he fought Tommy Hearns, who has already been KNOCKED OUT at Welterweight....

BTW, was Marvin Hagler "cherrypicking" when he fought a "former welterweight" in Sugar Ray Leonard, who hadn't fought in 3 YEARS.

 

funny how when I start putting in my two sense people suddenly shy away from the subject. The fact is nobody cares to elaborate on the issue of hagler being a southpaw because they know it would puts Bernard at a disadvantage. Again I ask; just how would Bernard's style give Hagler fits? Hopkins seemed little more than average. Industrious is how I would describe him but I dont think that every boxer who comes along with one or two strong performances necessarily means they would beat Hagler or even take him the distance.

 

Hopkins had nothing to keep Hagler off with and his speed is average, Hagler by UD 15

 

Hagler definitely felt it; Marciano felt Moore's right hand far more, but none of us think he was about to be knocked out.

 

I think it would have taken quite a few flush right hands for Hearns to stop Hagler. Even if he didn't break his hand, it's highly unlikely that he would have been able to land them as often as required to get the job done.

Hopkins performs particularly well against southpaws, predominantly owing to the fact that he has a good sneak lead right hand. The straight right is a punch most southpaws struggle to contend with.

IMO though, Hopkins has more issues to contend with from Marvin's end than vice versa.

Hagler's jab will be a key weapon, as will Marvin's physical strength. I think Hagler is way ahead in those two categories, whilst Hopkins is probably only slightly more technically sound with his defense (definitely not offense).

 

I'd have to say I'm in agreement here B(_)LL, I think the punch may have stunned him, and the fact that he walked into it may have put him a bit off balance as well, but I don't think he was hurt badly, considering how quickly he recovered from it.