Hopkins from the Trinidad fight versus Hagler from the Sibson fight

Hagler by decision but Hopkins' ring IQ and sneaky counters makes it very competitive. Hagler's jab, workrate, and clever boxing/aggression is the difference for this fight.

 

Double jabs from Hagler. going to the body, right uppercuts, head movement from Hagler, Hagler circles to his left, Hagler moving a lot. Hopkins hands high, b-hop slow 1-2`s, slow jabs from b-hop, b-hop missing a lot of shots, Hagler seemed smoother and sharper than b-hop and was better than Trinidad and stronger. B-hop`s height advantage could be a facor, it was a factor v Trinidad but Felix didn`t have a reach advantage, while Hagler`s reach was 4 inches longer than B-hop`s, Hagler`s jab would have been a real problem for B-hop.

 

Hagler was prime against Sibson, Hagler by UD and Hopkins takes a lot of punishment.

 

This

 

Hopkins fights a smart technical and can outbox Hagler similar to how Leonard did.

 

They have the same reach according to boxrec. So Hopkins is substantially taller and matches him in reach.

I like Hopkins in a very close fight. He's far more adaptive on the fly and i think he'd be a step ahead of Hagler enough to get him home. I think they could have a great trilogy with each fight extremely competitive.

 

Top answer.

 

It might be a hard won battle, but it would be won by Hagler, nonetheless.

For some time now, I've thought of Hopkins as a boxer who needs to establish a foothold in a bout to appear at his optimum. That is, he needs to define and control the rhythm and tempo of the fight to foster the making of his mark. And, when he does this, Hopkins looks quite excellent.

It is less of the case when he has some pressure ahead of him that might take him out of his comfort zone and dent his composure. That's why I think there are a good few middleweights, historically, who'd likely beat him - even at his best.

Hagler is definitely one of those in my book. I don't think Hopkins has enough to upset Hagler, take him out of his stride, and gain control over their bout. On the other hand, I do believe Hagler gives Hopkins a lot to think about. Too much.

Hopkins was afforded a lot of opportunities by Trinidad, the most significant being that BHop was allowed to control the pace. Trinidad fought cautiously in the first half of the stanzas (indeed, both of them did), and he lacked the forward momentum to put Hopkins under firm and sustained pressure. He also showed a lack of imagination at opportune moments when he did actually close the distance, which I put down to his fairly limited punch selection. Combination punching from Tito was very rare. He also offered himself up as a rather static target with relatively slow feet and a lack of head movement.

That said, Hopkins demonstrated defensive mastery, counterpunching and ramped up the volume to a fine finish, albeit in the face of a less-than-expected offensive threat.


The Hagler/Sibson bout had a number of comparisons and contrasts. Known to have a bit of a dig on him and carry physical strength, Sibson was very aggressive against Hagler and didn't let up on applying pressure until the very end. In doing so, Sibson showed good movement, body-feints, balance and a varied attack - and, despite Hagler's own fluid movement, was able to cut the ring off on occasion.

Sibson's jab and hooks, especially to the body, were world-class; if anything was lacking, it was his ability to deliver much in the way of combinations. However, this had more to do with Hagler's defensive and offensive posture.

Hagler, in the main, outmaneuvered Sibson, not allowing himself to be pinned down at any time - operating in tights spaces when required but never leaving it too long before making room for himself.

Most prominent of all was Hagler - ever the highly disciplined practitioner - unleashing his repertoire of offensive horrors on Sibson. It's difficult to find anything Hagler didn't do offensively, varying his own attack, to keep Sibson confused from start to finish.

In my opinion, it's a fight that sums up Hagler at his best in that he simply does more and does it better than almost any middleweight in history. I believe this would be demonstrated in the majority of the rounds against Hopkins - sufficiently enough to win over Hopkins' defense and catch the favorable attention of the judges. Some rounds might look close, but Hagler would always be in the running for having edged them.

Either way, this is a clear decision going to Hagler.

 

B-hop wasn`t as quick on his feet nor did he have fast hands like Ray.

 

Check wiki, Hagler had a 75 inch reach and B-hop had a 71 inch reach.

 

Hagler is the better athlete but he lacks the ring IQ to deal with the craftiness of B-Hop. Hagler had a bad corner and seldom really adapted his style during the round itself. Hopkins would just outhink him and stop him from getting into a rhythm or setting his feet to load up on shots with his movement and straight shots.

 

True dream match at MW, and that version of Hopkins was firing on all Cylinders. I think Hagler would win a competitive decision though, 115-113.

 

B-hop stepping with punches, B-hop would be throwing counters, B-hop would be keeping distance with the jab, B-hop would be throwing counter jabs, b-hop might be landing hard right hands.

 

Hagler very active with the lead hand, jabs to the body from Hagler all night, a lot of jabs from Marvin every round, combos from Hagler, 1-2`s from Hagler, Marvin had better punch variety than B-hop.