Hopkins Hagler at 160-Who takes it?

^^^What they said.

 

I thought Hagler did a really good job of cutting off the ring against Hearns though. Midway through the first round, Tommy tried to get some distance on Hagler, but Marvin cut him off and got him on the ropes and punished him. After the first round, Tommy tried to use more lateral and backfoot movement, but Hagler kept getting to him.

Hagler brilliantly executed this aggressive game plan, which was especially impressive given how different it was from how Hagler usually fought.

But Hopkins has a better chin, in-fighting skills, and defense than Hearns, and I can see him doing spoiling tactics to help neutralize Hagler if Hagler chose to fight in this manner.

 

This.

 

Not really. I actually learn way more in Classic than I do in General. That and there are much few haters/fanboys/trolls in Classic so it's easier to have good conversations in Classic. Overall it's a much better forum imo.

I don't think Calzaghe or Tarver beat any version of Hagler but I do think they would present some problems for him stylistically. RJJ in his prime @ MW has a great shot against Hagler especially the one Leonard fought but Hagler was a smart fighter. He could've found Jones and a prime Hagler was much more fluid. People forget that Hagler used to move more earlier in his career but he became more of a fighter though he was still quite technical(Winky was like this too). I love Jones but he hasn't been competitive at the "elite level" since his 30's. Hopkins, well, he's crafty and knows how to negate his opponents effectively so those traits helped him have his longetivity.

 

Marv would beat Bhop everytime prime for prime.

 

People keep bringing up the Mugabi & Leonard fights but that was when Hagler was faded. A prime Hagler is hell for pretty much anyone and I'm not just saying that because he's my fav MW lol.

 

50 50 fight IMO

 

Do you always say things to provoke or something... I almost never agree to anything you post... and Hopkins doesn't stand a chance if Hagler comes out of the corner in the 1st round like he did against Hearns.

 

That's because you're an idiot and the simple truth is painful to your fantasies.

And oh, you MUST be right. Hopkins has NEVER had to deal with someone charging out and starting fast against him. Oh that would just totally upset and confuse him. Oh he just couldn't deal with that. Oh the humanity. :roll:

 

Oh yeah, since he lost, he was not prime anymore :roll:

Same logic thatwhen he lost to Jones, he was too green at that point atsch

I guess his supposed prime was too unfortunate to have came at a time when he did not need it - during the time when he was fighting journeymen and good welters who had no business at middle.

 

He sure had people running at him like Trinidad, but Hagler is better than Tito and he would've been more sucessful against Hopkins in my opinion. Would it have been a tough fight ? Sure, Hopkins is a legend. But I pick Hagler.

 

It's debatable whether Hopkins was green or not against Jones in the first fight but he wasn't at his best that's for sure. His prime was something like 97-03. He declined late in his reign but you really need to study more Hopkins if you really believe his prime was in '05. Oh and saying Tito wasn't proven past welterweight is an excuse as he eventually destroyed Vargas in their fight @ 154 and demolished Joppy(capturing the WBA MW title).

 

Hagler v Hearns and Mugabi was so ridiculously far from Marvin's prime it's not even funny:-(.I'm shocked that you even wrote that.And Hagler would have beaten Tito/Echols/Joppy far more convincingly than Hopkins would have.Hagler over Bhop by UD

 

Faded?He was ****ING SHOT as that's the ONLY REASON Leonard chose to fight him at that point.THE ONLY REASON!

 

Prime Hagler= late 70s/early 80s. Particularly the Sibson fight in 1983.