Hopkins-Hagler: The Resumes

Hagler's title challengers weren't all the best, but overall i'd place them over Hopkins.

Nard has a good number of outright bad and unqualified challengers..hakkar, Bo James, Frank, Simon Brown, shot John David Jackson, Daniels etc..

I'm not the biggest fan of some of haglers challengers, but they were generally good solid middleweights that at least had some really good component parts(often power).

Tito aside, some of Hops opponents were serviceable\solid enough but most were ordinary fighters at best.Joppy and Holmes made Hugo Corro look like a badass middleweight champion.

Howard Eastman for instance is not even remotely close to the British middles hagler beat.he's more comparable to someone like james Cook from the eighties British scene.

Hopkins was dominant and did all he could, so i tend to think he shouldn't get penalised too much for who he fought.Most posters on here seem to have looked past his opponents when judging him anyway.

 

Hamsho, as unrefined as he was, would probably knock out Jermain Taylor and I'd give him a good chance of outdoing Kelly Pavlik as well.

 

Not sure I'd favor anyone on Hopkins's MW resume over a guy like Sibson from Hagler's.

 

Hamsho was one tough nut till Hagler did him in. And Sibbo, was a good strong fighter too. I wonder where Eastman and Joppy would have been ranked back then? I mean, Mugabi, Curtis Parker Dwight Davison I think would have beat many of today`s top middles

 

I agree, also would have liked to see allot of those guys fight each other just for entertainment value. Say Hamsho v Sibson, or Roldan v Hamsho, Roldan v Sibson etc. There were allot of tough middles in the early 80's, but they were overshadowed by Hagler and the great Welters, LHW wars going on, no to mention the LW's.

 

i think mugabi would destroy pavlik, jt, and abraham in the same month

 

Mugabi never beat a fighter as good as those three in his entire life. One good losing effort turns the man into a mythical warrior. His best win doesn't blow wind up their arses.

 

I'd hate to be wagering my life on those two results. Hamsho was an arm puncher if ever there was one. Very ordinary power. Scary easy to hit too. tho he had a fantastic chin that went overnight.

 

I wouldn't wager on Hamsho beating either but I'd give him a good chance, especially against Taylor.

Regarding Hamsho's arm punching, sure that's true, but I don't think it takes an animal puncher to do away with Jermain Taylor. 40 year old Hopkins had him in deep **** at the end of both their fights and arm punching Winky Wright had him feeling it too.

 

Hm, there´s some serious overrating going on here. Just like Ali´s opponents are seen as outstanding hws because they fought Ali it seems the same happens to Haglers opponets. Most of them were just as average as Hopkins'.

 

Hopkins opponents will rise in stature in time, just like Hagler's has, as well as Monzon's. I've got a mag here from the time criticising Valdez and Briscoe as very ordinary opponents, believe it or not :yikes

 

Marvin was a road warrior and was taking his act on the road for a lot of years before getting a title shot. From Washington to Philly. And he had an awful lot of fights before getting his shot at Antuofermo.
I think if Hopkins was forced to take his act on the road early in his career for say 6 years, there would be some losses as well because he doesn't get the ko's & isn't a world class finisher. If he did drop some decisions, he would've been avoided by the elite of the division since he was an independant and not an affiliated fighter. He had a style nobody is going to look good against and opposing managers just would've gone after the more favorable matchups instead of taking on a Hopkins for low money.