Hopkins-Hagler: The Resumes

What does doing nothing close to beating those type of opponents in their own era actually mean?.Almost all of Hagler's opponents legitimately earned their shot, so they were all beating top ten level fighters.Caveman Lee and obelmeijas being the exceptions.

Hopkins has far more fighters that were undeserved alphabet men.Not his fault though.

And tarver and Wright were at light heavy.Cobra was talking about middleweight title challengers.

 

How the hell anyone can come to the conclusion that Hopkins hold the edge looking at that list is beyond me. I suppose you rate the Johnson that Hopkins beat as a better fighter than Antuofermo?

 

Hagler looked hard as **** when he smashed Caveman Lee. Lee, though not a world beater, was a pretty good puncher, but it was the way Hagler disposed of him that gets me. Anyone else amazed by the power and especially length in that first jab? Watch the slow motion replay, it's the jab of a heavyweight. And then Hagler leaps in like no other fighter I've ever seen, he was an animal.

 

I simply see Hopkins resume as having more depth, no I don't see the Johnson Hopkins beat as quite as good as Autuofermo, he was better than Mugabe though. Autuofermo was also past prime, Johnson pre-prime perhaps

Plus HEarns is a massive win, but it was his first fight at 160 FFS

 

With your wording "leaps in". Reminds of when Hagler fought Sibson. He leaped in with the jab on many occasions. I liked Hagler's rhythm that night behind the jab. The snap and accuracy of it was a sight to behold. That sure was the work of a surgeon when breaking down Sibbo.

 

Was it ? I thought Hearns KO'd a decent middleweight contender in round 1 for his first fight at 160. One that went the distance with Hagler jsut before he fought Minter for the middleweight crown.

 

No. No he wasn't.

 

Great argument :good

 

Yes because Mugabe is the greatest of all time except for the fact he never beat anyone of note

 

:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

 

Yes, i am going to try weed out some more at the time info from solid sources and get to the bottom of it. It's perked my interest.

That's about it but he also gets his respect in here. He was likable, a good honest hard to the end performer who i considered what you see is what you get. It would have been interesting where he'd have ended up in a middleweight race without Hagler around. Possibly the best of the rest, but i would have liked to see a few more solid contests to gauge him fully pre Hagler demolition. I think he'd be badly outclassed by Hagler, Hopkins and say Jones but your average 160 sure wouldn't have it that simple.

A few days might be plenty, with all relevant footage.

Well it's up to all fans, especially by that time, to have a look see for themselves. As you've said it's plenty accessible.

There will always be opinions both sides of the norm, footage or no footage.

The simple thing here is that he was high risk with no reward. There were far better options and he never really forced a fight with any of them. From memory Duran didn't fight him so as to take on Hearns.

 

Me too.

 

Let me say this.

When thinking about the issue at work today (yeah i know lol) i was going to add "Dinner will be the first place i'll start, as he has access to pretty much every mag from the era, and i know he won't bull**** one way or the other".

You've just saved me the trouble, i'll patiently await your findings. If i come across my mag in the next week i'll name it and the writer.

 

Ok mate....er what am I looking for again? :yep

 

I was reading a Jack Obermeyer article just the other night (from 1982) predicted a Hagler-Valdes contest. It ended in a draw.