Hopkins-Hagler: The Resumes

You are looking for exactly how highly regarded Valdez and Briscoe were held by the press and writers of their day at that present time. I stumbled onto an article that didn't give them much credit at all and am wondering if it was common or closer to unique.

Cheers

:good

 

Interesting topic. My big collecting started proly about 81. You've got the 70's hammered.

 

Oh yes, totally hammered. I have a few 80s spares actually mate. If you admit Hagler's opposition was more difficult you can have 'em.

 

80's spares. I'M HERE!

 

Nor had Johnson at the time, and his level of opposition was step or two belo that of Mugabi. Mugabi was a high class fighter at the time and was thought of very highly. In hind-sight people consider him overrated based on the fact that he was ruined by Hagler, but in reality he was FAR higher regarded than Johnson, who didn't catch his stride until much later in his career. Hopkins's win over him at the time was meaningless and probably lesser qualified than his wins over the likes of Joppy, Echols, Vanderpool, etc.

 

Yes Johnson wasn't yet proven but the fact Hopkins beat him so emphatically and he'd go onto be so successful is meaningful. It was many years before he reached acclaim but 2years later he would arguably get robbed against Otke

Mugabi did little before and nothing after Hagler, his claim to fame is giving Hagler a hard night.

 

Oh i've got the 80's covered



On par

:smoke

 

Nonono, he not even got arguable robbed against Ottke that was a clear 8 rounds to 4 fought, nothing controversial or anythign about that one. Johnson used the bad press of Ottke to imrpove his own standing.

 

False. He lost to every top fighter he faced directly after Hopkins, proving his lack of worth at the time.

As has been stated often, that's simply a myth.

At the time he was a much higher regarded fighter than Johnson, and a much more effective fighter.

 

Hagler's is better, no doubt.

 

Haglers middleweight resume is obviously better.