Hopkins or Hagler?

I picked Marvelous Marvin over Hopkins.

 

Voted for Hagler, he knew when to quit fighting unlike the rest of them.

 

Hagler was the superior fighter. Let's be realistic here.

 

hagler could walk though anything anyone could think of throwing from MW up to LHW and dominate them

 

Hagler fought much tougher opponents then Hopkins did and was more talented then Hopkins.:rasta

 

Hagler.

would've made a great fight though. hopkins the counter-punching, defensive genius v Hagler the marauding, come-forward aggressor with dynamite in both hands...

 

is this a joke?

Hagler.

 

Hagler........

 

Hagler was I think the best middleweight of all time:good

 

Hagler easily. He was the better fighter and beat vastly better opposition.

 

Don't compare a toothless bum to an all-time great (Hagler). For all those who keep proclaiming Hopkins an all-time great, I wish they could name one great boxer who was in-their-prime and in the same weight class as Hopkins, and I don't mean someone moving up in weight as Tito did. I look at Hopkins resume and although it is filled with a few recognizable names the one fighter who was in-his-prime and at the same weight level was Roy Jones Jr., and Hopkins lost to him. His fighting style sucks and it turns out, he is a whiney *****. Far from the tough Philadelphia fighters from yesteryear.

 

It's close.

But Hagler fought in a much better Middleweight era.

My 160 rankings:

1. Carlos Monzon
2. Marvin Hagler
3. Bernard Hopkins
4. Harry Greb
5. Ray Robinson

 

hagler easily