If Hopkins was in the 80's he would have destroyed Hagler hearns and leonard

I agree but he wouldn't knock hagler out.

 

I'd favour Hopkins in these fights, but there's no "destruction" in it.

 

This is where things get nonsensical. If they fight 100 times, not only would Hagler go down once, he'd get stopped at least once... and vice versa. The majority of the time, neither guy goes down.

Only the Sith deal in absolutes.

 

"Destroy" is way to strong of a word, but Hopkins, Taylor, and Pavlik were all FREAKING HUGE compared to the guys who fought under the same day weigh in rule. No one ever takes the size difference into account when they make these type of match-ups, but you should give it considerable weight (no pun intended.)

In Marvin's era there was no super middleweight division. Hopkins, Taylor, and Pavlik would have all been light heavyweights, and Marvin never showed any desire to go anywhere near any light heavyweight.

 

Ya, that's a very overlooked point. True. It's actually kinda scary. I mean, would Hagler be a 154lber under today's rules...? Ouch.

 

hopkins would have been a legit mw

 

What a crock of ****. Hopkins would get beat by all 3 legends. The word destroyed makes me laugh..........man you need to go back & rewatch how Hopkins struggled with the Allens x 3, Joppy's x 3 & Eastman's of the world before you have him destroying Marv, Tommy & Sugar Ray. He got out boxed & foxed by Jermaine Taylor for christs sake.

 

I seriously can't see him beating Hagler @ MW...As much as I dnt care for SRR I think he wins a very close UD against Hopkins! The only 1 I think B-Hop wins is against Hearns and even then I'm pretty sure he will get his chin checked a couple of times...

Stylistically I think Hagler and Ray are jus bad match ups for B-Hop

 

Leonard wouldn't hurt him, but he outboxes him and had the superior speed even at MW. Hagler, even the old one that fought Leonard, shorter, but still stronger and his pressure would outhustle Hopkins. I give Hopkins his biggest chance vs. Hearns, but the thing is the earlier version of Hopkins was more aggressive, but got hit alot more, making more mistakes. The more modern version of Hopkins that we're used to seeing is a more defensive, more economic type that has a very low workrate, but is very precise. Middleweight version of Tommy beats either version of Hopkins, unless Hopkins does a Barkley and load up on a lucky punch. Hearns to busy, too athletic, and hit harder than Hopkins. Hopkins does not do good against speedy fighters and Leonard and Tommy in their primes or close to it were.

 

A lot of the post on here are stupid! Were havin a debate about a prime hopkins not the 37yr old hops and above. Its like me say hops can beat ray cause terry norris did! See how stupid that sound??? Hops in his prime freaks me out! What a fighter that guy was. When i watched his early fights that guy showed talent beyond what we've seen in a long time and i believe the person he would have whooped would have been toney and hearns. Hops wasnt getting outworked at his younger age so why all U silly people say that? He would have been too strong physically for ray leonard and Hagler just was too short BUT he had great pop and a lunge that would give hops trouble. I still think hops wins though and if U dont agree go watch hops vs echols win he was undefeated 21 and 0 with 21 kos! Hops can box on the outside and whooop ass on the inside. People just need to really look at the prime hopkin instead of this old hopkins and use his old age to make other fighters better then him, your fooling yourself and all true boxing fans!!!

 

Well, they are all either smaller or much smaller at their best weights.

So, very possibly.

 

That's right. And John L. beats ANY Klitschko on ANY day.

 

I believe Haglar would fight at 154 under the 30 hour weigh-in rule. He often weighed around 157 under the same day rule. Furthermore, I beleive he would terrorize the division.

On the other side of the coin, whether people like it or not, Marvin rarely fought bigger guys. He didn't even fight Murray Sutherland who was a much better fighter than a half blind recycled Ray Seales.

I had 4 big favorites back in that era. Alexis Arguello, Danny Lopez, Tommy Hearns, and Marvin Haglar. On ESB Arguello and Hearns get rated just about right. Lopez gets criminally under rated. Haglar gets over rated as all get out. Marvin was a truly great fighter, but he was not an invincible monster.

 

It was 3 years off not 5 and Marvin wanted to break his face so bad that he agreed to anything. Leonard got the pick of gloves, the ring size and 12 rounds instead of 15. As far as Hopkins beating Ray and Hagler goes, that's just a case of sincere delusion.

 

I believe he would of beaten Hagler, I also think he would of been too much for Hearns, Hearns was more of a destroyer than a Boxer and I think Hopkins movement and smarts would of negated that somewhat, also, Hearns had pretty suspect stamina and durability imo, add to the fact Hopkins was a big MW, I think he would be too much for Hearns.

There isn't a lot Hopkins cant do in that ring, he is one smart SOB in there, as you can gather im a bit of a fan, well not a fan, I just respect him immensely for being the legend that he is.


A fight with Leonard would of been interesting cause Ray has the speed to trouble him, that said, Hopkins was pretty good at making his extra size a significant factor in his fights.