Is Hagler vs. Hearns Over Rated?

Hagler and Hearns are iconic. That fight and the other fights with Duran and Leonard made the fab four stand out. Do I think it is sure thing that any of those 4 easily beats Trinidad or Delahoya or Mosley? No,, But it is the spirit they fought with regardless of winning which made them more special than the Tito, Delahoya and Mosley era. The Mosley and Oscar era will go down with other eras as ok and superfights but nothing to stand out really. Hagler/Hearns defined the fab four and that fight actually helped Duran and Leonard in the long run. I actually think Hearns knocking out Duran helped Duran because it defined the era as exciting, and Duran is part of that.
You say Hearns was finished after the first round. You put any two fighters in a round like that and punch with full velocity and the stronger natural guy at the weight will be a little better in round 2 since they landed the same amount of punches in round one, I think Hearns landed one more punch than Hagler in round one. Any two fighters fight like that and you will get an interesting and not expected outcome. Someone will be knocked out in a few rounds. You cannot fight like that and the fight go many rounds.

 

There's a lot of fights I'd consider better than Hagler-Hearns, but weren't bigger events (or with two prime/near-prime ATGs).

 

I think there is a case for saying that the fight is a little overrated in certain aspects.

In boxing, when incredible heart and determination are shown and a fight is super - exciting, of course fans are very happy. It terms of heart, courage and excitement, Hagler - Hearns was historic and can't be overrated.

However: Hearns, for all his amazing courage, didn't go into the fight with a smart gameplan. Trying to go to war in his first fight at 160 against one of the toughest middleweights in history when he had a serious reach advantage and great boxing skills was far from perfect. Perhaps Hagler would have walked down Hearnd anyway, but he would have had a better chance of winning if he had tried to box. As a result, Hagler actually had a somewhat easier victory in this fight than against some other opponents who would rate below Hearns in terms of ability.

 

Vargas Delahoya terrific? Exciting at times but Vargas couldn't hit Oscar clean. He didn't have the skills to really land his punch. Vargas never had defense and he was not a great fighter. Why put him in the equation.
As for Hearns and Hagler, Marvin was the bigger man. Hearns was fighting at 154 for 3 years prior to the fight. Hearns was a harder hitter than Hager but he was not a bigger man. Big difference when you compare punching power to physical strength. Just fighting in normal fashion, Marvin was stronger on the inside. Hearns was moving up in weight and Hagler was solid at 160 ,which was his strongest asset. Had Hearns been the welterweight Hearns and Hagler been a welterweight with the same strength and defense, Hearns would have knocked him out in the early rounds, like Hearns I think would have done to Hagler in a rematch.
yeah Hagler was hurt in round one of the fight with hearns. He even does a little wipe at the side of the top of his head on the left after that punch landed and he resumed. He was a great fighter. Hearns is the only fighter to ever visibly hurt Hagler during his title reign.
Comparing the Delahoya/Mosley era to the fab four era will not work. It was not as great an era by far and the guys were content with going the distance and winning on points. You mention Vargas, but Vargas is not a great fighter and had no defense, which is why he was knocked out by Tito,Delahoya and Mosley. Maybe the next great era will match the fab four era better than the last one did. It takes greats who come to fight regardless of consequence.
I am not sure how much tougher Marvin was than Hearns. He took a greater punch but his body was more compact than Tommy, but tougher mentally? Hearns was in many fights and greater fights than Marvin where he was getting hammered. When was Marvin getting hammered except for the Hearns fight. He still had a natural 154 pound fighter in front of him, and Marvin never moved up and tested himself against Spinks the way Hearns moved up and tested himself. Had Marvin walked through Spinks like he did Hearns I would say that means something. But he never did it. I always thought Hearns accomplishments were more than Marvins. He beat 4 HOF fighters Cuevas,Benitez,Duran,Hill and fought Ray and Marvin in classic fights.

 

I also have to say, when you say Marvin's ablility to take punishment was astounding. True. But as Ray said when he fought Hearns about Hearns taking a punch, he could take a punch and I had to regroup. Ray was a knockout puncher at welt. and Hearns took many punches from Ray which would have knocked out other guys earlier. By the way involving Mayweather in the Mosley era? I don't . Mayweather came later when the other guys got older.

 

I don't think this fight was easier than others. Hagler said this is one of my toughest fights. His face was swollen up and this was the last fight he was in where he was in shape and active. With Mugabi he was off a year and looked flat.
I admire Hagler as a fighter. He came at Hearns and Hearns opened up and hurt Marvin and both guys unloaded and fought recklessly but in a great war which I do not think we have seen in a first round ever. Not in this magnitude and skill level. For people to say it is overrated is sort of disrespect for boxing because this does not happen everyday. It revitalized boxing and every fight for a few year was compared to Hagler and Hearns. That fight is what defines Hagler's career.
What I do not respect about Hagler is his insistence on Duran and Hearns and Leonard to move up and fight him at his weight, when Spinks challenged him and he never took on the challenge. Now people say well Spinks was 6-2 and 175 pounds, but that is why it is a challenge. Hearns and Duran and Leonard all took on bigger challenges and I think you give fighters credit for moving up like that. I think that is why Marvin gets rated a little lower by me because he never moved up in weight. He never proved his skills moving up. That he could win a fight without the strength advantage. That means a lot.

 

that born at 160 stuff is nonsense. Hopkins looked like he was solid at 160 like Marvin and he was. But if they want to move up they can. It is a matter of Marvin not wanting to give up his advantage, and in a way that shows a little bit a lack of confidence. Just being honest. He had all the guts against Duran and Hearns and Leonard but Spinks challenged him and he never even responded. You know what Hearns was going to do had he beaten Hagler? Move up and fight Spinks. That is what I am talking about. Hearns thrived more on challenge in a way but he also paid for it by being stopped at times.

 

:deal Good points by the TS, but as interesting as they may be, they really all don't matter because that's not what the fans remember whether Hagler was ahead on the scorecards, etc, etc. Hagler was badly cut and despite him being ahead their was danger of the fight being stopped and that's what he didn't want to happen. Hagler had some heavy hands and an iron will second to no one, but Tommy still was the harder puncher of the 2. That Tommy broke his hand that isn't Hagler's fault. Basically it was Hagler's thick head that beat Tommy's legendary right hand. If Tommy might of been smarter, he could of MAYBE made a difference boxing from a distance with his jab, but he chose to go toe to toe with Hagler and he lost. Both took fight stopping powershots and both were in danger of being stopped, had the fight gone on and Tommy survived Hagler's onslaught it might of been Tommy being the victor, no one knows. Tommy obviously thought he could KO Hagler that's why he broke his hand, Hagler got cut and knew if he didn't step up the pressure Tommy might regroup and capitalize on the cut. Alot of drama in the fight. In no way do I think it is overrated.

Two elite fighters with no respect for each other sometimes the hatred will throw them off their gameplans and the fans will be witness to watching fighters not fight their usual style. Just look to Whitaker vs. Mayweather for example. We all know Whitaker was a defensive genius, but he threw that out the window with Uncle Rog and it turned into a hell of a fight. Hagler was always a boxer/puncher that could fight very well in the trenches too, and it showed in the Hearns fight, that's why people will only mention his infighting without watching his previous fights.