There is a flaw to that theory. The Hopkins that disassembled Glen Johnson would box well with the best variant of Hagler. Add to that, Hagler demonstrated that others could get into his head. Both Duran and Leonard accomplished this. Trust that the verbose and confident Hopkins would find a way to climb into Marv's head - and that Hops had the drive, will and talent to make it damned close. :good
Yeh, it was all about what went on in Marvin's head was'nt it, the blue coller chip on the shoulder, he'd **** himself off if he did'nt have one on each shoulder, he used to use that to his advantage but it always worked against him when it mattered as in Duran/Leonard by playing the aggrieved dis-respected champ. Without doubt Hopkins would have got at Marvin & in a big way, talk about looking in the mirror, i'd take Marvin to win on points but it would'nt be pretty & B-Hop would have more than his fair share of moments, close fight over 12/15 regardless.
Some folks underrate him, some overrate him, and some both underrate and overrate him at times, hows that for an answer? :smoke
when youve got carl froch saying that he would beat him, you know his great ability has been forgotten about by the stupid few
I hardly think that Hagler is becoming underrated..he polls rather well near the top of the middleweight rankings when the "best ever" at that weight is discussed, however I'm always leery of revisionism wherever and whenever it pops up it's nasty head. I myself believe he would have encountered a "bridge too far" in Monzon, but to me that's no disgrace. I put Hagler at #2 in the alltime middleweight rankings.
Froch is way too open for someone like Hagler. He must be smoking something if he thinks he would've beaten Marvin. :rastaFroch.
Not sure if he's underrated, most people seem to have him near the top of their middleweight rankings, but I think I rate him higher than a lot of other people do. I had him beating Vito and Duran comfortably and thought he edged out Ray too, so, he was quite a dominant figure all things considered for me. James Toney should not be mentioned in the same breath as Marvin Hagler so far as middleweights go. He was struggling to beat guys like Reggie Johnson, Michael Nunn and an old Mike McCallum at his peak, guys Hagler would have easily handled in peak form.
I thought that, all those flashy, shoe shine flurries of Leonard were offset by the more telling, and honest work and determination of Hagler, who finally got his groove and finished better than he started. I think Hagler barely eked it out, and deserved the decision, and certainly noting worse than a draw. The scoring was less than educated by the judges.
Froch would have suffered a Sibsonlike beating from Hagler or worse, and Arthur would have been subjected to the same kind of abuse as Roldan before exiting via a stoppage in the 8th or 9th.
Hagler hardly put two punches together. While Leonard was throwing combinations that were more designed to simply score, he did hit Hagler with some clean power punches. Ok, they never had an effect on the durable Hagler but he did catch him with some good power punches at times throughout the fight. If ever there was a moment during the fight that summed up Hagler's showing overall, it was the 9th round. He had Leonard hurt a bit on the ropes yet looked slow when having a stationary target in front of him who was there for the taking. His punches were predictable and ponderous. It was perhaps Hagler's most impressive patch of the fight, yet he looked terrible. His timing was off and he lacked the speed that he possessed in his prime or even the Hearns fight 2 years earlier.
hagler was great at slipping punches and lookin them off . people always seem to forget that ..also one of the best ever at closing the distance and superb infighter