Ray Arcel on Hagler - Hearns.

well the broken hand he did have, the massage was before Hagler. I never bought that. The baby pinky was something Hagler talked about in the 1982 right. The fact is Hagler never moved up and proved he was great like the other guys did. Would he have taken on Spinks? Well he didn't.

 

Hagler knew he had to run at Hearns and get him out of there. But he was tired. I know that . I can see it. Had Hearns had any energy, that moving and jabbing would have done a lot of damage. But Hearns was tired moreso.

 

I think a slowed down pace means a lot. I will never say Hearns could not beat Hagler. And do I think Hagler was the better fighter? No I think Hearns beat better guys than Hagler did. Both beat Duran, Hearns better. Hearns beat Cuevas,Benitez,Hill etc. And he moved up in weight.

 

And Marvin blasted Tommy out in 3. "And he moved up in weight," do you not see the utter irony and hypocrisy in your statement here. Tommy was FAR, FAR, FAR more suited to middleweight than Duran was to 154. He even won a lightheavy strap (albeit against a fighter I believe is vastly overrated in Virgil Hill) and, I believe, a cruiser strap. Jesus Christ, man, stop your hypocrisy.

 

Ignoring the FACT that Tommy tried boxing and moving and got overwhelmed anyway because he couldn't keep Hagler off of him. Tommy was hurt and tired because Hagler kept hitting him, lol. Marv was hurting him every time he hit him. Tommy was never known for his durability and he got his ass kicked by Marvin. Sheesh. You are hilarious. "Ray didn't fight his fight in their first" " Tommy broke his hand" Any more excuses? Will you pull a Manny and say that Tommy's legs were gone after the massage, lol?

 

Hagler was natural middleweight which helpshim here. And Virgil Hill is overrated why? Because he did not have the ferocity of Duran? Yet he had many more title defenses than Duran.. I think he might be underrated in the fights he had, but he failed against Hearns and Jones and does not have wins over other greats so that hurts Hill.. But it hurts Duran also. Hearns winning the lightheavyweight belt is just a passing comment to people, yet if Duran beat Hill it would have been the greatest thing ever. Fact is Hearns beat a guy 11 years after his first title and 30 pounds higher by rather easy decision. And Hill was favored.. The odds were for Hill. I am not sure Hearns was so suited for middleweight. He lost a little power, but he still beat guys going the distance.

 

Tommy tried boxing as a last resort after he was exhausted after round one and not as a game plan, similar to how he boxed after Ray hurt him in round 6 of the first fight. Ray not fighting his fight against Duran and Tommy breaking his hand are two different things. I never said Hagler did not deserve to win, although I think a fighter losing his best weapon is significant for the rematch, and this is why I said a slower pace would favor Hearns in getting distance and picking his shots if he fought a smart fight, and Hagler knew he didn't want Hearns having distance. He said it. And Ray did not fight his fight in the Duran fight. I think Ray had much more of a chance beating Duran anytime than Hearns had of beating Hagler just on the style, but I will never say Hagler was a greater fighter than Hearns. I would give Hearns the edge on whom he beat and the weight ranges he fought. Better opposition at the top and more ranges to prove he could fight different sizes. As for Ray, Ray could beat Duran anytime out after the first fight. He was too fast and he would never fight Duran again on the inside. That is not an excuse, he beat him two more times after the first fight and easily in both, and the third fight in 1989 when he was older and still he could move and outbox Duran. As for Hearns and the massage. I never bought that. I don't know if that was true. Either way anyone could make that excuse, that sounds like Duran's excuses when he lost to all the greats he fought.

 

It's bordering on ******ed to think that fight caused more damage to Hagler than Hearns. There's literally NOTHING to support that notion accept the wonderful "it looked like Tommy hit Marvin harder with a few shots that made up for him getting hit more often...." Ummmm yeah.....

 

The rematch would have been great for the fans and there is no doubt it's another money fight.. There was nothing in the fight that tells me it goes any different in the rematch.. If Hearns doesn't break his hand, it may go longer. The problem with assuming that Hearns can stay outside in a rematch is that Marvin has something to say about that too. The blueprint is there.. Marvin smothers him again. Hearns doesn't tie up, he goes back to give 1 , take 1 and Marvin KO's him again

 

that was not the typical fight of either guy. They went to war in a way most guys do not. The rematch would have been slower. Hagler's style was good for Hearns, but with Hearns reach and right hand I always thought the rematch would be very interesting.

 

So what it wasn't the typical fight of either guy? It happened. .. So Marvin is going to sit back in a rematch? why? Where he knows it's advantage Hearns there. You are so knowledgeable about this era and it just baffles me sometimes with your assumptions. If I KO a guy in 3 rounds, I'm going to have a completely different game plan going into a rematch ?.. That makes 0 sense!

 

I think in the rematch he would have a hard time being that aggressive. It would not be the same fight .. They came out like that because of anger. That fight was not going to go many rounds the way it started. It isn't that. Say you did knockout a guy in 3 rounds with that sort of frenzy, do you trust that you can reach that frenzy again? You would not hate him as much the second time becaus you have the first fight in a bonding situation and you know you made greatness, and Marvin was very emotional. I think as harsh as he was when he hated a guy, if he started to like someone that worked against him since I can tell he has a really soft heart. You pick up on that sometimes. He is a good guy, and as great as he was, if he hates he can pour it on. if he doesn't that hurts since I think it hurt him with Ray.. And Marvin was getting older, maybe he doubted he could reach that again and what if Hearns lands. Do I think Hearns would win the rematch? I don't know. It favors Marvin with his style, but I do think a slowed pace and Hearns knowing what happened the first time could help him not slug.. I do believe what Marvin said, if he is cut or hurt it makes him meaner.. And that is why he gets tougher the tougher the opponent.. Ray might not have hit him hard enough to get him as mad as Hearns might.. Marvin was unique. And I understand their styles. Hearns didn't have the chin of Marvin, so Marvin might slowly make it a fight and take hearns into deep waters and his chin making him through it and Hearns failing. It would be up to Hearns to take the slower pace and cut up Marvin or swell him, so even if the fights gets rough Marvin would be near the point where he is stopped. He face started to swell a little at that point. Even after round one of Hearns, the right side of his face was swollen. Which was surprising since that means Hearns left hooks were doing that damage.

 

You have to trust it because it worked .. if do not, you are not confident going in. I do not see Marvin conceding his advantages and willfully staying on the outside …. Anyway, there is no one on this board who wanted to see Hearns KO Marvin more than me … I'm still bitter to this day it didn't happen .. but sometimes you just got to accept what was right in front of my face to see

 

I honestly don't know. I did want to see how Hearns right would land at a slower pace and if he could get to the side. I do know this. if Marvin fought Hearns righty,, Hearns could get the right hand off to knock him out maybe.