Terence Crawford vs Marvin Hagler

So Crawford is supposed to do worse than a fat Duran? Sure, buds.

 

Hagler on points, but a bit closer than people expect, Crawford is a very good fighter.

 

It depends on Hagler's approach he didn't always turn up in his big fights in terms of performances.

Hagler let the 1st Antuofermo fight slip away from him.

On paper Hagler should've beat a former Lightweight in Duran more convincingly but he chose to fight a tactical fight and let the fight get a bit too close for comfort.

Hagler made a huge tactical error vs Leonard in the 1st half of the fight and let that fight get away from him.

If Hagler goes at Crawford like he did vs Hearns with real intent and fire in his belly then I see Hagler winning.

But if Hagler chooses to box tactically vs Crawford he could end up in a very close fight that he could lose on points.

 

Odds are he wouldn't beat Hagler, and I'm not a big Hagler fan. Marvin faced way tougher competition than Bud ever did, and although Hagler wasn't the brightest bulb he would overwhelm hm and force a stoppage.

 

Yes.

 

Kirkland Laing and Pat Lawlor.

 

Duran came close to beating Hagler. Crawford is a great fighter but he is not Robert Duran.

 

Nobody questioned whether Canelo was good, it whether he deserved certain victories he received that he didn't deserve.

 

Big Bud fan here, ever since he beat Ricky B. for the title and i picked him to beat Canelo, but MMHagler was an amazing fighter, perfect for Middleweight and i just cant see how bud deals with the kind of punishment that flattened Hearns, Mugabe and left Minter, Autofermo and others looking like they fought a buzzsaw. Both great switch hitters and cruel fighters, if you know what i mean, they were no mercy guys in the ring. I give bud this though, he knew when to leave and called retirement perfectly, Marvin had one fight too many for me.