The big 4 VS.The big 4 of our generation

What about Hearns Shaky chin.... I love how you guys always do this.

 

i haven't seen ike williams, so i will defer to your opinion until i can find some of his fights.

but remember, cholo may be outgunned in this matchup, but the bombs have to hit their mark. and duran was one great defensive fighter.

 

I'd take a prime B-HOP over a prime Hagler, other than that, it's a clean sweep for the big 4 of yesteryear.

 

A clean sweep for the greats of the 70s and 80s, no question. But yes, the Hagler-Hopkins fight is likely the most contested.

 

Hearns has more power, more height, more reach, more speed, a better jab, and a right hand that trumps the left hook of Trinidad.

On top of that he was adept at using his jab and setting up the perfectly timed right hand. Finding Trinidad was not hard, he wasn't the most adaptable fighter and used generally the same movement at all times trying to come inside.

They both have shaky chins. All the other intagables point to Hearns.

 

i may be in the minority, but i do not believe either fighters chin was as bad as what some believe. hearns was ko by leonard more from exhaustion than chin. ko by hagler, no shame there, and got caught with a great shot from barkley. tito's problem was balance not chin, the only time i remember him being seriously hurt was the hopkins fight.

 

I agree that Heanrs takes it, but i just didn't like your reasoning in that post. I will post my picks in a sec...

 

If you had to pick a fab 4 to represent b/w Lightweight and middle of our generation it would be:
Hopkins - Middle
Winky - 154
Delahoya - Welter
Mosley - Lightweight - Welter

Hopkins vs Hagler
Winky vs Hearns
Hoya vs SRL
Mosley vs Duran

The only outcome I'm sure of is SRL UD over Delahoya.

 

I'd say Hearns vs Winky is pretty much set in stone. He holds every advantage and Winky poses no stylistic problems, nor the threat that a big puncher poses Hearns.

 

Yeah, I'm ok with that too.

 

Hoya vs Hearns at 154lbs would actually be a sick fight....if Hoya actually fights.

 

The only fighters who have "punchers" chances against Hearns were either very good boxers who were actually defensively sound enough to get past his jab OR boxers who were naturally bigger than him. Trinidad is neither, so he loses by KO.

Mayweather is too small for Leonard at 147 and loses to him where Leonard is actually faster and stronger.

Hagler vs Hopkins is a toss up. 2 out of 3 to Hagler, but the one Hopkins wins will be clearer due to his ability to counter in close.

Duran vs Mosley would be close early on. But after the 7th or so, Duran, who was more technically skilled than Mosley, takes over with his subtle movement and accuracy.

 

I think people are sleeping on Hopkins, or maybe I'm just bias. I think he has a clear advantage of Hagler. Hagler was a beast. The man could box, he could brawl, and he had a great chin. However, Hopkins can also box, he also has a great chin, and he's not above getting dirty. Most importantly, I think he's death to lefties. He has a great straigt right, and also a good left hook. He was also much bigger than Hagler, and has great ring intelligence. I don't know if Hagler could outbox the bigger man, and I think Hopkins' counterpunching, chin, and defense get him the win if Hagler gets agressive.

I don't know, I'm going to have to back to the tapes for this one.

 

Chavez at 135 over Mosley, or is that in between the 2 generations

 

I think he'd have a good chance of beating the mid 80's version of Hagler, but not as much the version around the start of the decade, when he was coming into his own in terms of his experience and overall skills, and still had the young athleticism, fresher legs, more nimble footwork and overall movement. Hagler's own boxing ability and counter-punching was excellent, and the younger Hagler was much more impressive than the one who fought guys like Duran, Mugabi, etc.

Still, the fight's pretty damn even as it is. I see Hagler as the better brawler if it came down to a fight in close quarters, but I also think Hopkins was likely a bit more technical in close. Also, if we're going by the younger Hopkins of the late 90's, he wasn't quite as dirty or cagey as the older Hopkins who started to use those tactics to adapt with his old age and diminishing athleticism.

Both were more pure, technical boxers at their best, but with other dimensions.