Prime Marvin Hagler A little presumptuous but I'm hoping to start a series of threads where we take a fighter DOMINANT in his prime and weight class, who was never dominated and try to construct the type of fighter required to conclusively beat them. Extra points for thorough analysis and drawing comparisons to a real fighter, using specific examples/footage. The reason for the thread and my first pick: Marvin Hagler. The Marvin Hagler of 81-84, with his prime around the caveman lee/sibson fights. Describe the type of fighter and style needed to conclusively beat this hagler.
Good ideia ! Prime Tiger IMO.... A fast fighter, a good puncher....who could fight as great as Hagler at close distance, with great combinations, amazing left hook....and would be great with that good jab if he choose to box........Actually I would say Tiger´s jab was better than Hagler´s..... I can see Tiger by close (but clear) UD.....
:goodgood call. now my "counter" to this might be if gene fullmer could outbox tiger, so would hagler. i personally see hagler outboxing him at range and engaging him in a war in close, which neither fighter ever really lost. in the trenches, neither man budges but at distance, i favour marvin personally
:thinkinteresting and hagler thrived against come forward brawlers, which tiger would clearly stay away from. i see hagler adopting a similar strategy as he did against briscoe personally. if they fought 10 times though, i see 7 being FOTY candidates
Given that the first Antuofermo/Hagler fight was close enough to be a draw, and that it took 11 to disect Hamsho in the first fight, I think that the guy to beat a prime Hagler would be somebody to crowd him, roughhouse him, make him fight. Maybe Stanley Ketchel, maybe Jake LaMotta.
It depends, I think Hagler reacted to being rushed with extreme violence, but when he fought Duran, even though he most likely could have overpowered Duran with an alternative plan, he boxed, shaded him, clearly won, but without bulldozing a natural lightweight. I don't see him rushing someone physically stronger than him. Tiger, same thing, he liked to box and counterpunch, that is why inspite of his very heavy hands ("like being hit with a sack of coal" according to Terry Downes) he has a KO % of 30. I think this would only turn into a great fight if someone was clearly losing on the cards after 5 or 6. I don't think Tiger would beat Hagler.
interesting, ketchel i see for sure. and vito was able to frustrate the **** out of hagler despite having virtually no punch. lamotta's punching power is only slightly better and he was pretty massive, and physically, for a middleweight. against jake, do you see hagler being able to keep his distance? he was able to against sibson, who while not the quality of lamotta, was a big strong middle who just couldn't close the distance
Both wide open for Hagler in my opinion. I think to beat Hagler you'd need to make him reach for you, whether that's with very tall boxing or with lots and lots of movement behind a great great jab. Sugar Ray would be a very good pick for these reasons. (the other one)
good post and i agree. this entire thread came about while i was taking a crap wondering how a toney/hagler fight would play out. i think a strategy similar to duran, with more committment to hard counter punching and spoiling could do the trick. duran constantly disrupted hagler, landed lead and counter rights, and shoulder rolled on the inside enough to make hagler pissed and sloppy. i think a natural much bigger fighter like toney, adept at that strategy, would be surprisingly successful
Ketchel beats Hagler, Robinson and LaMotta beat him, a few others do also. Hagler and Monzon would be tough.
The fighter to beat Hagler was the guy that could force him out of his role as the counter-puncher and into pressing the action and forcing him into doing the leading.A conservative,disciplined approach with a decent amount of lateral movement involved,never giving Hagler a consistent stationary target to pick at. Duran didn't offer that type of movement,but he did force Hagler into do alot of the leading,and he was able to remain competitive throughout and see out the entire fight,and that had nothing to do with Hagler "showing him too much respect",as has usually been used to excuse Hagler being unable to take Duran out.Truth is,Duran was too intelligent to be taken out by someone like Hagler. Geraldo,who was never anything more than a fringe contender,was the one who really wrote the blueprint in how to beat Hagler.When you see Hagler reaching out at thin air,desperately trying to hit Leonard,it's usually asserted that this was the sign of declining reflexes.This might well be,but,problem is,Hagler was doing the same damn thing against Geraldo,and I assume that Hagler was supposed to have been in his prime around this point. And Mugabi generally isn't credited for the smarts and counter-punching ability that he showed against Hagler,either - and it was that,rather than him just having a heavy pair of hands,that enabled him to give catch Hagler with so many clean shots,and push him in such a tough,gruelling fight.