Where Do You Rate Hagler, In Punching Power?

8. If he were a heavyweight, he'd be like Joe Frazier's left in either hand. Not at the Foreman and Shavers level but a puncher. A two-handed, sharp, crafty, combination puncher who knows how to set up shots, throw you out of position to land great sweat-flyers. Unlike the crazy hitters like Abraham, Hagler didn't have to wait to set up a great shot. He could force those shots to happen when he wanted. He could throw a Superman flying right jab into your eye while you're biking back and just make hard shots happen and rattle you whenever. I would rather fight a dumb 9 or 10 than a Hagleresque 7 or 8. Any day. But that's where I'd have him. 7.5-8.

 

Stats are the meat and potatoes of any conversation to be had on who was the best. Anyone can go through each fight with a fine comb and point out the differences and I guess thats what makes the conversation fun.
But to be fair to Hagler the majority of his early fights there was no tape or film so its hard to make a fair comparison. Imo

 

Wel, we could say that Hagler didn't have such great punching power, but sure he KNEW how to punch and hurt people...

 

Hagler was very close to 9 out of 10 .. when he went out to do so he crushed guys .. he just more often chose to box then bomb but he could crack big time .. anyone that doesn't know this is simply uneducated to Hagler .. he was a monster puncher , maybe a notch below a Benn type but he also didn't fight that way because he was far more skilled ..

This content is protected

 

I believe Carlos Monzon had 61 KO's in a career that began in 1963 and ended in retirement in 1977.

 

I rate Marvin Hagler's punching power just about halfway between "I'm glad he never hit me " and "Thank God he never hit me."

 

Killer right hook!!!!

 

For mine, you nailed it Kid.

Maybe part of the issue for Hagler was he was built like he could/should knock out King Kong with one punch - but Hagler had a lot more strings to his bow than to fight as a single minded puncher might - which he approximated more to in the Hearns fight.

KO% aren’t the be all end all metric to reflect power. Reasonable insight tells us this with many other factors to consider. However, KO%s can’t necessarily be rejected or dismissed outright either.

If Hagler’s KO% was somewhat lower we might otherwise be deeming him to have been a powder puff puncher. Imo, Hagler hit hard enough - and equally important, consistently so.

Hagler did arm punch a bit but still packed a a very respectable punch.

At a bit of tangent, it’s interesting when Shaver’s inability to knock out certain fighters is addressed.

That’s when securing a KO is highlighted as NOT being the perfect measure of absolute power.

I understand the arguments on that score and they are somewhat fair but not completely sound, imo.

But I have to say that part of Shavers’ rep. was heavily built on his outstanding KO% which, as a reflection of his power, seemed to matter quite a bit until it didn’t matter/figure.

 

I don’t think he hit so hard. Bout the same as most 160lbers. He had a lot of tools to land those shots so he often got the stoppage.

 

Maybe not a one punch ko aritst but his grit, determination and accuracy seemed to do the trick.

 

I think his ability to string punches together is what made him so good at stopping people, along with heavy hands, excellent technique and a high workrate. He was unrelenting and wore guys down to the point where his hammering shots must've felt bone breaking. I don't think he actually had massive power on the sense of a McClellan or Jackson; I'd actually say he didn't hit as hard as a Benn or GGG with one shot. What he did which was so brutal is that, like Joe Louis or SRR, his third and forth shots in a combination carried the momentum of all of the first and second. Take the Roldan KO, for instance. Each shot just gets more and more nasty and has the added benefit of setting up the next, which keeps the momentum and power going. It's almost like he's got some special stat which stacks. I've no doubt that Hagler's combinations were more devastating than GGG's, but a single back hand from Golovkin was more impactful IMO.

 

I think he had above average power, but he was so economical that he did not swing for the fences.. He tried to economize and concern energy all the time, and when he needed to he pored it on. He punched hard when he wanted to, but his whole style was economy and efficiency. That destruct and destroy thing came up later.