Which fight did you like more: Hearns/Haggler or Arguello/Pryor

It very well could have ended that way. Honestly, that's sort of what happened in Hearns/Leonard I. I just think Tommy was at his best on the outside and honestly, Hagler was slowing down at that point. Duran was outboxing him in their fight and Leonard took that and ran with it when they fought in 87'.

 

Indeed. I am an old fart

The first fight I remember watching live was Soo-hwan Hong vs. Carrasquilla in 1977, over that tiny black and white box (Korea didn't have color TV until early 1980s, I recall).

 

I am the biggest Hearns fan there is, but I don't think there is any way he was winning against Hagler that night, once he broke his right. Common sense dictates that you cannot beat a fighter of Hagler's ilk without your primary hand.

The more interesting questions are 1) what would have happened if his brittle right remained intact, and 2) in that context, should he have still tried to bomb out Hagler or tried to stay outside.

As for question #1, I think he would have still lost the same way he did, but he has the proverbial puncher's chance. Hagler's chin is the best I've seen in boxing, and I don't think I've ever seen him even in serious trouble - much less get knocked down (legitimately). I know people say Hearns stunned him with that right in the opening moments, but he sure recovered quickly. Mugabi landed multiple bombs, but never really staggered him. Hart may have hurt him, but the round ended, and I can't be sure. So I'd think Hearns would need to land multiple heavy rights in succession to take out Hagler (if he can be taken out at all), and I tend to think that's unlikely. So he may land a few more heavy shots at intervals but I'd think Hagler weathers through them and likely stops him even earlier, since Hearns would have ran less without the hand issue.

As for question #2, I am again in a minority in thinking that Hearns' decision to try to knock out Hagler may have been the right decision. I don't think even the fittest Hearns would be able to run his way to a decision against Hagler. Yes, he ran well against Leonard, but Leonard was far more respectful of Hearns' power and didn't really crowd him except in the rounds where he had Hearns hurt (6, 7, 13, 14). And even then Hearns' stamina flagged, and he got caught! In contrast, Hagler would've been more aggressive and taxed Hearns' stamina and chin more than Leonard throughout the fight. In this context, why not test Hagler's chin? Cuevas had a reputation for granite chin, and so did Duran, until they met Hearns. Sure, Hagler's bigger and had a better chin even in rellative terms than Cuevas or Duran, but why not at least try?

Finally, there is the element of Hearns' condition that particular night. Hearns never had a good chin or legs in long fights, but Hearns' legs seemed rubbery even from the very get-go. Who knows the cause? The "massage" thing Steward talks about? Or weight draining issues? Whatever the reason, that Hearns wouldn't have been able to box even 10 rounds, I don't think. And it seems like Hearns knew it.

 

Ah ok. I figured you may have missed the build up and all the rest.

 

Palm slaps is the right word. You can see Tommy throwing those side hand rights and you can tell something is wrong. Shame that had to happen

 

Yeah, I had actually just immigrated to the U.S. when this fight happened, and the hype was insane in Korea, too.

 

Wow, good stuff mate.

 

Yeah, it was over as soon as he broke his hand. It seemed like after the first round, he was just done physically and mentally. Had he started out boxing and staying outside, I would have liked his chances much more. Tommy was so much more than a right hand power puncher. He could box with anyone as he showed against Virgil Hill and Ray Leonard. Don't get me wrong, he had one of the best right hands in boxing history and is rightfully rembered more for it, but the dude could box circles around a lot of guys. I think winning on points was the only way he was beating Hagler.

 

I don’t think Hearns really could have stayed outside against Hagler. It was too difficult. As Hearns said, he felt he had to get respect or would have gotten run over by Hagler.

Hagler was usually more methodical, but came at Hearns like a bull. Not only was Hearns so difficult to outbox at long range, but he was also the most dangerous with the right hand when he got some distance on it and had more leverage. So Hagler was going to very aggressively come at Tommy.

Midway through the first round, Hearns got some distance and landed some right hands, but Hagler got him on the ropes and hurt Tommy late in the round.

From the second round on, Hearns tried to move more, but Hagler kept getting to him.

 

I have never seen such a pair of highly skilled boxers brawl it out like Hagler-Hearns.

..except for the first round, and portions of, Pryor-Arguello

Two highly skilled boxers brawling it out.. that's the best

 

Yeah, he would have been ground down, as he tires as usual. On that night, he seemed also to have even less on the tank than usual, as I noted earlier in the thread.

 

The best fight strategy Hagler ever implemented in my opinion. Conversely, one of Hearns worst, or getting caught up in the moment, as opposed to being strategic, and using the jab overtime as he should've done.
Hagler only had one way to win, he took it, a sign of his greatness, because there's no way the version of Hagler that came out against Duran or Leonard beat Thomas Hearns.
He simply doesn't win a long range skills match against Hearns.
Not giving Hearns any room to get full leverage on his jab and especially his right hand was the perfect fight plan.
Perfectly proved by Hearn's very next fight against James Shuler, who he annihilated in one round. Demonstrated how lethal he was at Middleweight.
But the subject is which fight was better. In my opinion Pryor vs Arguello was far better.
Hagler vs Hearns was basically over in the first two minutes and thirty seconds of that fight.
The only real drama after that was if the cut Hagler received would get the fight stopped early for a Hearns win.
Pryor vs Arguello was a titanic battle from rd 1 where both men through more than a 100 punches until the fourteenth rd when the Ko occurred with very little slow down in between .
Hagler vs Hearns doesn't compare to Pryor vs Arguello in my opinion.
In fact it's not one of the top five fights of the 80's....