Tyson was rated 19th by the ring magazine in 1996 in a list of the best 50 P4P fighters in the last 50 years up to that point, Hagler was rated 20th, I feel Tyson was a more skilled finisher than Hagler but Hagler was killer in his weight class too, which fighter was better P4P? Info given on Hagler: Quality of competition: 9 Bouts v Top 50 fighters: 3 Why he was there: Dominated the division for more than 10 years, both before and during title reign. What he could have done to improve his ranking: Not given the first four rounds away to Ray Leonard. Tyson info: Quality of competition: 8 Bouts v Top 50 fighters: 2 Why he`s there: Unified title and reigned with iron fists. What he could have done improve his ranking: It wasn`t what he could have done at that point, it`s what could have done from then on.
I remember that magazine. Still have it somewhere. Wasn't it from 1996 and a few months before Tyson-Holyfield? And I believe Hagler was ranked close to Tyson, maybe a few places lower, like #22 out of the 50. Love both fighters, and Tyson should be ranked higher than Hagler in my opinion. It's close though. I think Tyson's post prison career tarnished his legacy. So I might have to go with Hagler being higher since he has wins over Duran and Hearns.
