who was more skilled Hopkins or Hagler?

I wouldn't go so far as to say one was really more skilled than the other. They were both complete fighters who were a bit better in certain areas than the other.

 

Yeah, Hagler certainly had the better jab, and I'd say he was the superior combination puncher too. Hopkins has the more sound defense, and probably an edge in footwork and overall ring control I think.

 

Hard to say. In offense it's Hagler in D it's Hopkins.

Hagler: jab, combos, body shots, head movement (close), more effective while trading inside
Hopkins: counter shots, accuracy, footwork, parrying (close), blocking, trap-setting, pace-setting, neutralizing, more effective on clinches

 

Hopkins is the more skilled and I don't see it as close. Hagler is the better bull

 

Two great fighters ! For me its close...
Have you received my translation PP ?

 

Hagler going in, Hopkins going out...different styles...Hopkins was more of a late bloomer and peaked at light-heavy...as Middleweights Hagler beats him IMO

 

:huh

 

I was going to say Hagler, but PP makes an interesting point. Hagler would win if they fought imo.

 

Hagler certainly would win.

 

I can't even understand this. You might as well have said "Wonk wonk wonk wonk wonk." It would've made just as much sense to me.

 

He did make an interesting point, i don't recall agreeing, but i'd like to hear his argument as Hopkins is clearly the most complete technician of our time, and therefore if there is any element of subjectivity to this debate then PP's point is of interest to me.

And Hagler is the better bull.