Hagler Vs. Hopkins: who wins? explain.

[Kid McCoy]

One's a legend, the other just thinks he's a legend. I'm going for the legend.

[portuge puncher]

hagler got outboxed by small old leonard and small old duran, what makes you think hopkins couldnt do it?

you should watch Duran - hagler,

duran only won like 3 or 4 out of the 15 rounds,

but the judges made it close

[portuge puncher]

One's a legend, the other just thinks he's a legend. I'm going for the legend.

bernard is a legend.

his resume is loaded, in his prime around 1997-2002,

he was a beast.

[Kid McCoy]

bernard is a legend.

his resume is loaded, in his prime around 1997-2002,

he was a beast.

Sorry, I know I'm in the minority on this one but I don't rate Hopkins as highly as some of his admirers do, especially those he seem to think he beats Hagler easily. He's a fine fighter, but for me not in the class of Hagler, Tiger, Greb, Monzon etc. I don't see what in his career puts him much higher than Calzaghe in the all-time stakes.

[portuge puncher]

Sorry, I know I'm in the minority on this one but I don't rate Hopkins as highly as some of his admirers do, especially those he seem to think he beats Hagler easily. He's a fine fighter, but for me not in the class of Hagler, Tiger, Greb, Monzon etc. I don't see what in his career puts him much higher than Calzaghe in the all-time stakes.

because of his style for one,
his level of compition is another,
great chin, supperoir boxing ability,
he's the best MW in the last 20 years.

in his prime he'd KO calslappy

[GJC]

There seems to be a view that Hagler will lose all the early rounds, I assume that is based on him virtually chucking the early rounds against Leonard? Hagler was by no means peak in that fight and seemed IMO to base his whole strategy that SRL would slow down and he would catch KO him in the later rounds. I think he fought a bad fight but still remain to be convinced that Leonard deserved the judges nod, thats an argument for another thread though.
I don't think Hagler was a slow starter in the vein of Frazier.
Hearns came racing out of the traps and had early success but was put away early. Hamsho, Scypion and Minter were also put away in the first 4 rounds so I don't think it is as cut and dried as people believe that Hagler will be 4 or 5 rounds behind by the middle of the fight.
It would be a good match but I can't see beyond Hagler.

[Kid McCoy]

because of his style for one,
his level of compition is another,
great chin, supperoir boxing ability,
he's the best MW in the last 20 years.

in his prime he'd KO calslappy

His style was dull as dishwater, his level of competition was mainly average, he has a good chin and fine boxing skills, wouldn't say superior, and yeah he probably is the best middle of the last 20 or so years. I'm not saying he's a bad fighter, just not among the elite middles for me.

KO Calzaghe? I doubt it. Hopkins' performance against Calzaghe put me off him a lot. The old-timers he gets compared to like Moore and Walcott would have been ashamed at such antics.

[Obama]

Hagler's record against B rated Philadelphia fighters cannot be over looked. Hopkins is debatably the greatest Philadelphia fighter of all time. Hagler is losing a decision. No doubt about it.

[Kid McCoy]

Hagler's record against B rated Philadelphia fighters cannot be over looked. Hopkins is debatably the greatest Philadelphia fighter of all time. Hagler is losing a decision. No doubt about it.

Yet presumably Hopkins' patchy record early in his career can be?

[Obama]

Yet presumably Hopkins' patchy record early in his career can be?

What patchy record? He definitely gets a pass on his first fight. He also gets a pass for losing to RJJ (who was nearly at his best). I mean RJJ was better than everyone Hagler beat combined at that point... Other than that, he didn't lose till he was past his prime. Hagler on the other hand once past his prime lost a fight he was supposed to win. The equivalent of Hopkins losing to De La Hoya should it have gone down that way.

ANYWAYS, it's not just about who lost to who. It's about the TYPE of fighter Hagler lost to. Philadelphia fighters have many things in common. And Hopkins was quite a few steps ahead of the guys Hagler faced.

I'm not even saying Hopkins > Hagler. I'm just saying he beats him h2h.