Hagler Vs. Hopkins: who wins? explain.

[portuge puncher]

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.

you say the calzaghe fight threw you off,
you wanna know why, hopkins was 43 ****in years old!!!

and his resume is maybe a little less then hagler's, but not by much.

hagler's greatest two fights were welter's,
but they were still great

hopkins fought tito and oscar, so its kind of the same ****.

hopkins also at 40 went up two divisions to be the lightheavywieght champ.

you say he was boreing, he's only boreing now because he fights safty first, but if you were in your 40's, wouldent you. he could be entertaing, watch this.

[Obama]

Hopkins most entertaining fight is the first Echols fight. It's a parallel to Hagler vs Mugabi.

Hopkins vs Echols is definitely the better fight tho, and Echols quite frankly would beat Mugabi.

[Kid McCoy]

What patchy record? He definitely gets a pass on his first fight. He also gets a pass for losing to RJJ (who was never much greater later on in his career than he was at that point). 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.

So Hopkins gets a pass for losing his first pro fight but Hagler doesn't for losing a decision he appeared to have won against Bobby Watts? Does Hopkins get a pass for needing two cracks at Mercado too?

Well it's all about opinions, and this is where we differ. I thought Hagler beat Leonard at the time and still do now. Close, but I thought he nicked it. Several of the other blemishes on Hagler's record were unjust too imo, including the Antuofermo and Watts fights and the bizarre scoring of the Duran fight.

That leaves one other loss, to Willie the Worm Monroe, a fight no one has seen bar those who were there night, so who knows whether the result was deserved? I don't see how that shows a susceptibility to Philly fighters, especially since Hagler KO'd Monroe twice in rematches. Personally, I think Hopkins would be susceptible to someone with Hagler's workrate.

[portuge puncher]

So Hopkins gets a pass for losing his first pro fight but Hagler doesn't for losing a decision he appeared to have won against Bobby Watts? Does Hopkins get a pass for needing two cracks at Mercado too?

Well it's all about opinions, and this is where we differ. I thought Hagler beat Leonard at the time and still do now. Close, but I thought he nicked it. Several of the other blemishes on Hagler's record were unjust too imo, including the Antuofermo and Watts fights and the bizarre scoring of the Duran fight.

That leaves one other loss, to Willie the Worm Monroe, a fight no one has seen bar those who were there night, so who knows whether the result was deserved? I don't see how that shows a susceptibility to Philly fighters, especially since Hagler KO'd Monroe twice in rematches. Personally, I think Hopkins would be susceptible to someone with Hagler's workrate.

hopkins is great at fighting guys with high workrates in his prime.

[Obama]

So Hopkins gets a pass for losing his first pro fight but Hagler doesn't for losing a decision he appeared to have won against Bobby Watts? Does Hopkins get a pass for needing two cracks at Mercado too?

Well it's all about opinions, and this is where we differ. I thought Hagler beat Leonard at the time and still do now. Close, but I thought he nicked it. Several of the other blemishes on Hagler's record were unjust too imo, including the Antuofermo and Watts fights and the bizarre scoring of the Duran fight.

That leaves one other loss, to Willie the Worm Monroe, a fight no one has seen bar those who were there night, so who knows whether the result was deserved? I don't see how that shows a susceptibility to Philly fighters, especially since Hagler KO'd Monroe twice in rematches. Personally, I think Hopkins would be susceptible to someone with Hagler's workrate.

All accounts of the first Willie the Worm Monroe fight were that Hagler CLEARLY lost it. That's not even debatable.

And yes he gets a pass at needing two cracks at Mercado. Foreign country, civil war, not properly acclimated to the environment. It's a no brainer.

Whether you think Hagler really won or lost those fights isn't everything. They're questionable decisions either way it swings. Hopkins didn't have any questionable wins in his prime. Didn't really have a questionable win period until Winky Wright.

Saying he's susceptible to Hagler's workrate makes me think you haven't watched a prime Hopkins fight. He was not beat by work rate back then. His own work rate was quite high.

[portuge puncher]

Hopkins most entertaining fight is the first Echols fight. It's a parallel to Hagler vs Mugabi.

Hopkins vs Echols is definitely the better fight tho, and Echols quite frankly would beat Mugabi.

hey bro, ive never seen B-hop vs echols, could post it plz

[Kid McCoy]

you say the calzaghe fight threw you off,
you wanna know why, hopkins was 43 ****in years old!!!

and his resume is maybe a little less then hagler's, but not by much.

hagler's greatest two fights were welter's,
but they were still great

hopkins fought tito and oscar, so its kind of the same ****.

hopkins also at 40 went up two divisions to be the lightheavywieght champ.

you say he was boreing, he's only boreing now because he fights safty first, but if you were in your 40's, wouldent you. he could be entertaing, watch this.

The Calzaghe fight didn't throw me off, it put me off. Old age is no excuse for Hopkins' antics in that night, crawling around on the canvas like a club fighter after imaginary low blows. Moore, Foreman, Holmes etc never did likewise when they were in their 40s.

Hopkins didn't suddenly start being boring in his 40s. He's been that way throughout his career. You fight whichever way suits you best, and that's the way which suits Hopkins.

Btw, he did not win the light-heavyweight title. He won a version of it and subsequently lost it to Calzaghe. **** Tiger is still the only fighter to have accomplished that feat with undisputed titles.

[portuge puncher]

The Calzaghe fight didn't throw me off, it put me off. Old age is no excuse for Hopkins' antics in that night, crawling around on the canvas like a club fighter after imaginary low blows. Moore, Foreman, Holmes etc never did likewise when they were in their 40s.

Hopkins didn't suddenly start being boring in his 40s. He's been that way throughout his career. You fight whichever way suits you best, and that's the way which suits Hopkins.

Btw, he did not win the light-heavyweight title. He won a version of it and subsequently lost it to Calzaghe. **** Tiger is still the only fighter to have accomplished that feat with undisputed titles.

he had a bad night in that fight, kinda like hagler vs leonard.

then Bhop at 43 dominated an undefeated knockout artist kelly pavlik.

[Kid McCoy]

All accounts of the first Willie the Worm Monroe fight were that Hagler CLEARLY lost it. That's not even debatable.

Yes I know the reports state he lost to Monroe legitimately. But I've also had enough experience of journalists to not want to rely on them any more than I have to, and seeing the footage is the only way to be sure. Still, that leaves one fight out of 67 that he lost "clearly". Is that really proof of his vulnerability to Philly fighters?

And yes he gets a pass at needing two cracks at Mercado. Foreign country, civil war, not properly acclimated to the environment. It's a no brainer.

Whether you think Hagler really won or lost those fights isn't everything. They're questionable decisions either way it swings. Hopkins didn't have any questionable wins in his prime. Didn't really have a questionable win period until Winky Wright.

Of course it is. I'm not going to dismiss Hagler for losing a fight I thought he won. If Hopkins gets a pass for needing two attempts to beat Segundo Mercado, then Hagler gets a pass from me from for the aforementioned 'blemishes' on his record. Which Hagler wins did you feel were questionable?

Saying he's susceptible to Hagler's workrate makes me think you haven't watched a prime Hopkins fight. He was not beat by work rate back then. His own work rate was quite high.

Yes, I've seen most of Hopkins' fights, and a lot of them were snoozefests. Yes, he had a higher workrate in his prime than now, but I still see a peak Hagler as too busy for him.

[Obama]

hey bro, ive never seen B-hop vs echols, could post it plz

Credit to original uploader: