Thread: Could Hearns have ever beaten Hagler?

I have been thinking about this fight and what If...

The fight had taken place when it was originally suppose to, not with so many cancellations and so many fights in between.

If Hearns didn't have such a dodgy hand, how much would this have effected him if he didn't have one? It was definatly a factor in the war.

Would Hagler have been so aggressive if he hadn't been cut so early on? Would Hagler have fought at such a high pace?

Or was Hagler just too strong for Hearns at middleweight and even with Hearns being fully fit for the fight would he have eventually stopped him?

Hearns should definatly boxed a lot more in this fight and I'm thinking if Hearns offered a more of a disaplined fight would he have beaten Hagler?

It was such a memorable contest though, I've been doing a lot of research on Hearns recentley and I do feel he had the tools to beat Hagler that night IMO.

As soon as I saw the title I was gonna post - if he doesn't cut Hagler he does better! lol, you don't cut Hagler if you don't want him to shift up to his top gears!

There was also a story about a member of hearns' enterouge giving him a deep tissue massage before the fight and fucking his legs up. Don't know if it's true but in theory it could have been a factor depending on the method of massage.

What ever happened I think it worked out perfectly... for the fans anyway!

Apparently Hagler told Hearns not to cut him or it would end up in a real fight which it did.

Yes I read that about the massage too, it seems like speculation by Steward though when answering why it went wrong.

Hearns defiantly got the tactics wrong though, but it was never in his nature to step down if someone wanted to fight him. This defiantly was the reason why he lost the fight though. If he had more discipline to his game plan and the factors I mentioned before would he have been able to have beaten Hagler?

Not in a hundred fights. Why?

When you land your big punch perfectly, and your hand breaks in three places?

You sir are forever outgunned.

I think Hagler is all wrong for Hearns. He learned on his very tough road to the top how to deal with rangy clever boxers. I think smaller guys who were too quick & elusive for him would provide more of a challenge. I mean you never know, but I'd favour Hagler over Hearns 4 out of every 5 they fought.

Hagler started the fight fast, he came out of the corner that way and that was his plan going in. Being cut had nothing to do with it.
He would beat Hearns every time because Tommy couldn't knock him out and he couldn't keep Hagler off of him and he wasn't durable enough to last. Tommy couldn't fight much inside and he couldn't keep Hagler away.

Originally Posted by Tam Seddon

I have been thinking about this fight and what If...

Originally Posted by Tam Seddon

The fight had taken place when it was originally suppose to, not with so many cancellations and so many fights in between.

If Hearns didn't have such a dodgy hand, how much would this have effected him if he didn't have one? It was definatly a factor in the war.

Would Hagler have been so aggressive if he hadn't been cut so early on? Would Hagler have fought at such a high pace?

Or was Hagler just too strong for Hearns at middleweight and even with Hearns being fully fit for the fight would he have eventually stopped him?

Hearns should definatly boxed a lot more in this fight and I'm thinking if Hearns offered a more of a disaplined fight would he have beaten Hagler?

It was such a memorable contest though, I've been doing a lot of research on Hearns recentley and I do feel he had the tools to beat Hagler that night IMO.

People say Hearns should have boxed more but I'm not sure even if Hearns would have boxed behind his jab. I don't think that would have been enough. I think Hagler would have just walked right through him. I don't think Hearns is a good enough boxer to walk away with a UD aganist Hagler. Remember one of the greatest boxers of all time (Sugar Ray Leonard) just about beat Hagler to a split decision and that was against and a way over confident and under-trained hagler.

Hearns was facing a highly motivated Hagler who was ready for war. Who didn't under-estimate Hearns as he did with SRL. There is no way Hearns could have jab and moved for 12 rounds. Hagler would have caught up with him and chopped him down. Maybe I'm under-estimating Hearns boxing skills but that's how I see it.

No! hagler was a naural middleweight who fought every tough S.O.B. on the east coast and was conditioned by wars with tally lanky sluggers with a punch. The key word is that Marvin was a natural middleweight and Tommy spent too much time as a welter and should have moved up years before he did.

If John Mugabi, young and brimming with power of a natural middleweight can't knock out an older past his prime Hagler, I have a hard time thinking that Hearns would have ever stopped Hagler. Hagler was a very good boxer, more than people will give him credit, he would have eventually caught up to Hearns and has shown he had the power to stop him. So Hearns couldn't stop Hagler but Hagler could stop Hearns, and Hearns would have to fight super cautious behind the jab for 12 rounds but Hagler would have found a way inside it eventually and there's no way Hearns would have beat him with just that for an entire 12 rounds, that plus the fact Hearns had nothing to move Hagler backwards really, once Hagler took Hearns perfect right hand on the button and kept coming, the fight was over, cause Hearns wasn't going to win a decision with Hagler mauling him the whole fight.

Originally Posted by Majesty

If John Mugabi, young and brimming with power of a natural middleweight can't knock out an older past his prime Hagler, I have a hard time thinking that Hearns would have ever stopped Hagler. Hagler was a very good boxer, more than people will give him credit, he would have eventually caught up to Hearns and has shown he had the power to stop him. So Hearns couldn't stop Hagler but Hagler could stop Hearns, and Hearns would have to fight super cautious behind the jab for 12 rounds but Hagler would have found a way inside it eventually and there's no way Hearns would have beat him with just that for an entire 12 rounds, that plus the fact Hearns had nothing to move Hagler backwards really, once Hagler took Hearns perfect right hand on the button and kept coming, the fight was over, cause Hearns wasn't going to win a decision with Hagler mauling him the whole fight.

Great point on the Beast. He hit Marvin clean a bunch of times and Marvin, well, he just kept on coming.

Yes, Hearns had the tools and skills to stay away from Hagler and possibly win on points. He did injure his hand in the fight and his legs were weak as well. So he could do it and he always wanted a return as he felt he could beat Hagler. He did unofficially beat Leonard.

Tommy would NEVER ever beat MMH at middleweight not in a million years , as great as the Hitman was he landed his best punches before he damaged his hand , and Hagler just walked threw them ,both were in there prime at the time,Hagler always would have to much ammo against Tommy ,although Hearns should have got the decision over Sugar ray , they were both past there best by then ,there was only one man who beat Leonard in his prime

Just watched the fight again after reading this thread and WOW! that first round never gets boring

Hearns had his hands very low a lot of the time and was getting caught by silly shots even at long range. He was constantly on the move but he was never going to be able to keep Hagler off him for the entire fight fighting like that. Hearns was doing well at times landing that long jab maybe if he had have planted his feet and threw 2s,3s, and 4s more often he might have deterred Hagler very slightly or at least been able to slow the pace of the fight down and the tide might have started to turn in his favour the more tired Hagler became with the way he was fighting.

Hearns dodging some of those blows in the corner 1st round and still trying to fight his way out was pretty special. Hagler was a monster!

Tommy beats Marvin in a return match. Hagler was taylor made for Hearns. Slow hands would have killed marvin in a return fight. If they box at all Tommy knocks Marvin down with combinations. The reason Marvin didnt get knocked out in the first fight is that he always had his neck in the "flexed position" waging war. In a return fight Marvin would be forced to box Hearns thus exposing his chin and relaxing his neck resulting in FLASH KNOCKDOWN's. Marvin was very lucky Hearns fought him the way he did in 1985. Hearns biggest problem is he had a bad trainer/manager. Both Hagler and Leonard's trainer out managed Hearns trainer. Had Hearns had Dundee as his trainer he beats everyone. Hearns was the best boxer, had the most FLASH power, and had the best footwoork of all his opponents. Hagler gets sliced up and stopped in a return match IMO
Hearns and Hagler wasnt a boxing match it was a street fight. Hearns has it all over Hagler from a boxing prospective. Not even close. Yes Marvin was stronger

Most times when Hearns landed bombs clean it was like a howitzer shell hitting a tin can vs Haggler it was more like a .45 round hitting a tank. Maybe if Tommy boxes the entire fight and stays away he lasts longer, but Marvin had his number in my opinion.