Printable View
Let us say that after Marvin Hagler beats Tommy Hearns in 1985 he decides to move up in weight, postponing the Spinks/Holmes fight. What would happen in the fight? I have always been interested to think how Marvin would have fared in this fight since Spinks did call him out a few times, an Marvin always wanted the welterweights to fight him, yet he never moved up. He did have a great chin and good power at middleweight.
well i think hagler would be too aggressive for him from what ive seen tyson was and even larry holmes in the rematch with spinks was more aggressive and spinks didnt like it because he likes to pick his shots so i say hagler wins on aggression although i could be wrong not seen many spinks fights but im just calling it from what ive seen from spinks
Spinks had a huge advanatage in sheer size didn't he? Not really weight but just the structure of his body was much bigger I thought
yeah Spinks was 6-2 1/2 , Although Hearns was 6-1 3/4 which might as well say 6-2.. But Michael was a legit Lightheavy.. This would have been a natural fight.
I would have to say that Hagler by decision. He had a great chin and would have held his own against Spinks. If one of the Davis brothers could keep it a close fight with Spinks, I think Hagler's aggression would have brought him home the winner. People might say that Qawi's aggression was supposed to win him the fight and it didn't. But Qawi was much shorter and relied less on boxing skills and more on a knockout punch than Hagler did. Hagler's boxing skills were not noticed as much because he outboxed guys then beat the shit out of them.
Jody
Spinks would have been too classy for Hagler. He would have used his height and reach advantage and boxed his way to a UD.
Even mentioning the fights he had with Holmes and Tyson is just stupid.
Welcome onboard, agree with you here aswell so :coolclick:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hench
why is it?? i was making a point with the few spinks fights ive seen he didnt like people that were aggressive holmes for example changed his tactics and spinks should of lost the fight plus spinks was complaining in his corner mostly every round and tyson fight tyson come right at him and he lasted 88 seconds so i dont see how that is stupidQuote:
Originally Posted by Hench
Spinks would have won with ease
Hagler knew he couldnt beat Spinks. Thats why the fight never happened.
Hagler is good but he would of been too small.
Hagler can't winthis, though I respect him as the second best after Leonard of his time he can't win... Spinks is too big, and too skilled for Hagler to beat...
Because there is a massive difference between losing to Marvin Hagler who is a middleweight and having 2 very close fights with Larry Holmes who was a Heavyweight.Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
I thought that was obvious.
Although Hagler was a great middleweight, I think Spinks would have beat him on size. I think Hearns would have given Spinks a better fight than Hagler. Stylewise Hearns could move up and fight better guys more evenly. Why? I am not sure. Hagler beats Hearns, but Hearns could beat alot of guys who Hagler would stuggle with. The Spinks Jinx would have hit Hagler in the first or second round and I doubt Hagler would have pressed forward much.
Too much size difference. SPinks via UD
i was on about aggressive side of it and how spinks hated it not the weight difference no one knows what hagler would be like at lightheavyweight anywayQuote:
Originally Posted by Hench