Printable View
Bernard Hopkins' toughest fights before the big names came after him (but after RJJ got him)were vs Robert Allen.....ROBERT ALLEN!!!
Hopkins was tough and cagey but IMO Hagler is hands down the better of the two and in a fight pitting a PRIME Hopkins vs a PRIME Hagler you have to pick Hagler to win on points, big punch output, won the early AND the late rounds, had a rock solid chin, and a motor like no other! Added to which Marvin was a southpaw and B-Hop apparently didn't like southpaws.
Robert Allen was beating Bernard Hopkins in there 1st fight, until Mills Lane pushed Bernard Hopkins out of the ring IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
But Robert Allen acted like a total drama queen in the rematch, it was some of the most over dramatic acting i've ever seen in my life. He should of been ashamed of himself that night.
All three were dirty fights
Hagler was perhaps the last great old school fighter.
He had to earn everything he got.
He had to fight the best Philadelphia could throw at him in the 70s, and back then, that was basically half of the top ten Middleweights in the world!
He also had to learn from defeats. The Worm Monroe stumped him first time round and yet Hagler learnt and avenged the defeat twice.
He was the victim of a close defeat to Boogaloo Watts, but avenged that defeat.... twice!
Hagler got his title shots against Vito and Minter by beating half the top 10 fighters in the division.
As a champ from 1980 and 1983 Hagler became a star by beating the best the division could throw at him, which was slightly below par historically.
Hagler's body of worked from 1976 to 1983 compares to most Middleweights; Duran, Hearns and Leonard from 83 onwards, adds the cherry on the cake of his career.
Wins over
Watts (2)
Monroe (2)
Hart
Colbert (2)
Finnegan (2)
Briscoe
Seales (2 plus a draw; 2 fights before 1976)
Antuofermo (plus a draw)
Minter
Obelmejias (2)
Sibson
Hamsho (2; one after 83)
Were excellent foundations to a future great.
I think Hagler had a pretty good resume wish he would of fought Micheal Spinks after his lose to Leonard would of been a good fight.
Both Hopkins and James Toney were "Old School"
I'm as big a Hagler fan as there is out there, but Spinks would have been too much for him. In 1987, Spinks was HW champion having beaten Cooney and Larry Holmes. He was just too big for Marvin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
Hearns briefly held the WBA strap at that point and vacated and LaLonde picked up the WBC strap around that time. I wouldn't have minded if he moved up and had a rematch with Hearns or even fought LaLonde, but I think he was mentally done with boxing at that point.
Does anybody know if a rematch was discussed with Hagler and Hearns after the Leonard fight? I'm guessing Hearns probably didn't want anything to do with Hagler after fight one. I'm not sure LaLonde was a big enough name an payday for him. He could have tried to add a belt just for the sake of adding a belt (like Ray Leonard), but Hagler had too much integrity for those kind of games, like paying guys extra to drain themselves down in weight. I'm fairly certain Hagler would have beaten LaLonde even at 175.
Without a 15 rounder to your name, you cannot classify yourself as such, IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle
Jorge Paez may have a case, but is a whole level and quite a bit below Hagler, maybe Starling has an argument, ditto McCallum, but neither where quite as Marvelous as Hagler.