Lets say these two amazing in there own right fighters fought at middle, who would win and why?
Hagler late TKO imo. Reason being because hagler had a great chin and would of worn b-hop down eventually with his constant pressure.
Printable View
Lets say these two amazing in there own right fighters fought at middle, who would win and why?
Hagler late TKO imo. Reason being because hagler had a great chin and would of worn b-hop down eventually with his constant pressure.
Haglers all day. He could go through a wall and fight as well as box. Amazing engine, and would make B-Hop fight for every second, no breaks.
Yer thats how i feel too, taking nothing away from B-Hop hes a ATG also just hagler was that bit better.Quote:
Originally Posted by sanj16
Hagler, by UD or LATE TKO.
Although Hagler would definately win a UD as I agree he is greater, I think it's almost disrespectful to Hopkins to think he would be KO'd or TKO'd, as he never showed any signs of coming anywhere near being knocked out or stopped in his entire career. He has one of the greatest chins in boxing, and contrary to popular belief that he is only crafty, he has taken hard shots and pressed on. If Duran can go 15 rounds with Hagler without even getting decked, Hopkins would certainly do the same.
Hagler by UD. He would make b-hop work harder than he has ever in his life.
Are you saying that Hopkins is as good or better than Duran? I would disagree and say that Duran was better, multi division champ, granite hands and chin. KOed once, but I am not sure anybody could have stood after that shot by Hearns.Quote:
Originally Posted by smashcrusher
Rahman beat Lennox. Tyson lost to Lennox. That doesn't mean I think Rahman is greater or just as good as Tyson. Hopkins has the best chin of any fighter of our generation, and is a natural middleweight, not a blown up light weight. The question you should be asking is 'is Duran's chin as good as Hopkins' chin?' You might be able to make an argument that it is just as good, but there is no evidence to suggest it is better.Quote:
Originally Posted by TyBuff
I think what seperates the two would be Hopkins defense. I dont recall a shot that really landed flush on him especially in the last few years. They are two different types of fighters where Duran chose to brawl more which exposed him to getting hit more and Hopkins opted for a more slick boxing style which limited the times he got hit. I would stand by saying that their chins were just as good as the others.Quote:
Originally Posted by smashcrusher
Duran was not proven at MW, sure he gave Hagler a good fight...but to be honest who has he really beaten at MW apart from Iran Barkley?
Depends:
Hopkins the brawler beats Hagler the brawler
Hopkins the brawler loses to Hagler the boxer
Hopkins the boxer loses to Hagler the boxer
Hopkins the boxer beats Hagler the brawler
I worked this out on:
Hopkins the boxer peaked in 1999 though 2001
Hopkins the brawler peaked in 1997/98
Hagler the boxer peaked 1977 though to 1979
Hagler the brawler peaked 1981 though to 1983
Hopkins would beat Hagler... he was too skilled, and had impressive power, and very good stamina... like someone else said his defense would be the key to this fight.
I definitely favor Hagler.
I think if Hopkins had been around back then he'd have been like Hearns (except all defense instead of all offense) and would have made for great fights, but would've come up short against other greats like Hagler and Leonard.
Your crazy leonard would be taken to school against Hopkins,Hopkins is an exceptional Boxer an extremely intelligent fighter and his iron clad defensive skills and counterpunching would be the determineing factor he would get UD or late Tko against leonard!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by FLH2o
I cant pick a winner against Hagler its a push as far as I am concerned, Hagler can press all nite if he wants but he can also get counterpunched either way its hard to pick a winner
IMPRESSIVE POWER??? WHERE?Quote:
Originally Posted by Taeth
Hagler all day every day!
"Marvelous" Marvin Hagler
1) constant pressure
2) accumulates punishment
3) great chin
4) southpaw
5) can be just as rough as B-Hop
Apparently youv'e not followed Hopkins's career.Quote:
Originally Posted by atomic bull
He's knocked out over 30 men in his career & the bulk of those are 1-6 round KO's.
Exactly, it depends. Because Hagler and Hopkins are rare fighters who experienced two completely different primes ;) So which one?Quote:
Originally Posted by Britkid
The Hagler who fought in the late 70s (77-79), beats any version of Hopkins; I actually have changed my opinion; I used to think the Hopkins who beat Trinidad would beat any version of Hagler, but I have rewatched some Hagler bouts from the 70s recently, and have changed my opinion. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Starr
The thing is this...Hopkins IWHO would have most likely confused Hagler a bit...no matter what anyone thinks.
Neither would have fought anything like the other...but Hopkins was pretty sneaky & cagey.
You never really knew what was coming from him & which angle it would come from.
It's such a tuff call from me & I am truly glad these fwockers were seperated by a generation.
Apparently I have, I'm from Philly THE REAL BOXING CAPITAL, THE LION'S DEN, NEED I GO ON.....THANKX MAAAANNNNNN!Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205