Hagler/Hearns is a spectacularly overrated fight

Agree/Disagree?

I mean I get that you have to take into account the context. It's a massive fight that had a big build up. Two great fighters, etc.

But if you just watch the fight, it's massively overrated as a great fight if you're just looking at it from a pure fight perspective. We see wars all the time. This fight was over by the end of the first round. The last two rounds Hearns was on wobbly legs.

The first round: epic. The overall fight: eh

Here's the fight: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYt5Rz2XlAg

It's not overrated. For the simple fact that top fighters like that don't go at each other the way they went at each other. The way they fought is the way De La Hoya and Trinidad should of fought

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

It's not overrated. For the simple fact that top fighters like that don't go at each other the way they went at each other. The way they fought is the way De La Hoya and Trinidad should of fought

---

That's the argument for it.

It doesn't hold a candle to Castillo-Corrrales 1. Toney-Jirov shits all over it.

Hell, Ward-Burton is a lot better fight from a pure fight perspective, much less Ward-Gatti. And those are just well known "lower-level" fights, there are an endless amount of fights that were better from a pure action perspective.

I don't think rounds 2 and 3 were all that bad. Hearns was still throwing bombs. He just realized somewhere along the line that he wasn't going to hurt Hagler bad enough to make a difference. But he never stopped throwing. It was only 3 rounds, but damn... what 3 rounds they were. I wish we had more Hagler-Hearns fights in championship boxing history.

I fully accept that I do have a bit of a revisionist view on this because I didn't see it live. But I am old enough to have seen a replay of it without knowing what happened. And I was entranced by it.

Just looking back at it, the only argument that it's one of boxing's great fights (and every fight is judged by it, Castillo-Corrales was judged by it) is that it was two legendary fighters. Otherwise we've all seen better fights.

I think it's certainly the greatest first round between two elite all time fighters fighting in their prime for a major belt, but round 2 and 3 are a bit of a beatdown.

Well... to be fair, 10 great rounds beats 3 great rounds anytime. That being said, I think after seeing the 1st round, anything less in the 2nd round would've been a letdown. I thought Hearns resorted to moving more, because he knew he wasn't going to get Hagler out of there with one punch.... and he had good boxing skills. IMO, it was still a good round. Round 3, yeah.... Hearns was on wobbly legs from being hurt toward the end of the 2nd.

Better fights? Probably. Better 3 rounds of fighting? Not for me.

Wait a second...is this the boxing section? I must have got lost. ;D

;D This is a rare appearance for me

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OumaFan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

It's not overrated. For the simple fact that top fighters like that don't go at each other the way they went at each other. The way they fought is the way De La Hoya and Trinidad should of fought

---

That's the argument for it.

It doesn't hold a candle to Castillo-Corrrales 1. Toney-Jirov shits all over it.

Hell, Ward-Burton is a lot better fight from a pure fight perspective, much less Ward-Gatti. And those are just well known "lower-level" fights, there are an endless amount of fights that were better from a pure action perspective.

---

None of them were as highly ranked as them 2. It was the number 1 Junior middleweight against the number 1 middleweight. Ray Leonard was retired in 1985. So it was pretty much the number 1 pound for pound fighter vs the number 2 or 3 pound for pound fighter.

Well no fucking shit man ;D

That's kind of the point, but not really the point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OumaFan

Well no fucking shit man ;D

That's kind of the point, but not really the point.

---

That point is why it's so highly touted. Comparing Ward-Burton to it is just wrong. You should be ashame of yourself

Ashamed. I'm looking at it from a pure fight perspective, which, if you have any sort of reading comprehension, has been obvious from the beginning of this thread. From a pure fight perspective it's a bit lacking. From a pure fight perspective it's a bit crap compared to the truly great fights.

1 amazing round and that's about it.

I agree to an extent. Dont get me wrong cuz I know it was a short, thrilling brawl between two legends which doesnt happen too often but I dont put that fight on a pedestal like so many people do. There has been many more better and longer brawling matches thats for sure.. any three rounds of first chico-castillo, vazquez-marquez, and morales- barrera were better imo..

I think the fight is higly rated mainly because the names that are involved.. I mean cmon, its fuckin marvin hagler and thomas hearns abandoning what they do best and going balls out like they are on the streets and shit.. thats what makes it extra special..

Ray leonard - duran could have surpassed that fight only if it wasnt so sloppy with not many clean punches landed..

I feel like it's a very special case in that it's a war between two legendary fighters. If that's enough for most people to feel like it's the be all end all fight, fair enough. But every truly great fight gets compared to it, when a lot of those fights were simply far better fights, just not brawls between two legends. The next brawl between legends should be compared to it, but that's about it.

To me it's a really great fight for about 4 minutes tops. That's personally not enough for me to consider it one of the truly great fights, no matter who the participants were.

I can see a point of over saturation for sure. Considering before ESPN Classic it was on "SuperBouts" almost every week ;D The 'event' part of it was massive and at a time when a guy moving up a division, a great, wasn't done on the scale or in carefree ease it is now. They were the top of the high profile food chain! Alot was made of the cuts but I don't think Hagler stepped it up because of it, he was Hell bent on wrecking Hearns after alot of bad blood in the first place and to the point of topic, he pretty much had it all his way.

I think it's a great fight, not overrated.

2 of the best bombing it out, look at today's champions...

Mayweather? Doesn't know the meaning of slugfest.
Klitschko? Can't afford to be in a slugfest.
Ward? ZzzZzzZZzZz.


We need more of this.

I don't know how you can say it's overrated, I think you would struggle to find a better opening 3 rounds in a mega fight. I'm only 32 so never seen it live but I still like to watch it on YouTube every year or two, I can only imagin what that fight must if been like to see live must of been amazing. Top class fight from two legends

This fight is amazing but perhaps in the past it was repeated a bit to often , it's place though in history should be respected and it is a true classic it is my favourite short fight

I've never been able to appreciate the fight.

Maybe it's because I wasn't there, I wasn't part of that time I history. I hadn't seen and felt the build up and been totally blown away by the outcome.

Before i really got into boxing, I always used to hear "Hagler Hearns, one of the greatest fights" but as myboxing knowledge expanded, I honestly felt like that was a little bit of a crock of shit, saved as an advert for those who were barely casual fans at best because over the years and years of following and researching I could honestly find and write a double-sided A4 page of fights that I enjoyed more.

I understand the magnitude of the fight had to be a factor but for me, it seems to be a reason why I don't like watching this fight.

If Hopkins had of blown out Trinidad in three rounds and them everyone repeatedly insisted that it wad one of the greatest fights ever, it would spoil it for me.

I'm not going to go so far as to say it was a "spectacularly" overrated fight, but I do believe that it's relatively short length does DQ it from being mentioned with fights like Castillo/Corrales and Gatti/Ward, where you had a full fight's length of ebbs and flows and great action. They had a great compeditive first round, but after that Hagler took over in a big way.

But it was a great fight, because like people mentioned it's very rare to see top, A-class fighters fighting it out like dogs in the ring, without fear of consequence (which was a dumb strategy by Hearns, in hindsight).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OumaFan

I fully accept that I do have a bit of a revisionist view on this because I didn't see it live. But I am old enough to have seen a replay of it without knowing what happened. And I was entranced by it.

Just looking back at it, the only argument that it's one of boxing's great fights (and every fight is judged by it, Castillo-Corrales was judged by it) is that it was two legendary fighters. Otherwise we've all seen better fights.

I think it's certainly the greatest first round between two elite all time fighters fighting in their prime for a major belt, but round 2 and 3 are a bit of a beatdown.

---

It was a great fight. I remember the night it was on, getting off work and hauling ass to my friends house to watch it. That first round was incredible. By the end of the 2nd it certainly seemed like things were going Hagler's way, but there was that cut. When they stopped the action in the third to have the doctor look at it, it was dramatic as hell. Then when Hagler floored him...just an incredible fight. That was nearly 30 years ago and I remember that night like it just happened.

*Hearns had violently ko'ed Duran, among others... with one punch... Hagler , the undisputed champ... the outcome was priceless...
to see Haggler wobbled... to see Hearns beat, in his prime... i'll take this fight over any... these r the fights u never forget...

true example of an irresitable force vs an immovable object.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimanuel Boogustus

I've never been able to appreciate the fight.

Maybe it's because I wasn't there, I wasn't part of that time I history. I hadn't seen and felt the build up and been totally blown away by the outcome.

Before i really got into boxing, I always used to hear "Hagler Hearns, one of the greatest fights" but as myboxing knowledge expanded, I honestly felt like that was a little bit of a crock of shit, saved as an advert for those who were barely casual fans at best because over the years and years of following and researching I could honestly find and write a double-sided A4 page of fights that I enjoyed more.

I understand the magnitude of the fight had to be a factor but for me, it seems to be a reason why I don't like watching this fight.

If Hopkins had of blown out Trinidad in three rounds and them everyone repeatedly insisted that it wad one of the greatest fights ever, it would spoil it for me.

---

*the hype is a big part of the show... there was one fight, Leonard vs Duran 1... unless u lived in the time then all the hype behind Sugar Ray is lost... I mean, he was unbeatable.. he was in commercials for gods sake, people either LIKED him ot HATED him. and Duran, he was fierce... mean, GREAT.. he was gunna shut that loudmouth up...when Duran beat him, it was the first time I had seen regular TV interrupted with close caption stating "Duran had won"..it was a big deal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jimanuel Boogustus

I've never been able to appreciate the fight.

Maybe it's because I wasn't there, I wasn't part of that time I history. I hadn't seen and felt the build up and been totally blown away by the outcome.

Before i really got into boxing, I always used to hear "Hagler Hearns, one of the greatest fights" but as myboxing knowledge expanded, I honestly felt like that was a little bit of a crock of shit, saved as an advert for those who were barely casual fans at best because over the years and years of following and researching I could honestly find and write a double-sided A4 page of fights that I enjoyed more.

I understand the magnitude of the fight had to be a factor but for me, it seems to be a reason why I don't like watching this fight.

If Hopkins had of blown out Trinidad in three rounds and them everyone repeatedly insisted that it wad one of the greatest fights ever, it would spoil it for me.

---

I think you have nailed it. It was huge fight at the time and for me it was huge as a fan. Even the face offs and stare-down were epic. But @OumaFan makes a good point in that if you take away the mystique its really no better fight wise then other shorter fights both before and after. The trouble is I guess is that one could take the same position in almost any fight. Short or long. I mean the things that made this fight what it was at the time is based on the same things attempted on the lead ups for most big fights today. Problem is they pale in comparison in most cases once the two teams are on the field. Floyd gets 40 million a fight for what appears to be a lazy day at the office. Every once in awhile you get a Firpo/Dempsey or Holt/Torres but not all that often.

fwiw part of this was me being a bit of a contrarian, and I get the "mystique" argument.

Mystique, golden era and name legends had everything to do with it. If they were not who they were it would be just another Alex Stewart ko 3 Ezra Sellers war.

You can't take the two men out of the ring once the bell goes. From the beginning until the end the same two guys are in there. The idea that some fights are just a free for all brawl and that skill, resolve and fitness to explode into war are just attributes that anyone can employ kind of demeans all of the sport. I know that we all know it's more complicated than that but taking s fight out of context and getting all microscopic over it misses the point. The whole enterprise is a huge and pointless display of barbarity on one level and an artform on another. Marvin and Tommy condensed so much about life in that opening round though that even a complete noob would get it. That does not mean it is in itself a one dimensional experience or a shallow and vacuous piece of work that should be dismissed because there are more nuanced or similarly intense fights drawn out over 12 or 15 rounds. It is a breathtaking ride still, and deserves it well earned status.

I think Ali is over rated, so is Foreman's punch power and Tyson's speed, Holyfield's heart...