Could Hearns have ever beaten Hagler?

[LobowolfXXX]

Interesting thoughts but off base. How can you say Hearns didnt have a bad game plan? Who else would go 3 minutes against Hagler without attempting any defense against Hagler?? That was the worst fight plan OF ALL TIME!!!

You also said: "Hearns was bad with pressure fighters who could take a punch" Pressure fighters....... Hmmm....... how about Duran "Hands of Stone" there was not a better pressure fighter in the world and look what happened to him when he fought Hearns. And I dont recall Duran ever being counted out or in trouble before the Hearns fight. So dont think it wouldnt have happend to Hagler. Hearns was also 22 when he fought Leonard and had the fight won. Hearns and Leonard never lost to a 7 or 8 ranked guy on the way up. Hagler was good but couldnt stand a chance boxing against hearns or leonard. Why is that such an issue to accept. Hearns came in too far below the 147 mark for the first leonard fight (145 lbs thus overtrained by his manager). Why do you debate that. An overtrained fighter runs out of gas in later rounds. Hearns was spent that night. Also that was Hearns first Championship fight in Vegas. Leonard had fought out there multiple times.

If you dont think there is a possibility that Hearns wouldnt have KO'd Hagler in a rematch we have nothing more to discuss. Hagler was a punching bag with slow hands after the first fight. Even if they fought back in 83,84 Hearns would have clearly outboxed Hagler. In a rematch Hearns outboxes Hagler pure and simple. Hagler gets hurt by trying to engage Hearns. Hearns would not infight with Hagler. Hagler was great but very lucky that night the way Hearns fought him the way he did. You think Hagler is this "indestructable object" and Hearns would wilt under constant pressure. I guarantee you Hearns would be ready for that pressure, would tie up Hagler and be ready to hit him HARD on the way in and get out without long infighting. Hearns was very durable until 88 when Hagler retired and Leonard was ducking him after he beat Hagler.

Final facts: Hagler was offered a rematch with Hearns in 86-87-88-98-90 he turned them all down. Also Hagler never fought bigger fighters like Hearns did and Leonard did to some extent. That is a minus against him in my book.

Hearns weighed in at 146 against Leonard, which was more than he weighed in at in his previous fight. "Running out of gas in the later rounds" doesn't explain why Leonard had him all but out on his feet in rounds 6 and 7.

Duran was a great fight by Hearns. If you want a fight that might have gone differently another night, that's one to think about. We don't know what would have happened if Duran had gotten in some good shots on Hagler, because Hearns caught him and laid him out.

That's EXACTLY what Hearns was trying to do against Hagler. It's Monday morning quarterbacking to say that it was a "horrible" plan because it didn't work. Duran was a hard-hitting pressure fighter; rather then go on the defense, Hearns tried to take him out early, and he succeeded. Against Hagler, without the benefit of hindsight, it makes perfect sense that he adopted the plan that worked against Duran, and not the plan that failed against Leonard. His best chance for a defense was a good offense.

I think it's you who thinks that Hearns was an "indestructable object," but he got himself destructed not only by Hagler, but also by Leonard and Barkley. Hearns may not have lost to a 7 or 8 guy on the way up, but Hagler never got knocked out, let alone multiple times.

So, Leonard was overtraining, Hagler was a bad plan, what's the excuse for the Barkley fight?

None of which is to say that Hearns couldn't have beaten Hagler, but it's a tremendous act of faith to think that he would have. I'm sure if we could go back and replay the night over and over, they each would have won some of them. But IMO, Hagler would have won the clear majority of them.

[TitoFan]

There's no reason to automatically rule out Hearns in a rematch. Of course, he'd have to change tactics, seeing as to how his Plan A in the 1st fight didn't work out very well. He came out like gangbusters in Round 1 to try to impose his will and his power on Hagler, who always had a good chin. He lost that battle. Who's to say he couldn't come out in a second fight and just use his jab and boxing skills for a few rounds until he warmed up... and THEN start throwing some ill-intentioned right hands at Hagler? It's possible.

[LobowolfXXX]

There's no reason to automatically rule out Hearns in a rematch. Of course, he'd have to change tactics, seeing as to how his Plan A in the 1st fight didn't work out very well. He came out like gangbusters in Round 1 to try to impose his will and his power on Hagler, who always had a good chin. He lost that battle. Who's to say he couldn't come out in a second fight and just use his jab and boxing skills for a few rounds until he warmed up... and THEN start throwing some ill-intentioned right hands at Hagler? It's possible.

I agree that it's "possible," and I don't "automatically" rule it out; the problem I see with it is that it's essentially the plan that didn't work against Leonard. Again, why assume that he would make it to the final bell against Hagler, when he couldn't do it against Leonard? Especially given that 1) Hagler hit harder than Leonard, and 2) Hearns had more KO power at 147 than at higher weights.

[Violent Demise]

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.

That's cuz the punch landed on top of Hagler's hard head. Might of been a different story if it landed on the chin. Would Hagler (who was rushing in) been able to take that shot? Would Hearns have broken his hand?

[FinitoElDinamita]

Never.. Ive heard people saying Hearns could have won had he not got into a brawl but I think Hagler would have beaten him either way.. Hearns could have boxed more in spots but at some point in the fight, he would have got into a tear up and knocked out late..

Hagler's style was all wrong for him..

[electivemed]

There's no reason to automatically rule out Hearns in a rematch. Of course, he'd have to change tactics, seeing as to how his Plan A in the 1st fight didn't work out very well. He came out like gangbusters in Round 1 to try to impose his will and his power on Hagler, who always had a good chin. He lost that battle. Who's to say he couldn't come out in a second fight and just use his jab and boxing skills for a few rounds until he warmed up... and THEN start throwing some ill-intentioned right hands at Hagler? It's possible.

I agree that it's "possible," and I don't "automatically" rule it out; the problem I see with it is that it's essentially the plan that didn't work against Leonard. Again, why assume that he would make it to the final bell against Hagler, when he couldn't do it against Leonard? Especially given that 1) Hagler hit harder than Leonard, and 2) Hearns had more KO power at 147 than at higher weights.

Hagler DID NOT HIT HARDER THAN LEONARD.................... Maybe equal. Ray had knock out power in both hands and proved it above 160. Hearns floored Leonard above 147, Duran above 147, Andres above 147 (WBC Light Heavy title), Roldan above 147 (WBC middle weight title) Get you facts straight

[electivemed]

Never.. Ive heard people saying Hearns could have won had he not got into a brawl but I think Hagler would have beaten him either way.. Hearns could have boxed more in spots but at some point in the fight, he would have got into a tear up and knocked out late..

Hagler's style was all wrong for him..

Hearns handed him the fight on a silver platter. Hagler couldnt exchange with Hearns in sharp quick exchanges. Only bar room tatics with no defense.

[electivemed]

Hagler never gave Hearns a return fight and that tells the story...........

Leonard gave Hearns a rematch at a catch weight Hearns had to honor into the ring at 162. Also he only gave Hearns a rematch after Hearns had trouble with Barkley and Kitchen. Hearns was ring worn and burned out from his Kronk Gym training by 1988. That said Hearns out pointed, knocked down and, almost knock out Leonard in the return fight.. Something Hagler couldnt sniff.

Hagler was lucky.........He knew it.........Thats whay he never gave Hearns the rematch. In that rematch Hearns wins an easy decision or TKO stoppage due to Haglers face cuts.

It it would have been so easy for Hagler to beat Hearns in a rematch and make another 10-15 million then why didnt he do that? Hearns was game ? as to any fight after 1988 of Hearns was past his prime. He lived at Kronk gym and took to much damage. He constantly trained against bigger fighters at Kronk. He sparing sessions are legendary.

[electivemed]

Interesting thoughts but off base. How can you say Hearns didnt have a bad game plan? Who else would go 3 minutes against Hagler without attempting any defense against Hagler?? That was the worst fight plan OF ALL TIME!!!

You also said: "Hearns was bad with pressure fighters who could take a punch" Pressure fighters....... Hmmm....... how about Duran "Hands of Stone" there was not a better pressure fighter in the world and look what happened to him when he fought Hearns. And I dont recall Duran ever being counted out or in trouble before the Hearns fight. So dont think it wouldnt have happend to Hagler. Hearns was also 22 when he fought Leonard and had the fight won. Hearns and Leonard never lost to a 7 or 8 ranked guy on the way up. Hagler was good but couldnt stand a chance boxing against hearns or leonard. Why is that such an issue to accept. Hearns came in too far below the 147 mark for the first leonard fight (145 lbs thus overtrained by his manager). Why do you debate that. An overtrained fighter runs out of gas in later rounds. Hearns was spent that night. Also that was Hearns first Championship fight in Vegas. Leonard had fought out there multiple times.

If you dont think there is a possibility that Hearns wouldnt have KO'd Hagler in a rematch we have nothing more to discuss. Hagler was a punching bag with slow hands after the first fight. Even if they fought back in 83,84 Hearns would have clearly outboxed Hagler. In a rematch Hearns outboxes Hagler pure and simple. Hagler gets hurt by trying to engage Hearns. Hearns would not infight with Hagler. Hagler was great but very lucky that night the way Hearns fought him the way he did. You think Hagler is this "indestructable object" and Hearns would wilt under constant pressure. I guarantee you Hearns would be ready for that pressure, would tie up Hagler and be ready to hit him HARD on the way in and get out without long infighting. Hearns was very durable until 88 when Hagler retired and Leonard was ducking him after he beat Hagler.

Final facts: Hagler was offered a rematch with Hearns in 86-87-88-98-90 he turned them all down. Also Hagler never fought bigger fighters like Hearns did and Leonard did to some extent. That is a minus against him in my book.

Hearns weighed in at 146 against Leonard, which was more than he weighed in at in his previous fight. "Running out of gas in the later rounds" doesn't explain why Leonard had him all but out on his feet in rounds 6 and 7.

Duran was a great fight by Hearns. If you want a fight that might have gone differently another night, that's one to think about. We don't know what would have happened if Duran had gotten in some good shots on Hagler, because Hearns caught him and laid him out.

That's EXACTLY what Hearns was trying to do against Hagler. It's Monday morning quarterbacking to say that it was a "horrible" plan because it didn't work. Duran was a hard-hitting pressure fighter; rather then go on the defense, Hearns tried to take him out early, and he succeeded. Against Hagler, without the benefit of hindsight, it makes perfect sense that he adopted the plan that worked against Duran, and not the plan that failed against Leonard. His best chance for a defense was a good offense.

I think it's you who thinks that Hearns was an "indestructable object," but he got himself destructed not only by Hagler, but also by Leonard and Barkley. Hearns may not have lost to a 7 or 8 guy on the way up, but Hagler never got knocked out, let alone multiple times.

So, Leonard was overtraining, Hagler was a bad plan, what's the excuse for the Barkley fight?

None of which is to say that Hearns couldn't have beaten Hagler, but it's a tremendous act of faith to think that he would have. I'm sure if we could go back and replay the night over and over, they each would have won some of them. But IMO, Hagler would have won the clear majority of them.

ALSO LEONARD WEIGHED 146 HEARNS 145. Your misguided facts are what cause me to disagree with you. Our opinions are another matter!!

[LobowolfXXX]

There's no reason to automatically rule out Hearns in a rematch. Of course, he'd have to change tactics, seeing as to how his Plan A in the 1st fight didn't work out very well. He came out like gangbusters in Round 1 to try to impose his will and his power on Hagler, who always had a good chin. He lost that battle. Who's to say he couldn't come out in a second fight and just use his jab and boxing skills for a few rounds until he warmed up... and THEN start throwing some ill-intentioned right hands at Hagler? It's possible.

I agree that it's "possible," and I don't "automatically" rule it out; the problem I see with it is that it's essentially the plan that didn't work against Leonard. Again, why assume that he would make it to the final bell against Hagler, when he couldn't do it against Leonard? Especially given that 1) Hagler hit harder than Leonard, and 2) Hearns had more KO power at 147 than at higher weights.

Hagler DID NOT HIT HARDER THAN LEONARD.................... Maybe equal. Ray had knock out power in both hands and proved it above 160. Hearns floored Leonard above 147, Duran above 147, Andres above 147 (WBC Light Heavy title), Roldan above 147 (WBC middle weight title) Get you facts straight

Leonard proved it in his one fight above 160? Please. Hagler clearly had more power than Leonard, and it's reflected in their knockout percentages. Leonard knocked out 62.5% of his opponents, and Hagler knocked out 77% of his.

As for Hearns, rather than cherry-picking his decision wins (Singletary, DeWitt, Sutherland, Minchillo), just look at the numbers. Fortunately, he had about as many fights at or below 147 as he did above, so the comparison is simple: At 147 and below, Hearns had 33 fights and 30 knockouts. That's over 90%. Above 147, he had 34 fights and 18 knockouts. That's barely over 50%. And it started IMMEDIATELY after he went over 147. He scored knockouts in 2 of his first 4 fights over 147. Or 4 of his next 8. Or 6 of his next 12. Or 8 of his next 16. He went from knockout out almost everybody to knocking out about half of his opponents. It's silly to suggest that he had as much power at higher weight classes as he did at 147 and below. Like just about EVERY fighter who moves into higher weight classes, his punching power diminished.

[LobowolfXXX]

Hagler never gave Hearns a return fight and that tells the story...........

What tells the story is that Hagler ended the fight with his belt, and Hearns ended it looking he had died standing up.

My bad on Hearns's weight in the first fight; I was indeed incorrect by one pound. That still doesn't explain away Leonard's hurting him badly as early as the 6th round, and it's nowhere near the factual error of calling two top-10 middleweights "unknowns."

[LobowolfXXX]

Never.. Ive heard people saying Hearns could have won had he not got into a brawl but I think Hagler would have beaten him either way.. Hearns could have boxed more in spots but at some point in the fight, he would have got into a tear up and knocked out late..

Hagler's style was all wrong for him..

Yes. Hearns was absolutely an all-time great, but Hagler was easily the worst matchup there was for him.

[electivemed]

There's no reason to automatically rule out Hearns in a rematch. Of course, he'd have to change tactics, seeing as to how his Plan A in the 1st fight didn't work out very well. He came out like gangbusters in Round 1 to try to impose his will and his power on Hagler, who always had a good chin. He lost that battle. Who's to say he couldn't come out in a second fight and just use his jab and boxing skills for a few rounds until he warmed up... and THEN start throwing some ill-intentioned right hands at Hagler? It's possible.

I agree that it's "possible," and I don't "automatically" rule it out; the problem I see with it is that it's essentially the plan that didn't work against Leonard. Again, why assume that he would make it to the final bell against Hagler, when he couldn't do it against Leonard? Especially given that 1) Hagler hit harder than Leonard, and 2) Hearns had more KO power at 147 than at higher weights.

Hagler DID NOT HIT HARDER THAN LEONARD.................... Maybe equal. Ray had knock out power in both hands and proved it above 160. Hearns floored Leonard above 147, Duran above 147, Andres above 147 (WBC Light Heavy title), Roldan above 147 (WBC middle weight title) Get you facts straight

Leonard proved it in his one fight above 160? Please. Hagler clearly had more power than Leonard, and it's reflected in their knockout percentages. Leonard knocked out 62.5% of his opponents, and Hagler knocked out 77% of his.

As for Hearns, rather than cherry-picking his decision wins (Singletary, DeWitt, Sutherland, Minchillo), just look at the numbers. Fortunately, he had about as many fights at or below 147 as he did above, so the comparison is simple: At 147 and below, Hearns had 33 fights and 30 knockouts. That's over 90%. Above 147, he had 34 fights and 18 knockouts. That's barely over 50%. And it started IMMEDIATELY after he went over 147. He scored knockouts in 2 of his first 4 fights over 147. Or 4 of his next 8. Or 6 of his next 12. Or 8 of his next 16. He went from knockout out almost everybody to knocking out about half of his opponents. It's silly to suggest that he had as much power at higher weight classes as he did at 147 and below. Like just about EVERY fighter who moves into higher weight classes, his punching power diminished.

Yeah and how many of those fights were above 160lbs for hearns. hearns fought at much higher weight classes than hagler EVER did. Also I selected fights of signifiance. If you want to discredit hearns for knocking out lightheavyweight champ go ahead. I dont think your "cheery picking" when you say he KO'd Roldan, Shuler, Andres, and knocked Leonard down twice (something Hagler couldnt do). Also Hagler fought smaller oppoenets he never "fought up" in weight class. A major black mark when comparing those 3 fighters.

If hagler fought the equal number of oppoents hearns did above 160 then haglers KO percentage drops like a rock. BAD COMPARISON. Both Hearns and Leonard "fought up" throughout their entire career. and one took almost 5 years off from the sport.

[Nameless]

We're skidding here. The debate was not who of the two was the greatest but if HEarns could have win against Hagler. Both were tremendous, tremendous fighters, 2 fly high hall of famers. HAgler was a gritty battering ram with top notch movement and a chin made of some material we've never heard about. HEarns was a fast combo puncher with steel in each fists. Just happens in that fight that Hagler turned it into a wild fight and that his chin could took the motor city cobra's power and speed. Tommy, he, couldn't take too much punishment on the button. PErhaps Hearns could have win would he have used more combos and reach advantage to circle Hearns for the whole fight but HAgler was moving just sooo welll and was so resiliant thathe would have been a very dangerous threat from beginning to end. NOw, could he have won it? Based on a pure hypothesis, yes, I believe he had a set of skills that might have pulled out a hard fought and "close" decision. But he didn't and unfortunately, we couldn't see a second episode. 2 greats fighters, one winner, end of story.

[electivemed]

[QUOTE=LobowolfXXX;1035982]

Hagler never gave Hearns a return fight and that tells the story...........

Thus back to my original observation: Hagler won because it was a streetfight. Good for Hagler. Who else fought him like that ?? Nobody.... Why...bad strategy...blame Steward......

Hagler knew he would never would get that style fight out of Herans again........thus he ducked Hearns in 86,87,88,89,90...................................

Finally, coming in at 145 was a major mistake for hearns and bad management by his camp. It absoultly cost him in that fight.