Could Hearns have ever beaten Hagler?

[Slim the BoxingManiac]

Yes, Hearns had the tools and skills to stay away from Hagler and possibly win on points. He did injure his hand in the fight and his legs were weak as well. So he could do it and he always wanted a return as he felt he could beat Hagler. He did unofficially beat Leonard.

Nobody had the tools to stay away from Hagler. Nobody. The guy was too focused, and too aggressive. Especially the version of Hagler that fought Hearns.

Let's put it this way. Was there any man who could have ever stayed away from a prime Hagler, Marciano, or Frazier?

Tommy beats Marvin in a return match. Hagler was taylor made for Hearns. Slow hands would have killed marvin in a return fight. If they box at all Tommy knocks Marvin down with combinations. The reason Marvin didnt get knocked out in the first fight is that he always had his neck in the "flexed position" waging war. In a return fight Marvin would be forced to box Hearns thus exposing his chin and relaxing his neck resulting in FLASH KNOCKDOWN's. Marvin was very lucky Hearns fought him the way he did in 1985. Hearns biggest problem is he had a bad trainer/manager. Both Hagler and Leonard's trainer out managed Hearns trainer. Had Hearns had Dundee as his trainer he beats everyone. Hearns was the best boxer, had the most FLASH power, and had the best footwoork of all his opponents. Hagler gets sliced up and stopped in a return match IMO
Hearns and Hagler wasnt a boxing match it was a street fight. Hearns has it all over Hagler from a boxing prospective. Not even close. Yes Marvin was stronger

This guy right here is a moron. I'll tell you why. I even had to stop reading after a few pages because of how strong this guys Hearns nuthuggery is. I love Hearns. But I've never seen anybody hug his nuts quite that hard.

1. Marvin did not have slow hands. You're an idiot for even saying that.
2. Neck in the flexed position? Are you retarded? If that's the case, than Marvin never fought without his neck in the flexed position, so you're an idiot.
3. Hagler has magnificent fucking footwork. Try and disprove me, dude.

Nobody beats Hagler in a shoot out at 160. Maybe Hearns. Fighting Hearns is like playing with matches next to a fire or trying to defuse a bomb. I can very easily see Hearns putting haglers lights out with one good setup punch. If hagler tried to get inside again Hearns would have held him in the second fight. Once hearns settled hagler down to a boxing match - hagler either gets KO'd, Tko'd by cuts, or out outpointed. a 5 year retired Ray Leonard outpointed hagler. Hearns wins an easy 5 point decision or tko on cuts. Leonard exposed Hagler bigtime. Even Hearns said Leonard would beat Hagler. Tommys weakness was his management not his skills. He was the class of that era with bad management. Can you imagine if Goody and Pat or Dundee trained Hearns. Dont get me wrong I love Hagler but he was tied for 3rd best with Duran in that fab 4. Hearns Leonard 1-2

4. Hearns would never in his wildest dreams "settle" Hagler down. How the fuck do you even imagine that as something that could be done?
5. Ray Leonard caught Hagler on his way out. Hagler lost his fire. He didn't want to box anymore, and he was going to retire. He was tipping off of the boxing page, and Mugabi pushed him over. Leonard merely caught him at the right time.
6. How in the fuck was Hagler tied for third best with Duran? He beat Duran by UD. He beat Hearns as well! That would put him as number two, Einstein.

Hagler could never replicate that performance. Hearns had more upside in a second fight. Hagler could'nt adjust. If Hagler came with the same hand speed from the Mugabi or Leonard fight then Hearns eats him alive. People judge Hagler off that one fight. As a boxer Hagler would'nt have a chance against Hearns. If he chose to box Hearns- Hagler gets knocked out or stoped on cuts. If he pressured Hearns- Hearns would hold him and not "exchange with Hagler" thus wearing down. Also I'm convinced theres a good chance Hearns hurts Hagler in a second fight. Not from a brawl but from long range. Hagler earned the first fight. But Tommy was the better fighter. Also Hagler was not the same fighter after the Hearns fight. Tommy was still in his prime.

7. Hagler is known for being able to adjust to his opponents.
8. Hagler was shot when he fought Leonard and Mugabi.
9. After the Hearns fight, he was on the downfall. He didn't want to box so much anymore. He was beginning to lose his fire. He became civilized. He had the money, the belts, he'd just knocked out Tommy Hearns. He was ready to settle down and relax. The guys mentality completely changed. That's the only reason that Thomas Hearns would have beaten Hagler. But Tommy Hearns would have never beaten a PRIME Hagler.

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

10. Hagler did hit harder than Leonard. Hagler also had knockout power in both hands, and proved it. You haven't disproved any of the guys points.
11. The guy said that Hearns had more KO power at 147 than at other weights. So you name off his accomplishments at 147 and tell him to get his facts straight? That makes no sense.

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.

:facepalm:

12. Those 'bar room tactics' were enough for Hagler to knock Hearns the fuck out. Boxing is all about tactics and skills. I've never once seen an untrained brawler beat an experienced boxer. Because it doesn't fucking happen, buddy.


Reply to each of these points specifically, and number them, as well. Prove to me you're not as stupid as you look.