Hagler Vs. Hopkins: who wins? explain.

[BennyST]

Out of every great middleweight, I would choose Monzon to be the guy that could truly beat everyone else in the history of the division. He fought every type of fighter possible, all of the great, and beat them all.

He's the one guy I would truly pick over anyone else. I would actually pick him to beat Hagler and Hopkins. Hagler and Hopkins fighting each other is very hard to pick.

Great find mate.

[BennyST]

i always figured he could beat marvin,
and i think monzon would pose real probblems,
he did everything great, except was a little slow.

This was always a littler bit of a myth with Monzon. Many people thought he was slow, but he was actually one of those guys who seem a lot slower than they actually are. He has very deceptive speed. I remember reading some article with Tony Mundine who said that the thing that most confused him Monzon was his speed.

Mundine was a very slick, very fast boxer with great skills. He thought he would be able to beat Monzon with his speed, but he found that it wasn't the case and Monzon had no trouble keeping up with him at all, and that most surprised Mundine who also thought he was slow. I think it's the way he moves that makes him appear to sort of lumber along, and it confuses the mind into thinking he is slow when he is, in fact, quite quick.

Incredible fighter.

[TredKiller]

i think it would end in a No Decision.

they both got big, bald, hard heads, and they use em!! lol

i expect the biggest clash of heads in history. lol

[BennyST]

I recognize Haglers skills, I've always said he had underrated defense. But would you pick him over a prime Hopkins in this matchup? I'm just basing it on styles. Hagler hated how Leonard kept moving, he also had trouble with tougher fighters like Mugabi. Hopkins has both of those + a solid defense to go with it.

I'm sure there are many fighters on Hopkins resume that Hagler would have made short work with, but on a styles vs styles matchup it seems like Hopkins' ball game. I could be wrong though.

What's interesting is that you are basing massive generalisations about Hagler's entire career on his very last two fights in which he was clearly past it and not fighting at even close to his peak. If you had seen more than just his fights against Hearns, Duran, Leonard and Mugabi (which I'm starting to realise many haven't sadly) then you would know he did not have trouble with either supposedly tough fighters or boxers.

[BennyST]

JMM is in his prime at 35, Hopkins was prime at 36, Calzaghe WAS in his prime at 36. Against Hopkins he looked bad because it was Hopkins, against a shot Jones he looked great. He was definitely in his prime. I can't really see how he landed more either, I'm not debating weither he won and all, since Hopkins didn't do enough either - but Calzaghe really didn't land anything.

Again, what's with these absurd generalisations man? Do you actually watch any fights of these fighters that you are talking about apart from their latest ones? Hopkins was one of those rather odd specimens that developed into his prime very late, but both of the other guys you are talking about absolutely had their best years well before what you are pretending they were. See, that really makes me wonder whether you have seen any thing beyond the usual Marquez/Pac/Diaz/Barrera fights and Calzaghe/Kessler/Lacy/Hopkins/Jones fights. If you had, you would know that years before they were fighting much better.

Marquez for one is looking much slower, easier to hit, less movement, less power etc etc. How do I know? Because I've seen all his fights from the earliest ones to the latest and he does not look anywhere as good now as he did in the past. He's still winning, but that doesn't mean he is in his prime still.

Calzaghe's prime ended before his fights with Hopkins and Jones. He looked terrible in comparison to his earlier self in both of those fights and I have no idea how you think he still looked as good as ever in either. Again, that just makes me realise that you have probably never seen a fight before his Lacy fight. People were already calling him over the hill then. By the Kessler fight he had slowed quite considerably and was punching more and more with just short, slapping arm punches as he couldn't wing the big shots anymore. Why not just go compare the Eubank fight to the Kessler and Hopkins/Jones etc fights, and you'll understand what a big difference there is. His real prime ended around 2005 or so.

[Squabbles94806]

Damn, that's a good one. As much as i like BHOP...i'd have to give it to Hagler.

Hagler is more powerful and stronger than BHOP. However, Hopkins has more boxing skill than Hagler. Plus, he's a smart boxer. I forget, is Hagler the one who can box ambidextrously? Anyways...i think it'll go to a split decision, which maybe 1-2 knockdowns. As far as a Knockout? I don't see one in this fight.

Either way, i'd pay to watch that fight. BHOP isn't even in FNF 4, so you can't even make that happen. Lol.

[Dynamite Kid]

Id pick Hopkins, not only is Hopkins a better boxer but he can also handle himself on the inside, he is as strong as Hagler if not stronger. Hopkins was really a 175 lbs boiling down to 160, he was freakishly big for a 160lbs, he also has a good chin and excellent stamina in his prime.

Hopkins also has a superb record against Southpaws, that said he never fought a Southpaw as good as Hagler but id still pick Hopkins.

Id say Hopkins is quicker to.

[Gettin Jiggy]

very hard one to pick! maybe edging toward hagler! but i think monzon beats both of them!

[Gettin Jiggy]

Id pick Hopkins, not only is Hopkins a better boxer but he can also handle himself on the side and he is as strong as Hagler if not stronger. Hopkins was really a 175 lbs boiling down to 160, he was freakishly big for a 160lbs, he also has a good chin and excellent stamina in his prime.

Hopkins also has a superb record against Southpaws, that said he never fought a Southpaw as good as Hagler but id still pick Hopkins.

Id say Hopkins is quicker to.

Nah i dont know about hopkins being a massive 160 fighter. he was said he could get lower than 160!

[Dynamite Kid]

Nah i dont know about hopkins being a massive 160 fighter. he was said he could get lower than 160!

Hopkins is a massive 160 pounder you can see that with the naked eye.

Hagler fought a lot of bigger guys like Roldan,Obell,Sibson but none of those guys have the size and skill of Hopkins.