Could Hearns have ever beat Hagler?

[80s champs]

On a different night? A different weight? What would be the result?

[smitty_son408]

Honestly, I don't think so....If the Hagler that showed up that night he fought Hearns, fought him 10 times he would win 10 times. He was aggressive leaving Hearns no breathing room and no room for error. Not to mention he ate his right hands like they were nothing in their bout.(except the one that stunned and cut him)

Hagler is all wrong for Hearns.

[redrooster]

On a different night? A different weight? What would be the result?

By 1987 Hagler could be taken by most anyone. He didnt even try to reclaim his title.

Even Antuofuermo admitted it in an ESPN interview before the Leonard fight that Hagler was ready to be taken by anyone except for Leonard.

[Addie]

Even Antuofuermo admitted it in an ESPN interview before the Leonard fight that Hagler was ready to be taken by anyone except for Leonard.

You couldn't fuckin' help yourself.

Personally, I don't see Hearns beating Hagler under any circumstances. Marvin was a great boxer, he had great reach, and would have been competitive in an outside fight almost as well as he was inside. He'd have hit Hearns at some point, and injured hand or not, Hearns cannot stand up to Hagler's power at 160lb. Nobody stops Marvin at 160lb, so Hearns would have had to outbox Marvin for 15 rounds, and he couldn't keep that up against the smaller Leonard.

[SuzieQ49]

By 1987 Hagler could be taken by most anyone. He didnt even try to reclaim his title.


He was coming off of top wins over heanrs and very dangerous mugabi. Did he suddenly age overnight? How does he drop off so much from 1985 to 1987 like you claim?

[Addie]

He was coming off of top wins over heanrs and very dangerous mugabi. Did he suddenly age overnight? How does he drop off so much from 1985 to 1987 like you claim?

Because by doing so, it would reduce Leonard's seemingly unbelievable win to just a blip on Hagler's record. Agenda.

If a fighter has just brutally stopped two huge hitters in Mugabi, undefeated, and Hearns, a certified ATG, then one has to assume he's in pretty good nick.

[redrooster]

He was coming off of top wins over heanrs and very dangerous mugabi. Did he suddenly age overnight? How does he drop off so much from 1985 to 1987 like you claim?

the way Saad Muhammud dropped off between 1979 and 1981; Wars of attrition

I thought by now you would have caught on to this.

[redrooster]

Because by doing so, it would reduce Leonard's seemingly unbelievable win to just a blip on Hagler's record. Agenda.

If a fighter has just brutally stopped two huge hitters in Mugabi, undefeated, and Hearns, a certified ATG, then one has to assume he's in pretty good nick.

So you want to engage me but not directly. Isnt that what you're trying to do?

Now you kow you shouldn't speak up unless you actually have the skills and the nerve to converse with me.

[birddog]

Hagler was starting to slip in 83 I think, the Roldan fight showed it. or maybe it was just a bad matchup.

Anyway I think Marv would have always found a way to get to Tommy. And Hearns instinct to engage and bomb would always be his undoing in this matchup. So a perfect storm.

However if TH could get on his bike and move. maybe he could get a stoppage on a cut. Both showed questionable judgement and tactics at times.

[dpw417]

Hagler always beats Hearns. IMO.

[80s champs]

How about at Lt heavyweight? If Hagler ever tried that,I did mention on any night, Or cruizerweight,Remember Hearns grew much bigger and stronger

[good right hand]

i cant say that hearns would beat hagler 5 times out of 10 but could he have ever beaten hagler?

oh yea i think so,

anyone could be anyone on different days especially world class fighters and especially especially great great fighters like hagler and hearns.

there where two factors that i was thinking that hearns had a decent chance in a rematch.

the back and fourth epic flow of the fight and hearn's brocken hand.

[The Wanderer]

Probably not anywhere near their respective primes. I doubt that Hearns, even with his fabulous power, could take Hagler out, and Hagler would never let Tommy's somewhat dodgy stamina and chin have the time and space he'd need to get a decision.

Maybe 1 out of 10 Tommy finds a way to win, but I can't think of how.

[MrMarvel]

I believe he would have outpointed Hagler had it been him in the ring instead of Leonard. Hagler would probably not have initiated a war and Hearns would have been content to stick and move. Hearns was a much better boxer than Leonard. Had Hagler initiated a war, I am concerned about his health given how slow he was by the time he fought Leonard. Leonard couldn't hurt Hagler. Hearns could.

But could Hearns have beaten a prime Hagler? No. Hagler was took good. He was the best of the bunch of that era, although I will concede Duran was the best boxer.

[Hank]

Sure he could have, which is why there was no rematch. I'd make Hagler favorite, but Hearns would have good chance, especilly a couple of years after their bout, because Hearns was more physically mature by then.

[MrMarvel]

By the way, I wanted Hagler to retire after Mugabi. He took too many clean shots in that fight. His face suffered swelling. He struggled when he should have dominated. Mugabi was really a smaller version of Obel. The early 1980s Hagler would have taken Mugabi apart. It was a great fight because we saw an aging all-time great battler taking on an exciting young fighter, but it was so telling about Hagler's future prospects. At the time, Hearns was on track for a rematch (he blew Shuler away in the preliminary). I was concerned about Hagler accepting a rematch with Hearns.

[Bigcat]

I think if Thomas made the cut worse and survived for 5 or six rounds, he may have made Marvin panick and do things out of character and maybe stole the show by composing the way the latter half of the fight went.... It was a closely made match at the time, and remember Thomas had some serious fire power too...

[laxpdx]

Honestly, I don't think so....If the Hagler that showed up that night he fought Hearns, fought him 10 times he would win 10 times. He was aggressive leaving Hearns no breathing room and no room for error. Not to mention he ate his right hands like they were nothing in their bout.(except the one that stunned and cut him)

Hagler is all wrong for Hearns.

Yes, I concur. Although, the irony of this whole thing was, even though Hagler did dominate, he lost. Everything he took from Tommy hastened his decline....i.e., pyrrhic victory.

[he grant]

Thyis Board is very tribal ... lots of interior fueds and longstanding battles ... I love it !

[Arriba]

Because by doing so, it would reduce Leonard's seemingly unbelievable win to just a blip on Hagler's record. Agenda.

If a fighter has just brutally stopped two huge hitters in Mugabi, undefeated, and Hearns, a certified ATG, then one has to assume he's in pretty good nick.

Whilst there's NO QUESTION that there's an agenda on the mend for someone here, it isn't out of the realm of possibility that the wars caught up with Hagler.

As per the topic at hand? No. I don't think Hearns could've beaten Hagler. I don't think Hearns could outbox Marvin and as we saw, he couldn't out slug Hagler. Still doesn't diminish how great Tommy was.

[JohnThomas1]

I think a Hearns boxing would have had an outside chance of stopping Hagler on cuts or getting a decision. The odds are against him however.

[Scorpion]

Didn't Hearns break his fist against Hagler?

[djanders]

Didn't Hearns break his fist against Hagler?

Yes. I think it was in the first round...if memory serves me right.

[booradley]

And Hearns instinct to engage and bomb would always be his undoing in this matchup. So a perfect storm.

However if TH could get on his bike and move. maybe he could get a stoppage on a cut. Both showed questionable judgement and tactics at times.

Tommy was physically capable of out boxing Marvin. However, Tommy was psychologically incapable of staying out of a war.

[MAG1965]

To say Thomas Hearns could not beat Hagler is not true and I see many people saying this. Hearns was an all time great as great as Hagler and he fought more greats than Hagler and beat several. I am not sure Hearns could have outboxed Marvin the way Marvin fought, but Tommy could have knocked out Marvin had he not broke his hand. Hearns showed he could hurt Marvin. So that right there tells you he could knock him out. I think a rematch Hearns would have probably won.. I always thought that. By 1st or 2nd round knockout. Marvin was a little too open for Hearns. That is why he had to war with Hearns.

[Privatejoker]

Mag1965.

"Tommy could have knocked out Marvin had he not broke his hand."

Why? I think John Mugabi at 154 arguably hit harder than Hearns and he never dented Hagler, and that fight went 11 rounds not 3.

Tommy would not have knocked out Marvin if not for his broken hand. Tommy couldn't KO Leonard, why Hagler? Who had dropped Hagler in that point in history? Don't talk about the unofficial one.

"Hearns showed he could hurt Marvin."

"Marvin was a little too open for Hearns."

Marvin sure as hell showed he could hurt Hearns even more. It was Hearns who was more open, it was Hearns on the ropes getting murdered on the inside.

[TommyV]

I always look at Hearns-Hagler in 2 scenarios.

Either it goes the way it actually did, both guys trading, both big power but Hagler's better chin see's him through as he knocks Hearns out early.

Or it goes similar to the first Leonard fight, ie Hearns out boxes him but probably always gets worn down and stopped late on while ahead on points.

[MAG1965]

Mag1965.

"Tommy could have knocked out Marvin had he not broke his hand."

Why? I think John Mugabi at 154 arguably hit harder than Hearns and he never dented Hagler, and that fight went 11 rounds not 3.

Tommy would not have knocked out Marvin if not for his broken hand. Tommy couldn't KO Leonard, why Hagler? Who had dropped Hagler in that point in history? Don't talk about the unofficial one.

"Hearns showed he could hurt Marvin."

"Marvin was a little too open for Hearns."

Marvin sure as hell showed he could hurt Hearns even more. It was Hearns who was more open, it was Hearns on the ropes getting murdered on the inside.
Yes I believe that Hearns had more snap than Mugabi. Mugabi hit Marvin with an uppercut in round 5 or 6 which was good, but Mugabi was already arm weary by that point. Tommy in my mind was the harder puncher early and hit Marvin with a bigger punch. Marvin actually was hurt with Hearns and was not with Mugabi.
Tommy did show he could hurt Marvin, but if he broke his hand on that punch he hurt him with it shows he could have kept hurting him, although breaking it means maybe he would have broke it again. But yes he could hurt Marvin.
Tommy could not hit Leonard clean in 1981. And the Hearns who fought Hagler was more experience than the one who fought Hagler, just not natural at the weight.
Tommy had no trouble hitting Hagler even when Tommy was exhausted. Had Hearns fought a more measured fight and put leverage on the right hand I can see him stopping Marvin. I didn't think this years ago but now I do.
Hearns fought a stupid fight, but that was Marvin's gameplan. But if you really think Marvin could have been that pumped up in the rematch I am not sure. That type of committment only comes around one time. Fact is Hearns and Marvin started liking each other more after thier fight, so the anger Marvin had toward Tommy would not have been there, and that is a big part of his game plan. All the prefight stuff worked in his favor.
I never said the Roldan knockdown was legit, but I do think if a man could have stopped Hagler it was Hearns. Hearns stopped Duran and was the first man to do it. Stopped Cueves when no one could at that point. Shuler. I think Hearns had the right hand to do the thing no one else could.
Look at Hearns vs. Shuler. He was bigger and looked strong. I am just saying it would have been a different and slower fight and that favors Hearns after 1986. As a matter of fact, when Tommy signed to defend his 154 pound title in June of 1986 against Medal, I was upset since I thought had he kept fighting at 160 then he would have been solid in the Hagler rematch. I thought that sort of hurt all the work he made with bulking up.
The Mugabi fight was exciting, but John did not have the experience to get his big punches in. So the fact of who hits harder does not matter if Mugabi could not get the punches in. Hearns forced Hagler to fight that style because Marvin knew he would be hit. With Mugabi he was being hit on the top of the head and on the arms. Big difference. Marvin had to force the issue with Hearns and get him out of there early.

[MAG1965]

I always look at Hearns-Hagler in 2 scenarios.

Either it goes the way it actually did, both guys trading, both big power but Hagler's better chin see's him through as he knocks Hearns out early.

Or it goes similar to the first Leonard fight, ie Hearns out boxes him but probably always gets worn down and stopped late on while ahead on points.The rematch would have been slower and Hearns would have been stronger and worked on his inside power. Hearns knew he could not outbox Marvin from the get go. They said so at the time. Hearns was going to box but be physical and try to hurt Marvin and swell him up and then box and win on TKO. Tommy still wanted to knockout Marvin and stop him and thought he could. Hearns problem was he always looked for the knockout.. Had he boxed and used his jab he would have won some fights he lost probably.

[MAG1965]

Yes, I concur. Although, the irony of this whole thing was, even though Hagler did dominate, he lost. Everything he took from Tommy hastened his decline....i.e., pyrrhic victory.I agree. Hagler put is all in that fight mind spirit everything and he won, but the damage he took sort of took his remaining fighting spirit. Sort of the price he paid for getting that win. I do not think he could have done it again with that same motivation.

[Privatejoker]

Mag1965

"Mugabi hit Marvin with an uppercut in round 5 or 6 which was good, but Mugabi was already arm weary by that point."

Of course he was, the fight went longer then 3 rounds and both fighters threw lots of leather. Hearns never had the chance to get arm weary because he was stopped earlier.

Hearns had more snap, but mugabi looked stronger than Hearns when he fought Hagler, Mugabi made Hagler stand off at times, he landed more shots on Hagler than Hearns and vice versa.

Hearns legs looked rubbery in round 3, while Mugabi in round six took the same barrage of punches and remained on his feet. Mugabi had stronger legs.

Hearns could never KO marvin, but we KNOW Marvin can KO Hearns.

[MAG1965]

Mag1965

"Mugabi hit Marvin with an uppercut in round 5 or 6 which was good, but Mugabi was already arm weary by that point."

Of course he was, the fight went longer then 3 rounds and both fighters threw lots of leather. Hearns never had the chance to get arm weary because he was stopped earlier.

Hearns had more snap, but mugabi looked stronger than Hearns when he fought Hagler, Mugabi made Hagler stand off at times, he landed more shots on Hagler than Hearns and vice versa.

Hearns legs looked rubbery in round 3, while Mugabi in round six took the same barrage of punches and remained on his feet. Mugabi had stronger legs.

Hearns could never KO marvin, but we KNOW Marvin can KO Hearns.
Hagler was a much better and more focused fighter when he fought Hearns. Comparing Hagler who fought Hearns to Mugabi is not really accurate. He had his nose broken in sparring training for the fight which would have happened in November of 1985 and the fight was postponed and he was inactive for a year, which was unheard of for Marvin. Most people thought he would stop John in 2 rounds, so he was overrating him I am sure. Mugabi was a guy he didn't know much about and fought him very cautiiously until it started to open up a little in mid rounds. But Mugabi did not hit Marvin that clean. You cannot compare how many rounds someone went with someone. Roldan went 10 rounds with Marvin. And Tommy knocked him out also in 4. He almost stopped Roldan in one.
Mugabi was not a great fighter. He lost to Duane Thomas by a thumbing but then lost to Norris and then McClellen. A sharp Hagler stops Mugabi in one or 2 rounds the same way Norris did.
Hearns could have knocked out Marvin. He rocked him when no one else could and he broke his hand. I never saw anyone else hurt Marvin except Hearns. I absolutely think Tommy could have stopped Marvin and I mean hit Marvin and wobbled him and follow up and Marvin is on the canvas. I absolutely could see this. Tommy would have been more natural at the weight and stronger and fought at a slower pace to get all the leverage behind his punch. A slower pace means Tommy could have moved to his right and go the right cross in from the side, which would have worked much better than punching straight and hitting Marvin flush since Marvin had a strong neck and could take the straight punches better than one from the side. If Tommy could have gotten the punch from the side like he hit Shuler with I think Marvin goes down. I am a believer in this. Marvin had a good style but in a rematch it would have been totally different. That fight was just unheard of. No way they fight that kind of fight in the rematch. No way.

[round15]

I don't agree with those who say Hagler always beats Hearns, 10 out of 10 times. Tommy broke his hand in the first round and got an ill-advised massage the night before, which Steward said contributed to the weakness in his legs. Hearns didn't move and box like he normally did using his jab to set up the right hands. At the same time, Hagler deserves all the credit for not giving Hearns the room to box, keeping the fight at close quarters.

Who knows what happens if Hearns avoids the massage therapy and is able to use his right hand more in the fight. I wouldn't say he beats Hagler but he's certainly capable of out-boxing Hagler and possibly winning a late decision.

[Thread Stealer]

I don't agree with those who say Hagler always beats Hearns, 10 out of 10 times. Tommy broke his hand in the first round and got an ill-advised massage the night before, which Steward said contributed to the weakness in his legs. Hearns didn't move and box like he normally did using his jab to set up the right hands. At the same time, Hagler deserves all the credit for not giving Hearns the room to box, keeping the fight at close quarters.

Who knows what happens if Hearns avoids the massage therapy and is able to use his right hand more in the fight. I wouldn't say he beats Hagler but he's certainly capable of out-boxing Hagler and possibly winning a late decision.

I tend to take what Steward says with a grain of salt.

Hearns did try to box midway through the first round, and had some success in the middle of the ring, but Hagler cut off the ring and got him on the ropes.

With the game plan Hagler had in that fight and how sharp he was, it's hard for me to picture Hearns winning.

I mean if Hagler fought like he normally does and boxed from the outside more patiently, then yeah, I can see Hearns winning a decision as Hearns was so difficult to outbox and outpoint. But Hagler and the Petronellis were no dummies and knew it was better to go to war up close.

I won't say Hagler beats Hearns 10 out of 10 either though. If you have 10 fights of guys on these caliber, one is bound to have an off night or 2, or the other is bound to have a really "on" night or 2.

[COULDHAVEBEEN]

Because by doing so, it would reduce Leonard's seemingly unbelievable win to just a blip on Hagler's record. Agenda.

If a fighter has just brutally stopped two huge hitters in Mugabi, undefeated, and Hearns, a certified ATG, then one has to assume he's in pretty good nick.

Can't see it any other way...everybody knows Hagler was crook on Leonard for delaying so long their one and only meeting...and just as crook on him for not offering a re-match.

If you can believe what you read - the book 'The Four Kings' for example - the loss to Leonard took an awfull lot away from Hagler and he may take the disappointment all the way to the grave.

[Doppleganger]

The one thing that Hearns never did to Hagler in their fight was go to the body. Perhaps doesn't sound so significant but look at many of Tommy's best performances, certainly later in his career, and he goes to the body often, with great success. Not just as a punishing attack but also to bring the opponent's hands down. If I look at 3 classic Hitman blast outs it's very clear to me that attacks to the body played a big part in forcing the stoppage.



Duran - Tommy went to the body quite a bit in this fight - indeed he even floored Roberto with hooks to the body. I think these body attacks softened Duran up and distracted him big time. If you watch the final few seconds of the fight you'll see Tommy jab the midsection of Duran before bringing over the big right; although at that time Duran was basically out on his feet body attacks played their part.
Shuler - Tommy went for the body right from the start and hurt his man with ripping left and right hooks to the body. Again for the final KO punch Tommy jabs to the body to bring down the hands and boom, over comes the right and it's goodnight Vienna.
Roldan - Life and death struggle for Tommy at times but again body attacks are featured and for the final right hand Tommy went to the body first before flooring Roldan for the full 10 count.


What does this mean for Hearns being able to beat Hagler? Well I feel Tommy would have had more success had he gone to the body, both as a weapon (Hagler was rumoured to be relatively 'weak' around the centre of his stomach) and to distract Marvin and bring down his hands. Could he have stopped Hagler? Well I'm really not sure about that but his odds would have increased for sure.

If Hearns has success with body attacks he might be able to have greater luck against Marvin, to slow him down in the main but also to distract and keep him off balance. After all, it's the punches you don't see coming that really hurt you.

[MAG1965]

The one thing that Hearns never did to Hagler in their fight was go to the body. Perhaps doesn't sound so significant but look at many of Tommy's best performances, certainly later in his career, and he goes to the body often, with great success. Not just as a punishing attack but also to bring the opponent's hands down. If I look at 3 classic Hitman blast outs it's very clear to me that attacks to the body played a big part in forcing the stoppage.



Duran - Tommy went to the body quite a bit in this fight - indeed he even floored Roberto with hooks to the body. I think these body attacks softened Duran up and distracted him big time. If you watch the final few seconds of the fight you'll see Tommy jab the midsection of Duran before bringing over the big right; although at that time Duran was basically out on his feet body attacks played their part.
Shuler - Tommy went for the body right from the start and hurt his man with ripping left and right hooks to the body. Again for the final KO punch Tommy jabs to the body to bring down the hands and boom, over comes the right and it's goodnight Vienna.
Roldan - Life and death struggle for Tommy at times but again body attacks are featured and for the final right hand Tommy went to the body first before flooring Roldan for the full 10 count.

What does this mean for Hearns being able to beat Hagler? Well I feel Tommy would have had more success had he gone to the body, both as a weapon (Hagler was rumoured to be relatively 'weak' around the centre of his stomach) and to distract Marvin and bring down his hands. Could he have stopped Hagler? Well I'm really not sure about that but his odds would have increased for sure.

If Hearns has success with body attacks he might be able to have greater luck against Marvin, to slow him down in the main but also to distract and keep him off balance. After all, it's the punches you don't see coming that really hurt you.
a slower pace would have helped Hearns. He could have placed his punches better.

[Privatejoker]

Why do some guys claim Hearns would have KO'd Hagler?

Hagler was stunned for a couple of seconds in the first round so what. It was a 15 round fight that went 3.

Hearns sometimes had trouble with stronger, more aggressive fighters who could force him back, i love Tommy, but he did not have a great chin. Hagler did, so Hagler should be given the benefit of the doubt about who would KO who (even if Hearns hand was ok or not).

Hearns had a good hand against Leonard (1981) and got stopped late when Leonard jumped on him like HAGLER later did. Look at rounds 6, 7, 13 and 14 (big rounds for Leonard).

Hearns had a good hand against Barkley but got caught by a sucker punch.

Hagler has never been stopped or anything close to it, he was stunned for a two seconds v Hearns and that's it.

Hagler has better stamina than Hearns and is more durable, i like Hearns to death but these are the FACTS. Even Juan Roldan rocked Hearns several times at Middleweight when Hearns had a good hand.
When Leonard was not able to outbox him, he turned fighter and won. Hagler turned fighter and won.

[Holmes' Jab]

I always look at Hearns-Hagler in 2 scenarios.

Either it goes the way it actually did, both guys trading, both big power but Hagler's better chin see's him through as he knocks Hearns out early.

Or it goes similar to the first Leonard fight, ie Hearns out boxes him but probably always gets worn down and stopped late on while ahead on points.


Totally agree.

[MAG1965]

Why do some guys claim Hearns would have KO'd Hagler?

Hagler was stunned for a couple of seconds in the first round so what. It was a 15 round fight that went 3.

Hearns sometimes had trouble with stronger, more aggressive fighters who could force him back, i love Tommy, but he did not have a great chin. Hagler did, so Hagler should be given the benefit of the doubt about who would KO who (even if Hearns hand was ok or not).

Hearns had a good hand against Leonard (1981) and got stopped late when Leonard jumped on him like HAGLER later did. Look at rounds 6, 7, 13 and 14 (big rounds for Leonard).

Hearns had a good hand against Barkley but got caught by a sucker punch.

Hagler has never been stopped or anything close to it, he was stunned for a two seconds v Hearns and that's it.

Hagler has better stamina than Hearns and is more durable, i like Hearns to death but these are the FACTS. Even Juan Roldan rocked Hearns several times at Middleweight when Hearns had a good hand.
When Leonard was not able to outbox him, he turned fighter and won. Hagler turned fighter and won.The significant thing is that Hagler was hurt by Hearns when he rarely is. So that alone means that Hearns could have hurt him again had the right hand been intact.

[MAG1965]

Totally agree.I fact that Hearns hurt Hagler in the first round shows had he landed hard right hands he could have stopped Hagler early.

[Privatejoker]

Didn't Hearns get stunned in round one? Or was it just Hagler?

[GPater11093]

I fact that Hearns hurt Hagler in the first round shows had he landed hard right hands he could have stopped Hagler early.

hearns no way is stopping Hagler early

he stunned hagler for afew seconds then hagler was fine i just dont see a KO for hearns

[Privatejoker]

Thank you GPater11093.

[GPater11093]

Thank you GPater11093.

its obviuos in my mind

[prime]

COULD Hearns have beaten Hagler? Possibly, but not probably.

Hearns had two good hands for a mere few seconds of the entire fight, yet stunned Hagler with the first thunderous right he landed and came very close to stopping him on a cut. He fought almost three entire rounds against a bloodthirsty champion two hands against one and-a-half, and held his own.

Man, I'm convinced a couple of well-placed Hearns rights could stop anyone.

But that chin will always betray Tommy.

[MAG1965]

hearns no way is stopping Hagler early

he stunned hagler for afew seconds then hagler was fine i just dont see a KO for hearnsWe just do not know. Hearns broke his right hand. After his hand was broken he would not land a clean punch by the right to stop Marvin. I am saying if that right hand was intact, I think Hearns right would have kept on landing and hurting Hagler. Why wouldn't it? Hagler did not rush to fight Tommy again and I admit why should he? He knew it would be a tough fight. I am one person who thinks the way Hearns would have beaten Marvin is by first or second round knockout. Not by decision. Hagler would have been very hard by decision for Tommy the way Tommy fought. But I could very well in my mind see the rematch in 1986 come out with Hearns looking stronger like he did with Shuler and coming out with a slower pace and landing to the body first and dropping in right hands and knocking out Hagler. Hagler is not a guy who had great defense and agaisnt Hearns you need it. He got a good win in April of 1985, but I think November of 1986 might have been when Tommy beat him up.

[Bill Butcher]

On a different night? A different weight? What would be the result?

Forget a different weight, it would need to be at MWT to be considered anything like any version of Hagler we have ever seen.

Possibly, if Hearns boxed, boxed, boxed & boxed some more, he might be able to outscore the versions of Hagler that fought Mugabi & Leonard... but even then I doubt it because eventually Hagler wore Mugabi down & he eventually in the 2nd half of the fight made Leonard go to war & even tho Leonards early lead was enough to see him the winner, he was made to fight more than he wanted & I genuinely dont feel Hearns is as gutsy or as plain tough as Leonard & therefore would likely fold under that exact same Hagler pressure albeit late on in the fight.

To answer the thread title - possibly more than probably but my pick is probably not.

:good

[MAG1965]

Forget a different weight, it would need to be at MWT to be considered anything like any version of Hagler we have ever seen.

Possibly, if Hearns boxed, boxed, boxed & boxed some more, he might be able to outscore the versions of Hagler that fought Mugabi & Leonard... but even then I doubt it because eventually Hagler wore Mugabi down & he eventually in the 2nd half of the fight made Leonard go to war & even tho Leonards early lead was enough to see him the winner, he was made to fight more than he wanted & I genuinely dont feel Hearns is as gutsy or as plain tough as Leonard & therefore would likely fold under that exact same Hagler pressure albeit late on in the fight.

To answer the thread title - possibly more than probably but my pick is probably not.

:goodI think Hearns could. But the main thing is that I think Hearns career is greater than Marvin's. Tommy fought more legends and beat them than Hagler did. Hearns fought world class fighters since he had 20 fights and he fought them all the way to almost 70 fights.

[Doppleganger]

a slower pace would have helped Hearns. He could have placed his punches better.
A slower pace would have helped Tommy but I think going to the body would have helped him even more. I think before the Sibson fight there were rumours that Hagler was 'weakest' around his midsection, especially in the middle of his torso. Tommy stated that he went to the body with Shuler cos "James didn't like those body shots too much" or words to that effect. It would have been interesting to see Hagler deal with the ripping left hooks that doubled over Barkley and Shuler.

[MAG1965]

A slower pace would have helped Tommy but I think going to the body would have helped him even more. I think before the Sibson fight there were rumours that Hagler was 'weakest' around his midsection, especially in the middle of his torso. Tommy stated that he went to the body with Shuler cos "James didn't like those body shots too much" or words to that effect. It would have been interesting to see Hagler deal with the ripping left hooks that doubled over Barkley and Shuler.it would have been very interesting seeing the Hearns who fought Shuler landing left hooks to Hagler's body and then landing some leverage right hands. I think it would have been a different fight.

[brando18b4h]

Yes, Hearns is always dangerous and the right punch at the right time like the one he K.O. Duran with could allow him to beat Hagler. But i do favor Hagler 8 out of 10.

[Privatejoker]

Mag1965.

"I think Hearns career is greater than Marvin's."

I don't.

P4P he is greater, but as a career....

Hearns is a ATG. But...

Hearns was never undisputed Champion. He had a chance at Welter but was stopped by Leonard.

He had a chance at Middleweight v HAGLER but got KO'd.

Look who HAGLER beat before the winning the title, compare that to Hearns before winning the title.

HAGLER had 50 fights before beating Minter. HAGLER had a whole career before beating Minter.

Held undisputed title for 7 years.

Never been stopped or officially dropped.

All defeats were controvesial.

[lolb]

I think Hagler wins every time just because of his superior chin.

[PernellSweetPea]

With Hearns sharp punching and power and if he came in a full 160 I think he could cut up Hagler and stop him. Anyone who says Hagler would win everytime hasn't seen Hearns fights. Hagler never fought Hearns again and could of. It would have been a good payday. He knew Hearns could hurt him with that right. Hearns did!!!

[Titan1]

Not really.Hagler at middleweight was another breed of fighter.And as great as Thomas was, he would always have them flaws of his to exploit, and Marvin would always find a way to do that.

[booradley]

My take on this subject might seem odd, but the answer is "no" in spite of the fact Tommy had the "skills" to out box Marvin. Tommy Hearns was physically capable of out boxing Marvin and winning a close but clear UD. Tommy was NOT, and I repeat, NOT, mentally/emtionally capable of beating Haglar.

Marvin would always be hyper aggressive. Tommy's response to agression was always going to be WAAAAARRRRRR! And Hearns can't win that kind of fight with Marvin Hagalr.

[Swarmer]

I think that depends on what version of Hagler comes out that night.

[Duodenum]

Ray Leonard predicted immediately following Hagler-Hearns that he thought Tommy was going to retire. "The man got beat!" He also said while sitting in on a post fight interview with Marv that, "Now you know why I decided to retire!" (He affably reached over to pat Hagler on the shoulder while saying this. His relations with both Hearns and Hagler were very friendly and cordial when everybody still assumed that Ray was finished forever. Remember that Hagler-Hearns took place in the aftermath of SRL's dismal comeback attempt against Kevin Howard. It really looked like he was completely done.)

Bob Arum had previously said that he'd be "honored" to promote a return match between Hagler and Duran the morning after they went the championship distance. When asked the same about a return with Hagler and Hearns, he replied that he did not know how he'd be able to sell a second fight after how decisively that three round war concluded.

The body punching of Hearns has been discussed as having key potential for a second go around. Just how effective can Tommy be with that when he's getting pounded and driven around on the back foot? Plus, going underneath means exposing his chin to those ruinous right jabs. The version of Hearns who got squashed in three was the version who bombed out Duran and starched Shuler. He was 26 years old for Hagler. The championship distance outboxing of Benitez was under his belt. He wasn't likely to ever get any better.

For a rematch, both would have had the outcome of that first bout in mind. Hagler was a miserable bastard in rematches. He made Monroe, Seales, Watts and Antuofermo pay dearly for blemishing his record (The Worm twice for handing him his one decisive defeat), then Obel and Hamsho discovered he wasn't any easier the second time in defense of his title either. Tommy's meager sequel resume consists of a draw with SRL that would have been another stoppage loss over the championship distance, and a second defeat to Barkley. Marv went right for his lanky frame direct from the outset. Combine the fact that Tommy never could take it downstairs well with his occasional difficulty in going longer distances, and I have a hard time seeing him last the limit.

[enquirer]

I dont know if it was haglers pressure or that hearns broke his right hand early,but hearns did not seem to be throwing his right hand 'straight' after the opening fussilade which wobbled hagler. I can really envisage hagler (fantastic chin though he had.) being hit with a 'duran like' right thus putting an end to proceedings. However,hagler was pretty special that night,fought the perfect fight and just seemed that he wouldnt be denied.
No middleweight in history would beat that version of hearns with that gameplan...Full props to hagler.
The schuler hearns may very well get a 12 rounder over 86 marvin.

[booradley]

Mag1965.

"I think Hearns career is greater than Marvin's."

I don't.

P4P he is greater, but as a career....

Hearns is a ATG. But...

Hearns was never undisputed Champion. He had a chance at Welter but was stopped by Leonard.

He had a chance at Middleweight v HAGLER but got KO'd.

Look who HAGLER beat before the winning the title, compare that to Hearns before winning the title.

HAGLER had 50 fights before beating Minter. HAGLER had a whole career before beating Minter.

Held undisputed title for 7 years.

Never been stopped or officially dropped.

All defeats were controvesial.

There was absolutely nothing controversial about Haglar's loss to Willy Monroe.

[KO KIDD]

Maybe but a lot would have to work in Hearns favor

Like had he not broke his hand

also Hagler with the big cut had to be extra aggressive or he would have lost via TKO

with out the cut Hagler may fight less desperate and Hearns may have stood more of a chance

[Bill Butcher]

Depends when they fought, I dont see Hagler outboxing Tommy over the distance so my prediction would have to be Hearns on points or Hagler by very late stoppage.

As I said, it would depend on which year they fought & the circumstances before & during the fight... I heard Hearns broke his hand in 1985, that certainly puts a whole new perspective on things if true.

[Boxed Ears]

People make far too much out of Tommy's chin. Look at the men who stopped him, then take under consideration that he would go on to go the distance with two out of the three that legitimately did so afterward. He fought nearly 70 fights over how many weight classes and about thirty fucking years, with some damn tough competition and he was legitimately stopped 3 times. "Oh, that chin will always let poor Tommy down, I tell you!" Every time, without fail, I swear.

[turpinr]

People make far too much out of Tommy's chin. Look at the men who stopped him, then take under consideration that he would go on to go the distance with two out of the three that legitimately did so afterward. He fought nearly 70 fights over how many weight classes and about thirty fucking years, with some damn tough competition and he was legitimately stopped 3 times. "Oh, that chin will always let poor Tommy down, I tell you!" Every time, without fail, I swear.you're right mate.

[The Morlocks]

the way Saad Muhammud dropped off between 1979 and 1981; Wars of attrition

I thought by now you would have caught on to this.
you're right. you know jimmy jacobs picked mugabi to beat hag. because hag was getting hit so much. he said while the hearns fight was exciting, look how much hag got hit. the fact is that after duran, the prime hag was over and he became after roldan primarily a puncher and that is NOT what he was at all in his prime.:viking

[heehoo]

No.

Hagler would have taken Hearns' right hand every time, shake it off, and come back to flatten Hearns every time.

Bad fight for the Hitman every time.

[booradley]

People make far too much out of Tommy's chin. Look at the men who stopped him, then take under consideration that he would go on to go the distance with two out of the three that legitimately did so afterward. He fought nearly 70 fights over how many weight classes and about thirty fucking years, with some damn tough competition and he was legitimately stopped 3 times. "Oh, that chin will always let poor Tommy down, I tell you!" Every time, without fail, I swear.

Accurate post, but let me expand on it a bit. At 147 Tommy had skinny little bird legs. In the Leonard fight his legs betrayed him, and he could not get out of the way. So, one of the stoppage losses had little to do with Tommy's chin.

[MagnaNasakki]

Ray Leonard predicted immediately following Hagler-Hearns that he thought Tommy was going to retire. "The man got beat!" He also said while sitting in on a post fight interview with Marv that, "Now you know why I decided to retire!" (He affably reached over to pat Hagler on the shoulder while saying this. His relations with both Hearns and Hagler were very friendly and cordial when everybody still assumed that Ray was finished forever. Remember that Hagler-Hearns took place in the aftermath of SRL's dismal comeback attempt against Kevin Howard. It really looked like he was completely done.)

Bob Arum had previously said that he'd be "honored" to promote a return match between Hagler and Duran the morning after they went the championship distance. When asked the same about a return with Hagler and Hearns, he replied that he did not know how he'd be able to sell a second fight after how decisively that three round war concluded.

The body punching of Hearns has been discussed as having key potential for a second go around. Just how effective can Tommy be with that when he's getting pounded and driven around on the back foot? Plus, going underneath means exposing his chin to those ruinous right jabs. The version of Hearns who got squashed in three was the version who bombed out Duran and starched Shuler. He was 26 years old for Hagler. The championship distance outboxing of Benitez was under his belt. He wasn't likely to ever get any better.

For a rematch, both would have had the outcome of that first bout in mind. Hagler was a miserable bastard in rematches. He made Monroe, Seales, Watts and Antuofermo pay dearly for blemishing his record (The Worm twice for handing him his one decisive defeat), then Obel and Hamsho discovered he wasn't any easier the second time in defense of his title either. Tommy's meager sequel resume consists of a draw with SRL that would have been another stoppage loss over the championship distance, and a second defeat to Barkley. Marv went right for his lanky frame direct from the outset. Combine the fact that Tommy never could take it downstairs well with his occasional difficulty in going longer distances, and I have a hard time seeing him last the limit.

There is nothing to be said beyond this. Hearns never showed he could beat Hagler at middleweight. Hagler was stunned in the first, not hurt. They are different.

Broken hand or not, Marvin always makes it out of the first few rounds, and like he always does against great fighters who brought it, Hearns falls apart late and gets whacked.

[dpw417]

Ray Leonard predicted immediately following Hagler-Hearns that he thought Tommy was going to retire. "The man got beat!" He also said while sitting in on a post fight interview with Marv that, "Now you know why I decided to retire!" (He affably reached over to pat Hagler on the shoulder while saying this. His relations with both Hearns and Hagler were very friendly and cordial when everybody still assumed that Ray was finished forever. Remember that Hagler-Hearns took place in the aftermath of SRL's dismal comeback attempt against Kevin Howard. It really looked like he was completely done.)

Bob Arum had previously said that he'd be "honored" to promote a return match between Hagler and Duran the morning after they went the championship distance. When asked the same about a return with Hagler and Hearns, he replied that he did not know how he'd be able to sell a second fight after how decisively that three round war concluded.

The body punching of Hearns has been discussed as having key potential for a second go around. Just how effective can Tommy be with that when he's getting pounded and driven around on the back foot? Plus, going underneath means exposing his chin to those ruinous right jabs. The version of Hearns who got squashed in three was the version who bombed out Duran and starched Shuler. He was 26 years old for Hagler. The championship distance outboxing of Benitez was under his belt. He wasn't likely to ever get any better.

For a rematch, both would have had the outcome of that first bout in mind. Hagler was a miserable bastard in rematches. He made Monroe, Seales, Watts and Antuofermo pay dearly for blemishing his record (The Worm twice for handing him his one decisive defeat), then Obel and Hamsho discovered he wasn't any easier the second time in defense of his title either. Tommy's meager sequel resume consists of a draw with SRL that would have been another stoppage loss over the championship distance, and a second defeat to Barkley. Marv went right for his lanky frame direct from the outset. Combine the fact that Tommy never could take it downstairs well with his occasional difficulty in going longer distances, and I have a hard time seeing him last the limit.
Excellent post as usual...Agree with all counts. Especially the part about Hagler being a miserable bastard...Bad man that Hagler.