Hagler v Hopkins

[JudgeDredd]

Prime for Prime.

I see Marvin winning a close decision after 12 cagey rounds.

[laxpdx]

I see Bernard holding his own through boxing and movement, but over time I see Marvin's tenacity taking over. Hagler eventually wears X down for an 10th round TKO.

[Holmes' Jab]

Hagler UD. Same outcome over 12 or 15.

[mckay_89]

B-Hop in a close but clear decision. He has all the physical advantages over Hagler, is very hard to outbox and can match Hagler for any rough tactics he might employ. How anyone could think that this fight is going to finish with a stoppage either way is beyond me.

[Holmes' Jab]

B-Hop in a close but clear decision. He has all the physical advantages over Hagler, is very hard to outbox and can match Hagler for any rough tactics he might employ.


Hagler would outhussle him and sweep the championship rounds on effective workrate. Hopkins is mean, Marv meaner. Hopkins would be removed from anything appraoching a comfort zone.


How anyone could think that this fight is going to finish with a stoppage either way is beyond me.


100% agreed.

[ramalinga]

There is a reason Marvin stayed at middleweight for his whole career, besides legacy. he was an incredible physical fighter at 160. I'm not so sure he would fare well against a fighter who was able to jump to 175 and outmuscle a 6'3 fighter like Tarver who walks around at 210 - 220. Hopkins has been beaten by one attribute, speed. RJJ, Taylor, Calzaghe all had very different styles but the speed advantage over Hopkins. Marvin's was a very good boxer - puncher but his best attribute was his combination of relentlessness and chin, something that doesn't do the trick against Hopkins. Close fight, but I see Hopkins edging it.

[Mr Butt]

hagler ud over 12 or 15

[Robbi]

Hopkins has the perfect style to beat Hagler IMO. He's tall and rangey, good on the outside, durable, quick, decent jab, defense, and he's got a superb boxing brain. I just think his overall style would pose serious problems for Hagler. IMO, Hopkins' best bet would be to hang back and counter rather than rush forward.

[Stevie G]

Prime for Prime.

I see Marvin winning a close decision after 12 cagey rounds.
This is how I see it. It's hard to gauge how it would be if it was a 15 rounder,as Hopkins is n't quite old enough to have fought in the fifteen round era.

[Dave's Top Ten]

I think Hopkins has some of the tools to beat Hagler, but he's missing a few. I think to beat Hagler you'd have to have more power, speed and movement than Hopkins possesses, although he's no slouch in any of those areas.

Intruiging chess match. Close first 6 rounds. Hagler's takes over in the second half as the they both open up.

UD Hagler.

[lefthook31]

I think Hopkins has some of the tools to beat Hagler, but he's missing a few. I think to beat Hagler you'd have to have more power, speed and movement than Hopkins possesses, although he's no slouch in any of those areas.

Intruiging chess match. Close first 6 rounds. Hagler's takes over in the second half as the they both open up.

UD Hagler.
I agree and I think Hagler had a better jab overall.

[Boro chris]

Hagler ud. Faster, sharper, stronger and with better combinations. He'd also outwork Hopkins too.
As for Hopkins prime I'm guessing were going with the master who disected Trinidad as opposed to the younger version who beat Johnson.

[lefthook31]

Hagler ud. Faster, sharper, stronger and with better combinations. He'd also outwork Hopkins too.
As for Hopkins prime I'm guessing were going with the master who disected Trinidad as opposed to the younger version who beat Johnson.
You know Hopkins had a little difficulty dealing with the strength and power of Echols and Allen. I think your right in that he perfected his defense a little more leading up to Trinidad, but then again Trinidad was never a true middleweight, and Joppy and Holmes were smallish middleweights as well.

[Brighton bomber]

You know Hopkins had a little difficulty dealing with the strength and power of Echols and Allen. I think your right in that he perfected his defense a little more leading up to Trinidad, but then again Trinidad was never a true middleweight, and Joppy and Holmes were smallish middleweights as well.

I agree that Tito was more a natural light middle but Joppy and Holmes? Now you are altering facts to suit your hypothesis. Joppy has never fought below middle and is the same height as Hagler, while Holmes is 6 feet 2.

I personally give Hopkins the slight edge here. I can't see Hagler outboxing the taller, more mobile Hopkins. And while Hopkins of course won't be able to do a sugar Ray and stay away all night, Hopkins has shown he is very effective on the inside and while at a disadvantage wouldn't be completely overwhelmed in close.

[Dave's Top Ten]

I can definitely see Hagler outboxing Hopkins during periods of the fight. Hagler would have the greater workrate, better jab, more fluid combinations, edge in strength and power and at least be even on sheer boxing ability. For all Hop's ability, he just doesn't quite have the skillset to deal with what Hagler brings.

[lefthook31]

I agree that Tito was more a natural light middle but Joppy and Holmes? Now you are altering facts to suit your hypothesis. Joppy has never fought below middle and is the same height as Hagler, while Holmes is 6 feet 2.

I personally give Hopkins the slight edge here. I can't see Hagler outboxing the taller, more mobile Hopkins. And while Hopkins of course won't be able to do a sugar Ray and stay away all night, Hopkins has shown he is very effective on the inside and while at a disadvantage wouldn't be completely overwhelmed in close.
I wouldnt consider Joppy and Holmes big strong middleweights. Yes natural, but not the biggest or strongest, and Im not implying Hopkins was weak nor did he not face strong guys. Hagler was certainly as strong as Echols or Allen, but a 100 times better fighter and they gave Hopkins some problems back in the day.

[Robbi]

Hagler ud. Faster, sharper, stronger and with better combinations. He'd also outwork Hopkins too.
As for Hopkins prime I'm guessing were going with the master who disected Trinidad as opposed to the younger version who beat Johnson.

Hagler, faster and sharper? Nah.

[ramalinga]

I can definitely see Hagler outboxing Hopkins during periods of the fight. Hagler would have the greater workrate, better jab, more fluid combinations, edge in strength and power and at least be even on sheer boxing ability. For all Hop's ability, he just doesn't quite have the skillset to deal with what Hagler brings.

Jab, strength and power for Hagler? Hopkins has the height of Hearns, with a natural LHW frame. He only stayed a middleweight for so long because of his unusual discipline. I don't think Hagler uses a jab effectivey against a 6'1 fighter with Hopkins' defensive abilities. Hopkins bullied Tarver around the ring, he can match the marvelous one for strength.

Marvin had an amazing combination of attributes, but the question is if these were the right ones to beat Hopkins, who only lost to fighters who had a sped advantage and the same height as him. A smaller fighter who can't significantly outspeed Hopkins, even as amazing as Marvin, would have a very difficult time against Hopkins.

[redrooster]

Hopkins despite his mastery of the game is no match for Hagler's skills and power. Hagler splatters his brains all over the ring canvas by the 8th

[Robbi]

Hopkins despite his mastery of the game is no match for Hagler's skills and power. Hagler splatters his brains all over the ring canvas by the 8th


Hagler doesn't have the power to trouble Hopkins's iron chin. An 8th round stopage or knockout? Get outta here kid. :hi:

[the cobra]

Agree with Robbi on this. Hopkins has the style and tools to edge a decision.

[Chris Warren]

Hopkins had admitted various times that Antwon Echols had him hurt big time so he could be hurt. Does that mean Hagler could finish him probably not but he has a better chan to knock out Hopkins late than Hopkins stopping Hagler late.

If they fought 10 times i would pick Hagler to win 6 and Hopkins 4.

[redrooster]

Hagler doesn't have the power to trouble Hopkins's iron chin. An 8th round stopage or knockout? Get outta here kid. :hi:

Power was not Hagler's biggest asset yet he still took out several iron chinned foes. It's not just htting power we're talking about, it's how and where you hit a man.

A good sharp hitter like Hagler will often take out someone no matter how their reputable their chin. A good sharp jolt you don't see coming will do enough damage.

Hopkins isnt just going to come away taking jabs that graze him and shake off hooks like they're nothing. You're living in a fantasy world

[Robbi]

Power was not Hagler's biggest asset yet he still took out several iron chinned foes. It's not just htting power we're talking about, it's how and where you hit a man.

A good sharp hitter like Hagler will often take out someone no matter how their reputable their chin. A good sharp jolt you don't see coming will do enough damage.

Hopkins isnt just going to come away taking jabs that graze him and shake off hooks like they're nothing. You're living in a fantasy world

Where do you get all the Hagler pictures?

[Bummy Davis]

at 160 Mavin too fast and too strong...Marvin wins a close UD at lightheavy B-Hop stronger and not as drained may pull out a SD

[PowerPuncher]

Hopkins UD better boxer, better defense, smarter.

1 thing we can agree on the loser will be bitter and talk trash

[Robbi]

Hopkins UD better boxer, better defense, smarter.

1 thing we can agree on the loser will be bitter and talk trash

B-Hop all the way. :good

[Brighton bomber]

I wouldnt consider Joppy and Holmes big strong middleweights. Yes natural, but not the biggest or strongest, and Im not implying Hopkins was weak nor did he not face strong guys. Hagler was certainly as strong as Echols or Allen, but a 100 times better fighter and they gave Hopkins some problems back in the day.

I agree Hagler is of course much better than Echols and Allen but I don't see the correlation. Hopkins is better than Antuofermo and Duran at mddleweight who gave Hagler a few problems.

In terms of strength I have never seen Hopkins dominated. I just rewatched Hopkins/Echols 2 and whenever Hopkins came forward he forced Echols back and he showed he was stronger also in the clinches. But of course Hagler was physically stronger than anyone else he fought but Hopkins would not be completely overwhelmed physically by Hagler based upon what he showed at middleweight and especially Light Heavyweight.

[MrMarvel]

You can't beat Hagler unless you throw punches in bunches. Hokins doesn't fight that way. Hagler throws punches in bunches. He is relentless. Hopkins would not be able to deal with the style. It doesn't matter whether Hopkins lands counter rights all night. He won't throw enough punches to outpoint Hagler. It's really that simple.

[MrMarvel]

To the person who doesn't see how somebody who moves up in weight and beats a light heavyweight loses to Hagler? Hearns moved up in weight and won the light heavyweight title twice, once against Virgil Hill, a terrific fighter. Hagler destroyed Hearns.

[Dave's Top Ten]

You can't beat Hagler unless you throw punches in bunches. Hokins doesn't fight that way. Hagler throws punches in bunches. He is relentless. Hopkins would not be able to deal with the style. It doesn't matter whether Hopkins lands counter rights all night. He won't throw enough punches to outpoint Hagler. It's really that simple.

This is a pretty important point when matching up these two. Hagler's workrate was impressive. And he was accurate with it. Down the stretch it would be one of the differences.

[JohnThomas1]

Hopkins has the perfect style to beat Hagler IMO. He's tall and rangey, good on the outside, durable, quick, decent jab, defense, and he's got a superb boxing brain. I just think his overall style would pose serious problems for Hagler. IMO, Hopkins' best bet would be to hang back and counter rather than rush forward.


X 2, Hagler will never fully figure out the puzzle that is Hopkins IMO. Good hard close fight with ring smarts being the difference for mine.

[Brighton bomber]

This is a pretty important point when matching up these two. Hagler's workrate was impressive. And he was accurate with it. Down the stretch it would be one of the differences.

Hopkins also had a good workrate himself during his prime. Watch the Johnson fight he threw anything from 60-100 punches a round for the whole fight. Though I must admit it would not be a good idea for Hopkins to stand and trade but he was capable of raising his workrate when needed in his prime. Hopkins was also very accurate with it as well, though could get wild sometimes.

[Brighton bomber]

To the person who doesn't see how somebody who moves up in weight and beats a light heavyweight loses to Hagler? Hearns moved up in weight and won the light heavyweight title twice, once against Virgil Hill, a terrific fighter. Hagler destroyed Hearns.

I am guessing that is aimed at me. But you seem to have completely taken by argument out of context. I never stated Hagler could not beat anyone who went up and won a light heavyweight title.

I am simply trying to suggest that strength wise Hopkins would not be overwhelmed by Hagler as he has shown through out his career that he is physically very strong himself and used the example that he was able to deal with a full blown light heavyweight to emphasise that fact.

So your example using Hearns who despite being a big framed fighter was never known for his physical strength completely misses the point of my original argument.