Hopkins or Hagler - who should rank higher in an alltime list ??

First topic message reminder :

Having a good natured debate with my friends Haz and Rodders on Hagler and Hoppo.

Haz reckons Hoppo couldn't carry Hagler's jockstrap.......Rodders agrees but not nearly as vehemently........

I think they are rose tinters...........and have Hoppo above,,,,,,,

Perhaps it's been done but feel free to express your opinions..

Do you not think that Marvin could be his own worst enemy at times though, captain? Had a nasty habit of being dragged in to the other man's fight, not a trait you can really associate with Hopkins.

I think Hagler's first fight with Watts is a decent example. I'm not an expert on 'Boogaloo' but from what I have seen of him, I'd say he was a very game and busy brawler, but also a limited one without a great punch. Appreciate that Hagler must have fancied his chances of stopping Watts, as a few others had done so before, but he got drawn in to some really scrappy, messy rounds where he got outworked and outpunched on the inside just as he did against Antuofermo (I) a couple of years later, when he had the skills to give them a lesson in the sweet science. Again, he also seemed to fall asleep somewhat towards the end of the fight.

Don't get me wrong, I had Hagler winning those first fights against Watts and Vito by 2 and 4 points respectively, but I do think that they showed the first glimpse of Hagler's tactical failings, which ended up costing him big time against Leonard.

I don't think that Marv had that many technical failings, Chris, but I do think that he could be a bit dopey in the ring at times if he didn't feel either threatened or that his machismo was being impugned. For a bloke of his ability, he was a bit slow to get to work at times - Watts, Seales, Antuofermo, Duran - so as you say, the signs were always there that he had a slight gap in the armour. It took someone like Tommy to rile Marvin and then fight precisely the sort of fight that Hagler would have prayed for to show him at his best.

Agree with your sentiment there - when scorned Hagler could really hit the groove. The one who tore in to Minter was a totally different animal to the one who rested on his laurels against Vito the year before.

Hagler was incredible that night at Wembley. His punch accuracy and shot selection, considering how aggressively he was fighting, were superb. As Minter himself said, when Hagler got going, he didn't punch you - he punched through you.

Hagler wasn't the only one who got slightly shafted on the cards though...I think I am right in remembering that nearly all sat ringside for Hopkins v Taylor I scored the fight in Bernards favour and I have seen many many people who claim Hopkins should have got the nod against Calzaghe.

No argument that Hagler has the much better stand out win, stellar record and more exciting style.

But for me Hopkins whilst probably not having that stand out win still holds legitimate very very good wins...Trinidad...Winky Wright (who was coming off wins against, Mosley x2, Trinidad & a draw with the then upcomg Taylor) ...

as well as good wins against De La Hoya, Tarver, Pascal, Cloud, Pavlik (struggle to find any great handing out the lesson he did at the age of 43!)...with 4 of those wins coming on the other side of 40! Some achievement in itself.

I'll stick to my view that in a fight Hagler shades it...in a comparison of who is better P4P in the all time list...Hopkins gets revenge!

What has Hoppo's age got to do with anything. He is a boxer so his age is irrelevant.

Huh!? Because his age makes his achievements more remarkable in many ways...point me out another fighter who has been stepping in the ring and either winning or at least running close fighters of a previous generation...not just once or twice but for the past 8 years?!

You must be on the wind up Az - If you really think age has nothing to do with being a boxer then I do not want to hear you talking about a fighter being too young or someone being over the hill when they lose!