Clearly not the ´greatest three rounds of boxing ever´ as usually mythologized by glossy-eyed historians due to Hearns´ right-hand breaking in Rd1 and having fuck-all left in his legs from Rd2. What happens in a Mythical Rematch, say 10 months later: NO pre-fight leg massage, NO broken-hand and NO cut on the forehead? (this one´s for REED :stir: )
The first round is the best in history simply because there is no fight ever between guys THAT great where they went at it like that Anyway, Hagler wins it no matter what because he had the extremely rare ability to soak up all of that terrible punishment while dishing out a shitload of his own
Agreed that the fight is overrated as hell. Very one sided and hagler made hearns look like garbage. In a re, i think that hearns could make it a bit more competitive, if he uses his legs and jab, but at the end if the day, he simply lacks the capacity to keep hagler offhim for long, and he is not durable enough to win a firefight
How many of those flush uppercuts can Hagler take if Hearns doesn´t break his hand though? And as for ´all that terrible punishment´ - he suffered maybe 5 or so big shots, two huge ones before Hearns´ hand broke and he took his foot off the gas and tried to box.
Fucking hell, cdogg finally gets to fuck a woman and he turns into the bigget pussy-whippee evah. :: Props, brah, props...
No doubt that's the better fight overall. I think leonard-Hearns is a better fight than hagler-Hearns too, so many ebbs and flows, style reversals etc. must've been amazing to see live
Okay Einstein, name a legendary fight that lasted three rounds that is more memorable than this one. :warning:
No youre missing the point: the first round was balls-out. Hearns busted his hand in that round and from that moment on, his power was depleted by maybe 30-40%. His right-hand shots were forced, shoulder punches....almost no pop in them whatsoever.
Word, he stopped power punching after the first round. 2nd and 3rd rounds were anti-climatic ( great finish though).
Hagler wins every time. Aside from that 1st round, it really wasn't that competitive of an affair. Hagler at 160 is just too big, too strong, and no matter what you hit him with, he seems to just walk through it. Hagler KO 6 in a rematch.
Hagler should probably win. Hagler fought a smart fight by turning into a bull and coming right after Hearns and closing the distance. Hearns was most deadly when he got more distance to get proper leverage on that right hand (Cuevas, Duran, Shuler). It was difficult for Hearns to get that shot in on Hagler because Hagler didn't give him enough space. His most damaging shots to Hagler were a short right uppercut following by a looping overhand right. If Hagler fought in his more usual style of a patient, surgical boxer, Hearns would have a better chance because he'd be better able to get the proper distance he wanted, and where he was very difficult to outbox. But Hagler will still be getting thru with shots. Hagler could apply some methodical pressure and I think he'd slow Hearns down with the shots he lands. Eventually, Hagler would chop down the tree again.
Hagler and Hearns could SOMEWHAT fight. They were decent. But both guys peaked about 15 years before Floyd Joy showed these brutes how it's done, so both were relatively primitive. Not their faults... they simply didn't have 2017 level talent and skill.
Please. Hagler and Hearns and Floyd all have equivalent talents and I've never said otherwise. jake Lamotta is a different kettle of fish.....as is the 50s compared with the 80s, as a whole. Ray Robinson was ahead of his time in terms of talent, hence his legend, but very few from that era (50s) was on par with the majority of the contemporary champions. Anyway enough of this useless banter..... In a rematch Hearns would have lasted longer because he would have boxed Hagler and not slugged but Hagler would have eventually caught up to him in about 9 rounds.
I don't remember ever saying that Lamotta was some top 20 all time great. I just said I'd pick him over Canelo... which isn't some big stretch, since Canelo isn't a great fighter.
Canelo is a better fighter than LaMotta...if you weren't so biased against him you'd see that. Just compare LaMotta footage with Canelo footage....it's clear to see. Canelo is faster, smarter, more elusive and probably has more power too. LaMotta wasn't a complete mindless block but he's certainly not as good a boxer as Canelo. I think Canelo even matches Lamotta for chin.
I don't think Canelo's chin is that good. Dependable, sure... But I doubt he'll take the assault of power shots from Robinson that Lamotta took and still remain standing. Honestly, I expect him to get stopped on September 16th mid to late rounds.
. I thought you despised Kevin hart. I guess we'll all find out about how strong Canelo's chin is in a few months....
Idiotic... Just stupendously fucking idiotic... Shit like this is why I barely bother posting in the boxing section anymore... Flat Earth shit like this
yeah I'm sure you'd prefer this place to evangelize the world with the doctrine of "old timers good, contemporary bad"
I liked it when people who like and understand boxing posted here ... Rendering the retards an amusing curiosity
