We've never seen Hagler at this weight but let's speculate shall we... Stylewise I have to go with Joe by decision. I want to say Hagler, but I just can't see it. Discuss. opcorn:
Agreed that Joe doesn't hurt Hagler (but who could) but Calzaghe is just as busier as Hagler, significantly faster hands, naturally bigger, taller...Hagler wouldn't have a southpaw advantage, and Hagler is not a one punch knockout artist and Joe has a very dependable chin himself. I can't see hagler winning....
Joe's chin isn't that good. He's been knocked down and hurt against weak opposition. How the hell would he deal with Hagler swarming all over him? No one stayed in range with a prime Hagler and came out ahead. Why the hell would Calzaghe be any different when Hagler fought faster fighters and won?
Joe has faster hands, but Hagler was WAY more accurate and would score more effectively. Also you neglect to mention Hagler's piston jab, which would bust up Joe w/o a doubt. And Hagler was a better infighter. And height is irrelevant cause the way Joe fights, he leans in and negates his height anyway.
I can really see Calzaghe, quite literally shitting himself in his corner just as the bell goes for Roundd 1.
this fight would be competitive. let's get real. despite his strong, very good overall competition, hagler never beat a great middleweight who's in his prime. Calzaghe would've beaten old ass duran's ass too. calzaghe is also big. if he were in the 80s, he would've been a light heavy.
Man, oh, man does Calzaghe get overrated by some. :doh: Calzaghe's slappy punching wouldn't keep Hagler off of him and he doesn't have the mobility to avoid Hagler. It would be competitive for a few rounds, but Hagler would take over around round 4 or 5 and Calzaghe gets stopped (probably a TKO) around round 8.
calzaghe is better than vito antofuermo. he's also never been knocked out. fuck it. calzaghe wins on points.
I'm not so sure Calzaghe is better than Vito. Frankly...I don't see what some other folks see to think Calzaghe is all that. Vito wasn't pretty in the ring, but he was effective and competitive against the best of his era. And Calzaghe was taller and had better handspeed, but so did everyone else Vito fought...and yet he was Middleweight champ and a top contender. And if you're referring to the "Draw" between Hagler & Vito...that was as bad of a decision as I've seen. Vito fought hard and rallied late, but the decision should have been Hagler's. Have you actually seen that fight? Or the rematch? Calzaghe is a good fighter who has benefitted from an average (at best) division. His title reign reminds me of Virgil Hill's. Lots of defenses, but mostly mediocre opposition.
that 'draw' was hardly impressive. hagler's great fighter. probably the best middle ever. calzaghe might be the best super middleever and imo has the lateral movement and slappy or not, his greater handspeed to outpoint hagler in a tough fight.
You start off by saying that Joe gets "overrated" and then you pick Hagler to stop (no less) the bigger Calzaghe who's never been stopped or even been in danger of being stopped in just 8 rounds? :: Who's overrating who? Hagler doesn't stop a smaller Duran...WHO HAS BEEN STOPPED but he stops the bigger Calzaghe who has never shown a chin or stamina problem?:doh:
I agree. Hagler could be outboxed by a faster rangier boxer. Hearns , well he wasn't faster (especially of foot) and we all seen the game plane he used. :: Hagler will be beat to the punch and then miss Joe as Joe moves out of range. As much as I dislike Monzons awkwardness , he would have a much better chance at 168 then Hagler.
It's funny, you always look to the worst performances of a fighter against a fighter who is nothing like the one you are comparing him to. Hagler didn't stop the tricky Duran, but he did chop up and stop tough Middleweights like Hamsho (twice), Scypion, Sibson, Antuofermo & Roldan. Not to mention all of the good middles he beat before he won the title. In his prime, Hagler was a beast. He was an excellent boxer, accurate as all Hell, and a very good puncher. He wasn't a one-punch Hearns type bomber, but all of his punches hurt. And don't base this match-up on the last two fights of Hagler's career. Look the years shortly before and then the early years of his title reign. Not too many folks went the distance with Hagler from 1977 to 1983. There is this myth out there that Hagler was nothing more than an average puncher and that is simply not true. Calzaghe may not have been stopped so far in his career, but he also hasn't faced a fighter anywhere near the ability of Hagler. Calzaghe would have nothing to keep Hagler off of him and he wouldn't outbox Hagler either. Maybe you mistake Hagler for Jeff Lacy, but I sure don't.
Hagler ain't stopping Calzaghe at 168. Joe has a top notch chin and Hagler wasn't a one punch KO artist. This fight is pretty close. Calzaghe is a mover and Hagler hates that. Joe would definitely frustrate Hagler with his hand speed and footwork. I think it goes to decision. P4P, I take Hagler to win but I'm not so sure that at 168 he beats a prime Calzaghe.
Calzaghe's a mover? Thats news to me. Sloppy Joe's footwork is nothing special at all, his handspeed is good, lets not act like its blazing or something. Leonard was faster, even the 87 Leonard. And Joe's footwork isnt on the same PLANET as Leonard's. In fact, prime Hagler was lighter on his feet, and had better footwork than Joe, even though his hands werent as fast. I'm not sure if Hagler stops him, but if Joe lasts the distance, he takes one helluva beating. I honestly cant see why anyone is picking Joe. Hagler is not an old Eubank, or Lacy.
He does move pretty well. I'm sure you've seen alot of Calzaghe fights and he does have pretty fast feet. He's no Roy Jones or nothing, but he can move laterally pretty well, especially after firing off his flurries. I think Hagler's the better fighter for sure. And if at 168 he could be the same beast he was at 160, then I think he wins clearly and gives Joe a beating. But I do think that Joe would frustrate him alot early and give him some fits.
The reason why Calzaghe's never been stopped is that most of his defenses have been against fringe contenders. It's not like he was in there with a bunch of all-time-greats. Also, it's not like Hagler never knocked out someone who'd never been knocked out before: John Mugabi Mustafa Hamsho Wilford Scypion Fulgencio Obelmejias Loucif Hamani Mike Colbert Mike Tyson couldn't knock out Bonecrusher Smith, who's been knocked out on seven occassions, including two before the Tyson fight. He also couldn't knock out James "Quick" Tillis, who'd been knocked out three times before, and who was knocked out 11 times in total. Nicolai Valuev's never been knocked out, but I'd pick him to get knocked out by the smaller George Foreman. :dunno:
Since when did Hearns outbox Hagler? I don't remember seeing that. :dunno: Also - Calzaghe boxes or fights NOTHING like the prototypical Hearns you're referring to. I think it's a very competitive fight and one Calzaghe has good chances in...but this rationale isn't sound. Joe is no Mayweather....and Hagler is not nearly as slow as you make him out to be. Peace.
You have it reversed. The way I worded it , I was making a joke about the brawling style Hearns used Vs Hagler. INSTEAD of boxing.
Let's revisit this one shall we! I got a little heat for my Calzaghe pick. Anyone had a change of heart?
