Hearns beats Hagler in a rematch

[Sound Judgement]

Yup it was a tie....

[SamWise72]

The simple answer is that we don't KNOW. Hearns never boxed a disciplined fight against as good and big an opponent as Hagler, and Hagler only faced such a challenge once himself, and lost. Hearns didn't have quite the strength of character in the late rounds that Leonard did, but he also wouldn't have been coming off a big layoff. It would have been fascinating, and I think it could have gone either way. The shot that stopped Duran drops anyone at middleweight, but I could believe Hagler could get up.

[loaded_gloves]

I can't see Hearns ever being tough enough to survive a middle like Hagler, who besides great skill had a chin and power of his own.

At some point over twelve or fifteen Hearns is going to come unstuck.

[Dart340]

If Hearns and Hagler fought a hundred times, I wouldn't bet once on Hearns if I was spending somebody else's money.

You have to be a real Hearns FanBoy to picture a different result than the first fight.

Nobody has mentioned the difference in mental toughness and intimidation factor. Hearns=Paper Hagler=Scissors

[Sound Judgement]

Those scissors were pretty dull against duran and leonard. Hearns was the top of the class as a boxer against the other 3 no question. He boxes haglers ears off and holds up easy.....

[Sound Judgement]

Also hagler became unstruck against leonard who was no where near the boxer of hearns...

[loaded_gloves]

You sound like a mad Hearns obsessive.

Look, we all love the Hitman, one of the all-time greats, but some people are all wrong for some greats and Hagler was all wrong for Hearns whatever style Tommy employs.

There's nothing wrong with that. Hearns' three round defeat to Hagler was more glorious and heroic than many men's points defeats to the Marvelous One.

[Sound Judgement]

I agree with your comments 100 percent. Hagler fought heroically. His best performance for sure and a true champion and great champion.

All I ever said was I wanted to see the rematch. I like hearns chances if he sets up behind his jab and boxes. I just would have liked to see what happens. One fact for sure we will never know?? Marvin did have some trouble with Duran and Leonard tactically. Very surprised he didn't charge after both? It is just very hard for me to see a hagler hearns rematch with the same intensity... Marvin was the type of guy who if he gave you the rematch wanted no doubt and most likely would have tried to box Tommy early to prove his skills (which were also very sound). I think more fans wanted a second Hagler Hearns than a second Hagler Leonard

[loaded_gloves]

I'm sure Tommy would have boxed in a rematch and might well have gone the distance a second time around. Marvin might have been more cautious as well. Many times these rematches of hellish wars are more tame and tactical (Ali/Frazier II one example).

I still see the same man winning, even in a more 'cerebral' second fight, possibly knocking Tommy down en route. Yes Hagler had some problems with Duran and Leonard but those men were less susceptible to a big punch, and less likely to unravel even if knocked down.

I'd pick Hagler again but you can never totally write off someone as great and thrilling as Tommy Hearns.

[Sound Judgement]

Hard to see hagler losing any fight really? Still baffled the way he fought leonard. I almost thought the fix was in so they could fight again or even 3 times. However leonard said one and done. I do have to say i wanted hagler in that fight but I have to give the edge to leonard. Hagler really looked done after the hearns and mugabi wars... Glad he didn't fight on. Hearns really was a solid middle in 86 -87. He looked so much bigger against roldan than in the hagler fight. Would have loved to see a tactical hearns hagler fight. Yes tommy would have had to cut or injure hagler somehow to throw him off his game. However most of hearns victories and flash knockouts came off the jab and his boxing tactics. I always wondered how hagler would have responded to a hearns right cross to the chin? Credit to Marvin for avoiding hearns power in there only fight.

[SenorPipino]

Tough guy Hagler would always beat Tommy. He wouldn't let the Hit Man do what he wanted.
If Tommy could have outboxed Hagler, he would have done it in 1985. Hagler ignored Tommy's power, bulled his way inside, and used his strength and skill to take away Hearn's always questionable resistance.
The Hearn's plan was always to use his legs and reach to outbox Hagler, but when faced with someone who had no respect for the Hitman's power, Tommy simply faded away.
I recall he later had some bogus excuse about draining his legs when training on the sand in Florida. He claimed he entered the ring knowing he had to fight toe-to-toe because his legs were gone before the fight.
Tommy could have done all his running on cement and the result would have still been the same.

[orbtastic]

I think Hagler was dismissive of SRL in general, particularly his "power" at middleweight. This is a man who had not been knocked down (legitimately) his who career and took thunderous punches from one-hit hitters like Hearns and Mugabi. I know someone will say Roldan knocked him down...

If you watch the fight, his whole demeanour is one of truculent submissiveness. He thought that he was winning and he thought he wasn't being outboxed or hurt. His best moments in the fight were those where he fought Southpaw, he was very effective but he only did it for 3 rounds or so and switched back to orthadox. Presumably he just thought he was winning. I think he underestimated SRL but also underestimated that those 30 second shoe-shines and flurries towards the end of the round were undoing the previous two and half minutes work he had done.

Anyway, the fight's been done to death ad nauseaum but that's why he fought like he did against Leonard.

I love Hearns but in a battle of punchers you have to favour the best chin and that's Hagler. He was stunned momentarily against Hearns (where that shot broke his hand) but you saw what happened when Hagler landed, Hearns was all spaghetti legs. It's easy to look at the Schuler fight and see Tommy measuring him for that right on the chin but Hagler had a proven chin and was a much better fighter. It's also easy to see the blitzing he gave Duran but let's not forget he'd had to put him down twice prior to that and it was effectively target practice for a dozen or more shots before he landed that last huge right hand that pitches him forward.

The finish against Roldan was good but he'd been badly wobbled and had to put him down 3 times prior to landing that last bomb.

To me a rematch would have been interesting but I think it would be the same conclusion. Tommy was in love with his power, despite his boxing prowess and reach, and just loved to brawl and knock people out. You just know he hurt inside so bad after losing to Marvin and he'd be out to prove he could hurt him and be (maybe) the first to stop him and he would get dragged into Marvin's fight.

I'll see if I can find the interview online, but there was a decent SI piece (about Duran or Benitez, I think) that talked about the potential rematch and aftermath of their first fight.

[orbtastic]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/ ... /index.htm

[Borinken25]

I love Hearns, one of my all-time favorites along with Hagler. However, I just don't see any scenario in which Hearns could beat Hagler. In a second fight I could see Hearns boxing and moving and winning some rounds. Hearns could run but not for the entire fight. Hagler eventually would find his way inside and hurt Hearns. Hagler iron chin would be the big difference.

Hagler versatility would be always in his favor, he too could box when he wanted too.

[Sound Judgement]

Hearns broke though to another level after the hagler fight just as he did after the first leonard fight. Through about 1988 hearns could take a sound shot. I just don't believe hagler could raise his game to that level again in a rematch. It was very evident in the magubi fight how much hearns took out of hagler in their fight. You had a motivated hearns vs a fading hagler. A past his prime hearns outboxed and knocked down ray leonard 18 months after the hagler fight. Leonard also had a few fights after the hagler fight and was fighting a the same or better level he did against hagler. It was wise of hagler to stay away from hearns. Motivation is a powerful ally. Just ask hagler-he used it in the hearns fight himself.

[Borinken25]

Hearns broke though to another level after the hagler fight just as he did after the first leonard fight. Through about 1988 hearns could take a sound shot. I just don't believe hagler could raise his game to that level again in a rematch. It was very evident in the magubi fight how much hearns took out of hagler in their fight. You had a motivated hearns vs a fading hagler. A past his prime hearns outboxed and knocked down ray leonard 18 months after the hagler fight. Leonard also had a few fights after the hagler fight and was fighting a the same or better level he did against hagler. It was wise of hagler to stay away from hearns. Motivation is a powerful ally. Just ask hagler-he used it in the hearns fight himself.

Could you explain what do you mean by this statement "Hearns broke though to another level after the hagler fight just as he did after the first leonard fight."

Are you trying to say he became a better fighter? What is your argument for that?

I see no evidence of Hears becoming better or learning anything from the Hagler fight. He was out-boxing Leonard in their first fight until he ran out of gas. That to me tells me that he was a great boxer to begin with not to mention his punching power. The problem is Hagler was just too strong for Hearns and had an iron chin as well as boxing ability. Hagler was just Hearns Kryptonite.

[Sound Judgement]

Difficult to judge a street fight. No one ever attempted to fight hagler the way hearns did. It did NOT pay off. Totally clear on that issue. Hearns dominated the middle weight division after hagler turned him down.just as he did at supermiddle after he retired Ray Leonard. Hearns was a better fighter after both the first leonard and hagler fight. Also this BS that hearns couldnt go the distance against hagler is BS. He proved he could go the distance and beat ray leonard at a higher weight class. Something MM could not do....so says ray leonard about both fighters....

[Sound Judgement]

Sorry... super welter after the first fight with leonard. Not supermiddle.

[Rover]

You sound like a mad Hearns obsessive.

Look, we all love the Hitman, one of the all-time greats, but some people are all wrong for some greats and Hagler was all wrong for Hearns whatever style Tommy employs.

There's nothing wrong with that. Hearns' three round defeat to Hagler was more glorious and heroic than many men's points defeats to the Marvelous One.

[Sound Judgement]

If hearns was such easy pickings for hagler then why not grab another 20 million before fighting leonard?? I will tell you why... Because it was by far his hardest fight ever to win. Hagler, Goody, and Pat knew after the mugabi fight leonard was easier pickings than hearns...... Hearns was killing everyone after the hagler fight...

[Sound Judgement]

Honestly looking at how hagler boxed duran and leonard I believe a second fight is a layup for hearns. Really an easy points victory or stoppage on cuts. Hearns had the ability to inflict cuts and swelling. Something hagler had to deal with a lot. Also Duran was never out and had an iron jaw until he fought hearns. You guys are really selling hearns short .....

[Sound Judgement]

If i am a hearns obsessive you are a hagler jock sniffer...

[Dart340]

So, really, "Sound Judgment", you're 100% convinced that Hearns would absolutely raise his game in a Hagler rematch and become sturdier physically and mentally than ever before and score an incredibly rare victory against a fighter who devastatingly kayoed you before, and you're so convinced that you are simply going to repeat your main thesis over and over again in this thread until everyone gets bored and walks away.

The purpose of this thread was not to stimulate discussion then, but merely to shout your opinion (one not shared by just about any of the other posters on this thread, and there are some smart guys on this board...) ad nauseum. Not "Sound Judgment", I think.

We're all entitled to our pet opinions. I'm convinced Jesse James Hughes was odds on to stop Felix Trinidad and take his title if Hughes hadn't met his demise in an Alabama swamp, but I'm also smart enough to know that there are probably less than a half dozen people on the planet that would agree with me. Got to have perspective.....

[Rover]

So, really, "Sound Judgment", you're 100% convinced that Hearns would absolutely raise his game in a Hagler rematch and become sturdier physically and mentally than ever before and score an incredibly rare victory against a fighter who devastatingly kayoed you before, and you're so convinced that you are simply going to repeat your main thesis over and over again in this thread until everyone gets bored and walks away.

The purpose of this thread was not to stimulate discussion then, but merely to shout your opinion (one not shared by just about any of the other posters on this thread, and there are some smart guys on this board...) ad nauseum. Not "Sound Judgment", I think.

We're all entitled to our pet opinions. I'm convinced Jesse James Hughes was odds on to stop Felix Trinidad and take his title if Hughes hadn't met his demise in an Alabama swamp, but I'm also smart enough to know that there are probably less than a half dozen people on the planet that would agree with me. Got to have perspective.....

He said a lay up for Hearns?

[Rover]

After the Hagler fight and before Hagler signed to fight SRL, Hearns beat Shuler, Medal and DeWitt. Not exactly what he'd done before Hagler (annihilate Duran).