Hagler vs Hearns

What is everyones opinion of this fight?

For me, it is the greatest fight of all time. However, I wonder if the result would have been different if Hagler hadn't been cut.

I've always wondered if he felt he was on borrowed time due to the cut and just carried on going for it, so to speak.

Great fight, great fighters.

So what is everyones memories/ thoughts on it?

Congrats hobo - first boxing article on the new 606!

Hagler Hearns one of the all time great wars. Had Hearns boxed from round 2 onwards - the fight could have been his. If he hadn't had that massage which "forced" him to be more aggressive and took energy from his legs. If he hadn't been caught up in the pre-fight hype...who knows. Hearns had the chance to make a case for being the greatest of the fab 4. Sadly, cos I'm a massive Hearns fan, he didn't.

As the american commentators would say - woulda, coulda, shoulda, didn't.

My favourite Hearns knockout was in his fight with Duran.

It just seemed that Duran was shell shocked and took the final blow without any type of defence. My fave knockout ever!

A great fight and up there with Dempsey v Firpo for title of the greatest short fight of all time.

Hagler was always going to try and get inside and up close with Hearns to deny Hearns the leverage to get those power shots off. Despite Hagler rushing forward quickly, Tommy managed to hit Hagler with his best shot and although initially staggered, Marv walked right through it. Marv then decided to just go for it and went on all out attack. The cut clearly meant that Marv had to do things quickly but that first big right hand from Hearns aside, I never got the feeling that Hagler wasn't in control.

Hearns did try to box on the outside in the second round but Hagler's ability to switch hit and his excellent footwork allowed him to cut off the ring and close the distance.

It doesn't matter how many times they fight, I would always pick Hagler to stop Hearns sooner or later. Hearns was great but Hagler was all wrong for him (likewise Hearns was all wrong for Duran).

Cheers (and well done on the site).

I listened to the fight on the radio live.I believed then and still do that Hearn's had the skillset to beat Hagler.Fast hands ,great boxer ,keep him at range.
That didn't happen.I think Tommy's machismo took over and he tried to knock Marvin out and early.Look at Hearn's pre-fight stare.He wanted to ko Marvin for sure.
That wasn't going to happen and Marvin took full advantage
Marvin fans will point out that he cut off the ring space ,forced Tommy to go toe to toe and cemented his legacy.That is also correct
As a Hearn's fan no excuses(like Tommy himself) the better man won on the day
No I dont think the cut made any difference.The tone of the fight was set in the first minute
Classic fight and two great fighters

What a great topic to start with! I too am a massive Hitman fan who will always want to know the answer to this question: Why no rematch? A close and crazy fight between two great fighters who never gave excuses. The viewing figures for a rematch would go through the roof.

Plus, look how Tommy fought in his next fight: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woWSl5PBVAs

I'd actually bet on Tommy to take it if they rematched, you could see he was enthusiastic for it from his words right at the start.

Maybe greatest round of all-time but probably not greatest fight due to the fact it only lasted 2 and a half rounds.

Arguello vs Pryor 1 and duran vs leonard 1 are above it in my opinion. Ali vs Frazier 1 and 3 are also better fights.

Hobo wrote:I've always wondered if he felt he was on borrowed time due to the cut and just carried on going for it, so to speak.

~Mr. Hearns heavily disrespected Mr. Marv in the lead up, so with the first bell, Mr. Marv tossed the proper safety first boxer suit and unleashed the killer knucks.

A thimble of blood hardly matters to an enraged beast bent on savage mayhem.

Talk about a tyny thimble of an Avatar!

skidd1 wrote:I listened to the fight on the radio live.I believed then and still do that Hearn's had the skillset to beat Hagler.Fast hands ,great boxer ,keep him at range.
That didn't happen.I think Tommy's machismo took over and he tried to knock Marvin out and early.Look at Hearn's pre-fight stare.He wanted to ko Marvin for sure.
That wasn't going to happen and Marvin took full advantage
Marvin fans will point out that he cut off the ring space ,forced Tommy to go toe to toe and cemented his legacy.That is also correct
As a Hearn's fan no excuses(like Tommy himself) the better man won on the day
No I dont think the cut made any difference.The tone of the fight was set in the first minute
Classic fight and two great fighters

Hagler was a master at cutting off the ring. He didn't give Hearns time to breath and time to box. Hagler wanted a war and Hearns had no choice but to go to war. Hagler was just too good for Hearns and the big difference maker was that Hagler had a rock for a chin and he knew it.

I agree that Hagler was too good at war for Hearns, but not too good fr Hearns full stop. Hearns' legs were gone by the second round, but you could see when he wanted too he'dmake Hagler follow him around and walk into punches. I think Tommy was more than capable of outboxing Hagler.