Who was a more exciting fighter Marvin Hagler or Prince Naseem Hamed?

[Mayweather41-0]

Who was a more exciting fighter Marvin Hagler or Prince Naseem Hamed?

[Evil Abed]

This seems kinda random.

But Prince.

He was crazy and unpredictable.

Hagler was steady and just very good at everything.

[Las Vegas,]

I've watched a few Hagler fights, and he's pretty exciting. I'm maybe biased due to the fact that I grew up with the Prince. I gotta go with the Prince though.

[Albo Dakkid]

For people that don't really follow boxing it would be Prince Naseem. They would love how entertaining this guys is.

But inside the ring Hagler is far more entertaining. Hagler was like a welterweight Joe Fraizer who never backed up and was packed full of action. Watch his fights against duran, hearns

[tyger]

Hamed was more colorful, especially his entrances.
But in the ring, during the fight, Hagler wins hands down.

[Thread Stealer]

For people that don't really follow boxing it would be Prince Naseem. They would love how entertaining this guys is.

But inside the ring Hagler is far more entertaining. Hagler was like a welterweight Joe Fraizer who never backed up and was packed full of action. Watch his fights against duran, hearns

No he wasn't. This "Hagler was a brawling pressure fighter" myth really needs to stop.

Hagler (A middleweight, not a welterweight) was a boxer-puncher who used lateral movement, his jab, and then opened up with combinations. He'd jump on his opponent when he had them hurt (Scypion, Lee, Hamani), but he was much more of a patient boxer who used lateral movement, or in the case against Briscoe, boxed on the backfoot, than some Joe Frazier-esque pressure fighter.

Mayweather walked Judah and Mosley down behind a high guard. Was Mayweather a pressure fighter? Was he a "walk you down behind a high guard" type of fighter? No, that wasn't his usual style. Much like the Hearns fight wasn't Hagler's usual style.

It was perhaps the greatest display of a fighter switching from his usual style, and doing it to perfection, against an ATG in Hearns.

[FkDaHtrs]

Hamed was more colorful, especially his entrances.
But in the ring, during the fight, Hagler wins hands down.

I'm sure most will agree with that.

[Albo Dakkid]

No he wasn't. This "Hagler was a brawling pressure fighter" myth really needs to stop.

Hagler (A middleweight, not a welterweight) was a boxer-puncher who used lateral movement, his jab, and then opened up with combinations. He'd jump on his opponent when he had them hurt (Scypion, Lee, Hamani), but he was much more of a patient boxer who used lateral movement, or in the case against Briscoe, boxed on the backfoot, than some Joe Frazier-esque pressure fighter.

Mayweather walked Judah and Mosley down behind a high guard. Was Mayweather a pressure fighter? No, that wasn't his usual style. Much like the Hearns fight wasn't Hagler's usual style.

It was perhaps the greatest display of a fighter switching from his usual style, and doing it to perfection, against an ATG in Hearns.

I don't know hagler like that cause I'm not from that era but I've watched a few of his fights and highlights and he was definitely more of a brawler and puncher than a boxer and had a very exciting style


The two of his legendary fights which i have wattched against Duran and Hearns he looked like a straight up brawler.

[PinoyZoi]

Hard one. I would say Naseem entrances is out of this world, but Hagler is just an amazing street brawler when hes in the ring.

[King of Sting]

This seems kinda random.

But Prince.

He was crazy and unpredictable.

Hagler was steady and just very good at everything.

Well put.

For people that don't really follow boxing it would be Prince Naseem. They would love how entertaining this guys is.

But inside the ring Hagler is far more entertaining. Hagler was like a welterweight Joe Fraizer who never backed up and was packed full of action. Watch his fights against duran, hearns

Bull****. To each his own really. You're basically suggesting that the folks that would prefer to watch NAZ don't know **** about boxing. Being entertaining has nothing to do with someone's boxing acumen.



If you wanna watch a high wire act, then NAZ's matches are the ones to watch. If you wanna learn something then Hagler's fights are the ones people should watch.

Anything can be entertaining, to each his own, really. No one is more correct than the other.

For me, when NAZ what at the peak of his popularity, he was very exciting to watch, the stuff that he does, I've never seen anything like it up to now. Even comparing him to fighters from older generations. He remains truly one of a kind. I don't consider him an ATG like Hagler. But, watching NAZ in n' out of the ring was like watching a circus act.