If these 5 fights had happened 5 years earlier...

Some interesting opinions out there. Leonard-Hagler is the toughest one for me. Both we’re better fighters in 82, somebody made a great point about Hagler being much hungrier back then, by 87 he was sleeping in those “silk pyjamas”. I was actually watching the HBO build up to this fight and Michael Katz reaffirms this, feeling Hagler had definitely shown signs of decline by 87. Leonard’s style, speed and lateral movement would give any version of Hagler problems but the younger version of Hagler would be able to cope with it more effectively IMO. I think the fight would remain close and possibly controversial but this time Hagler gets the nod. I’ve always believed Mayweather would beat Pacquiao. Whenever Mayweather has a considerable advantage in terms of length he’s incredibly tough to beat, a fresher Pacquiao could potentially give him more problems but I still think Mayweather takes the decision. Calzaghe-Hopkins would play out pretty similar IMO, Hopkins counter punching and ring craft was always going to give Joe problems and Calzaghe’s work rate and activity was always going to give B-Hop issues. B-Hop did noticeably tire late in that fight so maybe at 38 he could up his activity. I think this is a split decision once again but this time B-Hop gets it. Holyfield simply had Tyson’s number from my perspective, whilst Mike was fresher both physically and mentally in 91, I still don’t believe he would have been able to outfight the teak tough Holyfield. I could see it maybe going the distance but I think Holyfield gets a late stoppage again. Tito was arguably the first guy to clearly beat Whitaker but by that point Sweet Pea was inactive and battling his demons. Whitaker was at his welterweights peak in 94 but Tito was still a potent force and has beat guys like Yori Boy Campas, Camacho Blocker and Carr. He wasn’t as seasoned as he was in 99 though and would likely fall victim to the defensive mastery of Whitaker. I could still seeing it being close on the cards though, I’ll say Whitaker by SD.

Oh Nice Question All change except for Calzahge Hopkins. Same result. Joe is too fast and slippery Hopkins can't get off and throws away rounds Hagler was waiting for his big moment. It was Hearns who was the sacrificial lamb in 1985. It would have been Leonard getting destroyed by the hungry angry prime Hagler. He would have worn him out by rd 9 and 10 and stopped him within 12 or later before Rd 15. Whitaker beats all fighters of the last 30 years to present in his prime. Tyson Holyfield I flip on because Holy wasn't as roided and lighter at 206, not as strong. Tyson was still a fighter and proved it against Ruddock, however not as great as the Kevin Rooney version who dominated. Manny was a buzzsaw like nothing we've ever seen. His constant pressure would make it difficult to contain. His busy ness would win close rounds. If Floyd got caught Manny would capitalize. Just an opinion

I think Harper beats Leonard but the results stay the same in the others.

I think a lot changes. I’ll take Hagler over Leonard, Pacquiao over Mayweather, Hopkins over Calzaghe and Whitaker over Trinidad. I think Holyfield has always had Tyson’s number so I think that’s the same fight. I think the hagler/Lenard fight is always going to be close.

I don’t know too much about Trinidad’s rise. But I would say out of the 4 remaining, the only difference in result is Hopkins by UD and maybe Tyson survives the 12.