Greater fight... Hearns-Hagler or Chavez-Taylor?

[Mintcar923]

These are two of my favorite fights. But I'm not quite sure which is the superior. Both had great action, significance, and drama. Which ranks higher?

[SCtrojansbaby]

Chavez vs Taylor easy

[jabsRstiff]

Hagler-Hearns was more explosive and wild.

Chavez-Taylor had the sustained action.....and in my opinion showcased all of the best of boxing in one fight.

[StarshipTrooper]

Chavez-Taylor was ruined by the screwjob at the end so Hagler-Hearns takes it.

Poet

[bojangles1987]

I enjoy Hagler-Hearns more.

[gatorDelux]

cant count the times ive seen hagler hearns oon both my hands....

i know how many times ive seen taylor chaves.....

3


hagler hearns

[fitefanSHO]

Both are GREAT fights but I think Chavez-Taylor is the better overall fight.

And I AGREE with what Richard Steele did, I think in a way he saved the fight. Let me explain...

Regarding the classic 1990 fight between Meldrick Taylor and Julio Cesar Chavez, and the so-called controversial stoppage by Richard Steele. The HBO crew would have had you believe Taylor was easily winning the fight when in fact he was losing, at least in my opinion, most especially with the knockdown in the 12th. Richard Steele's call, whether right or wrong, prevented (what would would have been) an actual bad decision on the score cards and it secured a win for the fight's deserved winner, Julio Cesar Chavez. Even with the knockdown factored in to the final scoring (10-8 across the board in the 12th for Chavez), Taylor STILL would have won that fight had Steele not stopped it, and that would have been a terrible decision on the score cards despite what HBO was selling, so I have always been glad that Steele did what he did because it really was the only way for the real winning fighter to win that fight at that point, though I am sure Steele did not know that when he did what he did, he just saw a hurt fighter not responding to direct questions. It should also be said that HBO did a terrible job of describing the action and putting it all into proper context. They wanted a "superstar on the threshold of greatness" and that's how they were determined to describe Taylor no matter what was happening in there.

If Steele had let Taylor finish the fight after the knockdown and the final bell rang 2 ticks later with Meldrick still standing, I don't see how anyone could possibly still have Taylor winning that fight, particularly with a 10-8 in the 12th round. Ask a child to look at Chavez and then look at Taylor. Ask that kid who won the fight. So the way I see it, that controversial stoppage, in addition to being the right thing to do in that moment, gave the fight to the rightful winner and prevented what would have been a silent injustice.

Judge Chuck Giampa had Chavez up by a point after 11 and would have awarded him the win if the fight had gone to the cards. The other two judges must have been listening to the HBO and not watching Chavez methodically DESTROY Taylor.

[bojangles1987]

Both are GREAT fights but I think Chavez-Taylor is the better overall fight.

And I AGREE with what Richard Steele did, I think in a way he saved the fight. Let me explain...

Regarding the classic 1990 fight between Meldrick Taylor and Julio Cesar Chavez, and the so-called controversial stoppage by Richard Steele. The HBO crew would have had you believe Taylor was easily winning the fight when in fact he was losing, at least in my opinion, most especially with the knockdown in the 12th. Richard Steele's call, whether right or wrong, prevented (what would would have been) an actual bad decision on the score cards and it secured a win for the fight's deserved winner, Julio Cesar Chavez. Even with the knockdown factored in to the final scoring (10-8 across the board in the 12th for Chavez), Taylor STILL would have won that fight had Steele not stopped it, and that would have been a terrible decision on the score cards despite what HBO was selling, so I have always been glad that Steele did what he did because it really was the only way for the real winning fighter to win that fight at that point, though I am sure Steele did not know that when he did what he did, he just saw a hurt fighter not responding to direct questions. It should also be said that HBO did a terrible job of describing the action and putting it all into proper context. They wanted a "superstar on the threshold of greatness" and that's how they were determined to describe Taylor no matter what was happening in there.

If Steele had let Taylor finish the fight after the knockdown and the final bell rang 2 ticks later with Meldrick still standing, I don't see how anyone could possibly still have Taylor winning that fight, particularly with a 10-8 in the 12th round. Ask a child to look at Chavez and then look at Taylor. Ask that kid who won the fight. So the way I see it, that controversial stoppage, in addition to being the right thing to do in that moment, gave the fight to the rightful winner and prevented what would have been a silent injustice.

Judge Chuck Giampa had Chavez up by a point after 11 and would have awarded him the win if the fight had gone to the cards. The other two judges must have been listening to the HBO and not watching Chavez methodically DESTROY Taylor.

What? You really think it would have been wrong for Taylor to get that decision? Been a long time, but I had Taylor winning like 8 rounds. He was outworking Chavez most the fight and landing serious bombs on him.

[fitefanSHO]

Chavez was landing harder and infinitely more damaging punches, he broke Taylor's face, in addition to beating him very badly to the body. And he closed the show with a crushing knockdown. He took all the fight from Taylor, and ruined him as a fighter. I have no doubt in my mind who won that fight, and who was winning.

[BigStereotype]

Chavez-Taylor and I don't even really have to think about it. That's one of the greatest fights of all time. Hagler-Hearns was really damn good, but I prefer a boxing match like jcc-taylor over a wild brawl.