Hagler or Benn??

[The Noose]

Hagler of around 77/78 was the best 160lb fighter ever with his counter-punching.

The washed-up old slugger that edged out a washed-up old little guy Duran and a blown-up chinny Hearns (and a one-paced, one-dimensional Mugabi) was not Hagler at his best and is over-rated.

Benn blasted out Iran Barkley and Gerald McClellan which is very impressive, and Benn was more awesome than Minter and Sibson put together.

.

Thats is maybe one of the most biased opinions ive seen.

Benn beating Minter, Sibson, Barkley...IMPRESSIVE.

But Hagler beating Duran, Hearns and Mugabi....washed up, chinny, and one dimensional!

Foolish, foolish boy!

And still banned.

[stevenson]

omg benn was a bum. hagler would of killed him, who the **** is nigel benn one of the ****ty british fighters of the past i bet

[dep_violator]

Hagler.

He has something most fighters have and very few ever has.

A LOT OF ****ING HATE.

That hate makes his will so strong that he becomes unbreakable.

Hagler can kill a man in the ring. His chin is just about one of the best and he is relentless.

Hagler for me is in the top 5 all time p4p.

[masterdirector]

Benn was more exciting to watch for sure. I'd have picked him to beat Hagler but hell that'd probably be a damn good match.

[pr20]

Thankk You! You guys are killing me with this topic. benn was a really good fighter. One with such devastaing KO power that people reveree him even more which is often the case in the sport. but remember we are talking about a guy who was very one dimensional and also a guy who did not make adjustments well on the fly in fights. I don' think he would have even beat RJJ let alone Hagler! also we all can adree that styles make fights. That being the case it is important to know that all great fighter slightly adjust their styles and gameplans depennding on who they fight. if you check the era at the time he was king, there was no fighter with the rep as a KO king like Hagler challenging him but that does not mean that he could not handle it through adjustments. especially not with the chin he had.

Lastly it is totally unfair to compare fighters from different eras in any context other than their prime. So will peopel please stop talking about wild man Barkley catching a slower tommy hearns with a good shot and knocking him out. historically theya re not even in the same hemispher.

[MickyHatton]

Having been lucky enough to see both men fight live and to have been around when they both were fighting, I have to say Hagler without hesitation!

Benn was an awesome fighter W 42 (35 ko's) | L 5 | D 1 | Total 48, but Haggler was an all time great W 62 (52 ko's) | L 3 | D 2 | Total 67 .

[MickyHatton]

omg benn was a bum. hagler would of killed him, who the **** is nigel benn one of the ****ty british fighters of the past i bet

LOL, that makes a mockery of some of the great fighters he beat then!

McClennan and Barkley to name two!

[jabsRstiff]

Benn was more exciting to watch for sure. I'd have picked him to beat Hagler but hell that'd probably be a damn good match.

You try way too hard to be different....even if it means sounding like a complete fool.

Hagler would destroy Benn. Terible style matchup for Benn.

[sweeetscience]

"He certainly has more natural talent than I had and punches harder than I ever did. He's the one I'm really excited about." - Marvin Hagler on Nigel Benn in 1989

Marvin beats Benn from a wheelchair...in his priime after hid prime...forver and ever....Hagler and Benn in the same sentence...C'mon!!

[Gregster]

Benn definately beats 84-87 Hagler, Hagler wasn't in that class! 1977 was Hagler's best year.