Who wins hagler vs bhop prime vs prime mw

[dontrell]

You didn't have to dance to give Hagler problems. Plus, Hopkins could move very well. And if you're referring to the second Echols fight, yes it got ugly. But in the first fight Hopkins boxed beautifully.

In Hopkins/Echols 1, Echols had no problems getting Hopkins against the ropes, and even had success, landing on Hopkins. He also landed a good amount of inside shots on Hopkins.

You can't compare even compare Echols to Hagler. There are things for Hagler to exploit in a fight with Hopkins. Hopkins could move a little bit, but not at the pace you'd need like a SRL. His inside game would be nullified by Hagler's devastating shots on the inside.

Also, a younger Hopkins wasn't as seasoned as an older Hopkins. He was much more reckless in there. Another thing Hagler could exploit.

[DAZED 2.0]

So was Hopkins, judging by what I've seen from both I would actually say Hopkins was better on the inside.

Yea it's weird how that's overlooked.

[dontrell]

So was Hopkins, judging by what I've seen from both I would actually say Hopkins was better on the inside.

They're both great in fighters, but Hagler was a tremendously better body puncher. He hit with so much more force.

[dontrell]

Yea it's weird how that's overlooked.

That's never overlooked. That's one of Hopkins' best attributes.

[RiC-DiC]

Hopkins would frustrate the **** out of Hagler.

[Doctor_Tenma]

Yea it's weird how that's overlooked.

Extremely, for as long as I've been watching boxing I would say James Toney is the only fighter I can say applied himself on the inside better than Hopkins but that's about it. Not Ward nor Mayweather in my opinion and those guys are good.

[DAZED 2.0]

In Hopkins/Echols 1, Echols had no problems getting Hopkins against the ropes, and even had success, landing on Hopkins. He also landed a good amount of inside shots on Hopkins.

You can't compare even compare Echols to Hagler. There are things for Hagler to exploit in a fight with Hopkins. Hopkins could move a little bit, but not at the pace you'd need like a SRL. His inside game would be nullified by Hagler's devastating shots on the inside.

Also, a younger Hopkins wasn't as seasoned as an older Hopkins. He was much more reckless in there. Another thing Hagler could exploit.

A younger Hopkins? The question referred to his prime, not his age. Hopkins was at his peak when he was around 33. An incredible fighter then.

And yea, Echols caught Hopkins by surprise early on but Bernard adjusted and easily outboxed. Echols landed nothing of note after the first few rounds.

[DAZED 2.0]

Extremely, for as long as I've been watching boxing I would say James Toney is the only fighter I can say applied himself on the inside better than Hopkins but that's about it. Not Ward nor Mayweather in my opinion and those guys are good.

Completely agree.

[dontrell]

A younger Hopkins? The question referred to his prime, not his age. Hopkins was at his peak when he was around 33. An incredible fighter then.

And yea, Echols caught Hopkins by surprise early on but Bernard adjusted and easily outboxed. Echols landed nothing of note after the first few rounds.

What? He stunned him in the 12th round, and almost got the KD.

Echols was very game in the 1st fight.

[DAZED 2.0]

What? He stunned him in the 12th round, and almost got the KD.

Echols was very game in the 1st fight.

Yea in the last few seconds he landed one right that appeared to stun Hops. Doesn't change the fact that the previous six rounds (and for much of the 12th), he struggled to lay a glove on him.