Who ranks higher overall P4P: Marvin Hagler or Thomas Hearns

[RightJabLikeZab]

Not sure how this is even a debate. Not only did Hagler beat Hearns, but his only real loss is a questionable decision against SRL. Hearns has plenty of unimpressive losses in his prime.

The whole "he challenged himself, he moved up" is a bull**** storyline. Dude was over 6 foot tall and "moved up" to MW in his mid 20s.

So those other 2 losses on Hagler's record are fake ones apparently http://boxrec.com/boxer/8684

[just the facts]

I think both guys prime weight was 160 and at that weight Hagler won the H2H matchup, so he gets my vote.

[TonyGe]

It pains me but I have to give Hagler the edge P4P. I believe he was a more complete fighter. He could fight from either stance. He could fight on the inside or from the outside. Great combination puncher, fantastic chin. I totally respect Hagler but I like Hearns more.

[Chrismart]

2 of my absolute favourites.
I'd have to give Hagler the nod though.

[j0zef]

So those other 2 losses on Hagler's record are fake ones apparently http://boxrec.com/boxer/8684

Hence the word 'real' in my statement. A lot of guys take losses early on in their career. They don't mean anything.

Hopkins lost his first fight against a no name, Pac was knocked out by some bum, Monzon's losses came in early stages of his career. That list goes on and on. It always make me laugh when people try to hold early losses against a fighter's legacy or careers.

[E-Thug]

Leonard knocked Hearns out

Hearns got robbed of a win in the 2nd fight. In fact, Ray Leonard says himself in his book him and Tommy are 1 win a piece.

And hey, if Ray says it's a win, it's a win for Hearns as far as I'm concerned.

On topic, both fighters are outstanding but I'd personally say Hearn

[Hatesrats]

2 of my all-time favorites... But if i had to choose one. "Hitman" Hearns.
(The Duran KO, The 1st classic w/SRL & the win over Virgil Hill put him over the top for me)

[bigdunny1]

Easy Hagler..