Hypothetically Speaking: Hagler vs Hopkins

[Ray Corso]

I didn't say he had 15 pound advantage. I stated he re-hydrated 15 pounds.

Hagler beats Hopkins anyone who studies them knows Hopkins work rate is nothing like Marvins. Hopkins is not a big puncher and will not back Hagler up.
Hopkins was better at 175 in my opinion, he was very green at 160 and his opponents for the most part allowed him to grow. He had no amateur back ground so he needed a learning curve at the beginning.

I know Bernard has a high rating but I don't have him any where near what most fans place him.

Ray

[them_apples]

I didn't say he had 15 pound advantage. I stated he re-hydrated 15 pounds.

Hagler beats Hopkins anyone who studies them knows Hopkins work rate is nothing like Marvins. Hopkins is not a big puncher and will not back Hagler up.
Hopkins was better at 175 in my opinion, he was very green at 160 and his opponents for the most part allowed him to grow. He had no amateur back ground so he needed a learning curve at the beginning.

I know Bernard has a high rating but I don't have him any where near what most fans place him.

Ray

not you, the article. and didn't Hopkins have 300 boxing matches in prison? (or at least quite a few)

I would pick Hagler over Hopkins as well, he had a far better jab than Hopkins and just in general was 10x better and more determined than anyone Hopkins fought in his entire career.

[Ray Corso]

I doubt he had 30!
I know a lot about "prison boxing" because I participated in the Somers Prison (Enfield Ct.) program for many years.
I brought members of my amateur team there prior to regional tournaments. The better boxers in the prison usually had one good round in them then they faded.
(not to much road work in there)

Prison programs were utilized back in the 60's through the early 80's then they were abolished. Not sure if there in use now, I would doubt it.

Ray

[billeau2]

I don't go into these threads with the intention of agreeing with Ray...he is a contankerious old timer! (said affectionately) lol...but once again his wisdom regarding both men is spot on.

Lets talk bernard, who I like as a fighter, a guy, like Winky Wright, who seldom gets mentioned these days, who had tricks and skills and could make the most out of his gifts. If you watch Hopkins in his stance his head to shoulders forms a false line. This is a nice old trick the guys used, it makes the head appear to be a better target than it really is, it also makes the fighter look, sort of like a puffer fish... puffed up and coming forwards when in fact they are in neutral mode...able to be back a few more inches from the opponent's punches and able to react to what is happening.

My point is that Hopkins is very skilled and I don't think he lost to Taylor either. BUT as Ray says, his condition was exceptional, yet he really could not consistently pressure guys. He was best when he was able to pick apart the better boxer punchers from a distance like he did time after time...Winky used the Peek a boo to do much the same thing... bide his time for an opening.

Hopkins faultered when he fought better pressure guys, like Kovalev... guys who could come at a faster cantino than the traditional boxers/punchers.

Hagler would pressure Hopkins too much and Hagler did not make the mistakes that guys like Calzighe make. Marvin also had more power...the fight would look a bit like the Kovalev fight frankly. I know Hopkins was older when he fought Kovalev but if one looks at his resume, which is fantastic, he feasted on boxer punchers, not pressure guys... Trinidad for example.

Marvin? What the idiots who say bad things about Hagler fail to realize is that his work rate was fa-nt-a-sticccc. Try to find a handful of pressure fighters at that weight that could do what Hagler did, most of them are smaller, occasionally a guy like Holyfield pops up who was another great energizer bunny, but its hard to keep poppin away at the rate that Marvin was able and it would be very hard for even a guy like Jones, to stand back and set up Hagler from a distance.

Lets use precedent. I know Jones was older but when he fought Glencoffe Another excellent pressure guy, he looked lost. he could not keep Glen Road Warrior off of him long enough to use his machinations... even at prime if he fought Hagler at an equal weight he would not have it easy because Marvin was a lot better than Glen Johnson and would not let Jones get off. Toney with all his skills could not ever hope to pressure Jones and as a counter puncher...signed his death warrant under the line that says "styles make fights"... I would rather walk around my old hood and say my name is "Lou Cipher and all Ricans I will lick!" than be a counter puncher facing Roy Jones!!

[ShoulderRoll]

Trying to trace the heavyweight title as far back as it goes. From ancient Greece to AJ. It's going to be called "A History of Violence"

Sounds interesting. Is there much continuity from the ancient Greek days to the time of James Figg?

[escudo]

Not quite sure yet. I'm at the early Roman Era in ancient greece. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Hagler > Hopkins

[billeau2]

Not quite sure yet. I'm at the early Roman Era in ancient greece. I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

Escudo

The Greek information comes mainly from olympic contests, the earliest of which was for each region to have champions whom competed at the main Olympic event.

There are legends such as the contest that had to be decided by allowing each contestent a free blow, I forget who the contestants were but the bout was won when a spearhand to the side killed one of the boxers.

The Greeks had boxing and wrestling but they also had a combo sport called pankraton. You can look up a gentleman by the name of Jim ARvantis, I would imagine he has an internet presence... He is an expert on Hellinistic Combat due to his attempt to reconstruct the fighting art of Pankraton.

My spelling might be off but the information is good. The Romans were much less interested in the gaming aspects of fighting because they had gladiators and because the Roman mind set was more practical.

When fighting in the caste system in Europe and the Middle Ages, the sword became pronounced. In mediaval times the Bastard Sword particularly, an ugly instrument that could be used in all ranges. We see many fencing traditions develop but not much boxing. There is some self defense with staff and wrestling as well during this time. I say this because James Figg was originally a fencer and when originally developing boxing as we know it he used a fencing vocabulary and system of reference for the Marquis of Queensbury. Boxing was a way to settle differences with no deaths.

Escudo: One theme you will see over and over again is that when combat becomes a real skill that is used regularly weapons quickly become involved. It also seems that when we look at all the traditions of Japan, South East Asia, even China to an extent... we see that weapons that are used at close quarters become a much needed skill. You can take a mental invalid and teach them to hold a 12 foot pike in front of him and thrust....he can neutralize a much more skilled opponent in so doing.

But when one is taught to use the blade and the body at close quarters the skills used are magnified. A tribal Kali knife man would have no problem taking on ten men given a few bladed weapons... One Samurai legend for the development of Kukishin Ryu (the art of nine demons) details how a body guard when defending the emporer, had his long staff (roku shaku bo) of six feet, split in two, whereupon he "fought like nine demons" to chase off the attack on the empror. This legend embodies the transformation of a long weapon into an effective short weapon.

Looked at combat this way the hands and feet become another weapon. Indeed this is how Karate and Chinese boxing become understood historically. But boxing takes another turn, the fist as a weapon becomes a very distinct development with very few parallels. I would be aware that in Hawai particularly there was a polyglot of cultures where many different martial ways were set against each other. You can see historical records of Henry Osaka Dan sen Ryu Jiu Jutsu and other Ju Jutsu guys in the 1920's fighting against boxers, wrestlers, etc. This is interesting as it gives a perspective on how the arts of pugalism came against each other and developed.

Finally it is good to be aware of Brazil a land where there were a lot of combatives competing against each other regularly. Luta Livre, Catch Can, Boxing, Judo, Jiu Jitsu, etc! brazil's culture was a crucibal of machismo competition. We don't look at Brazil enough as a major contributor to the pugilistic arts. It was in Brazil that Judo was allowed to develop infettered by the second world war. It was in Brazil that a vital tradition of promoting wrestling, and other forms of fighting was patronized by a paying public.

These are a few things I would look at, hope it is helpful.

[escudo]

Escudo

The Greek information comes mainly from olympic contests, the earliest of which was for each region to have champions whom competed at the main Olympic event.

There are legends such as the contest that had to be decided by allowing each contestent a free blow, I forget who the contestants were but the bout was won when a spearhand to the side killed one of the boxers.

The Greeks had boxing and wrestling but they also had a combo sport called pankraton. You can look up a gentleman by the name of Jim ARvantis, I would imagine he has an internet presence... He is an expert on Hellinistic Combat due to his attempt to reconstruct the fighting art of Pankraton.

My spelling might be off but the information is good. The Romans were much less interested in the gaming aspects of fighting because they had gladiators and because the Roman mind set was more practical.

When fighting in the caste system in Europe and the Middle Ages, the sword became pronounced. In mediaval times the Bastard Sword particularly, an ugly instrument that could be used in all ranges. We see many fencing traditions develop but not much boxing. There is some self defense with staff and wrestling as well during this time. I say this because James Figg was originally a fencer and when originally developing boxing as we know it he used a fencing vocabulary and system of reference for the Marquis of Queensbury. Boxing was a way to settle differences with no deaths.

Escudo: One theme you will see over and over again is that when combat becomes a real skill that is used regularly weapons quickly become involved. It also seems that when we look at all the traditions of Japan, South East Asia, even China to an extent... we see that weapons that are used at close quarters become a much needed skill. You can take a mental invalid and teach them to hold a 12 foot pike in front of him and thrust....he can neutralize a much more skilled opponent in so doing.

But when one is taught to use the blade and the body at close quarters the skills used are magnified. A tribal Kali knife man would have no problem taking on ten men given a few bladed weapons... One Samurai legend for the development of Kukishin Ryu (the art of nine demons) details how a body guard when defending the emporer, had his long staff (roku shaku bo) of six feet, split in two, whereupon he "fought like nine demons" to chase off the attack on the empror. This legend embodies the transformation of a long weapon into an effective short weapon.

Looked at combat this way the hands and feet become another weapon. Indeed this is how Karate and Chinese boxing become understood historically. But boxing takes another turn, the fist as a weapon becomes a very distinct development with very few parallels. I would be aware that in Hawai particularly there was a polyglot of cultures where many different martial ways were set against each other. You can see historical records of Henry Osaka Dan sen Ryu Jiu Jutsu and other Ju Jutsu guys in the 1920's fighting against boxers, wrestlers, etc. This is interesting as it gives a perspective on how the arts of pugalism came against each other and developed.

Finally it is good to be aware of Brazil a land where there were a lot of combatives competing against each other regularly. Luta Livre, Catch Can, Boxing, Judo, Jiu Jitsu, etc! brazil's culture was a crucibal of machismo competition. We don't look at Brazil enough as a major contributor to the pugilistic arts. It was in Brazil that Judo was allowed to develop infettered by the second world war. It was in Brazil that a vital tradition of promoting wrestling, and other forms of fighting was patronized by a paying public.

These are a few things I would look at, hope it is helpful.

Thanks for all the information I really appreciate you taking such an interest in pointing me in the right direction but I am going to try as hard as possible to stick to boxing as much as possible. It's my first book and there is hopefully going to be plenty of time to explore the development of martial arts at another time in other books. While researching the post catholic boxing ban I found (perhaps not suprisingly) that Russia had a thriving boxing scene in the middle ages.I didn't know this before I started and so this is going to take a massive amount of research.

The asian martial arts are very much their own entity and the way they approach martial arts was quite a bit more martial than most other cultures. Duels were fought to the death most often with weapons. I have read the book of five rings and the hagakure they contain many useful hints that also translate to unarmed martial arts. The Europeans placed emphasis more on Calvary and the sword but it seems western Europe didn;t have much of a boxing culture until the rise of the london prize ring and james Figg.

As far as Brazil I'm trained in BJJ and I know the lineage of the Gracie family and that they adapted Judo tught to them by mitsuyo maeda. As well as both Luta Livre (which lost the Gi) since many of it's practitioners were from the lower class. As well as the development of Capoeira which was created to look like a dance so slave masters wouldn't think there slaves were learning to fight. They also had a love for the straight razor as I recall.

Thanks for the insight as alway bill, you are always good to talk to.

[billeau2]

Thanks for all the information I really appreciate you taking such an interest in pointing me in the right direction but I am going to try as hard as possible to stick to boxing as much as possible. It's my first book and there is hopefully going to be plenty of time to explore the development of martial arts at another time in other books. While researching the post catholic boxing ban I found (perhaps not suprisingly) that Russia had a thriving boxing scene in the middle ages.I didn't know this before I started and so this is going to take a massive amount of research.

The asian martial arts are very much their own entity and the way they approach martial arts was quite a bit more martial than most other cultures. Duels were fought to the death most often with weapons. I have read the book of five rings and the hagakure they contain many useful hints that also translate to unarmed martial arts. The Europeans placed emphasis more on Calvary and the sword but it seems western Europe didn;t have much of a boxing culture until the rise of the london prize ring and james Figg.

As far as Brazil I'm trained in BJJ and I know the lineage of the Gracie family and that they adapted Judo tught to them by mitsuyo maeda. As well as both Luta Livre (which lost the Gi) since many of it's practitioners were from the lower class. As well as the development of Capoeira which was created to look like a dance so slave masters wouldn't think there slaves were learning to fight. They also had a love for the straight razor as I recall.

Thanks for the insight as alway bill, you are always good to talk to.

Brazil is interesting..the capoestas put razors between the toes! lol. Martial arts wise there is a point where boxing is more part of that development. You are quite right about Figg and how that started boxing off as a new development. The Greeks did have boxing though and you might be able to cull some more info about that. Intersting thing about Japan is that even though duels were fought to the death it was never a requirement. If harm could be avoided, it generally was. This is the initial reason for Boken (wooden training weapons). But Japanese arts do not like the closed fist as much as the empty hand... generally.

Chinese arts are tricky which is why I did not mention them. There are many boxing arts and they bare similarity but have different goals.

Brazil is a different story. In addition to being a hotbed of Japanese martial arts activity from when the Portugese befriended the Japanese, because of the desire for spectator sports and the lack of prohibition there was a lot of promotion of all the fighting arts in Brazil, including boxing, though not as much as some of the other fighting arts.