Erik Morales vs. Manny Pacquiao was one of the matchups where everyone had an opinion, and assessments varied as to who the winner would be and how the fight would unfold. The divergent opinions were a signal that this was the best kind of matchup boxing fans could hope for, because no one really knew who was going to win and plausible scenarios for either man?s victory were made.
Uncertainty is what drives boxing, and not just in the ring. With all the talk and predictions it is easy to forget who was right, and who was way off base now. But I am not here to remind others of their predictions on Morales vs. Pacman – that is easily done by anyone with access to the web. Instead, I want to travel back into time and review another highly anticipated fight, and see how twenty minds of the time saw the outcome of the 1985 superfight shaping up between Marvin Hagler and Thomas Hearns.
A cross section of writers, boxers, promoters, and trainers were asked, and again opinions were evenly split. Parallels can be drawn between the two fights, with the most obvious being a big puncher moving up in weight to take on an established, iron chinned, and naturally larger champion. Pacquiao, as Hearns was then, was the sexy pick, with his flash outshining the blue-collar workmanlike brilliance of Hagler. A second parallel is not as obvious. Before Hearns’ fight with Hagler, he destroyed the legendary Roberto Duran in vicious fashion, while Hagler had struggled to win a decision against the same Duran. Morales and Pacquiao had their mutual bout with Marco Antonio Barrera to compare the two with. Obviously, now we know that how they did against the same opposition did not make a difference in either case. When in doubt, the boxing axiom of ‘styles make fights’ always applies – no matter how much we try to read around it.
Pat Putnam (Sports Illustrated senior writer… back when they covered boxing) – Pick: Hearns “Just coming straight against Marvin gets you killed. Hearns will fight him the way Ray Robinson would have fought him. I’ve always felt that Hearns and Leonard are the only two fighters of this era who had a chance to beat Hagler. Whatever happens you are going to have a classic.”
Putnam was right twice even though he picked Hearns to win. He was right that coming right at Hagler will get you knocked out…which Hearns proved for him. He also saw into the future where we all found out that Leonard did have what it took to defeat Hagler – although the debate still rages about that decision.
Angelo Dundee (Legendary trainer) – Pick: Hagler “Either man is capable of winning and that is what makes a great matchup. I like Hagler for the simple reason that Hearns is going into the higher weight division. Early on, Hearns will look like the winner, but he has a habit of deviating from his left jab at some point and when he forgets it he becomes fair game.”
Somehow, I think Dundee would have picked Morales for the same reasons.
Dr. Ferdie Pacheco (Boxing analyst for NBC at the time? when they covered boxing) -Pick: Hagler “Hearns has shown too much respect for good boxers who punch back hard. Hagler takes a tremendous shot, Hearns can’t knock him out. I think Hagler will win by outright kayo.”
A succinct and accurate assessment. In the end, the better chin won, which is usually the case when a great puncher meets a greater chin. Looking back, too many people were influenced by the way Hearns destroyed Duran in the run-up to this super fight.
Eddie Futch (Legendary trainer) – Pick: Hearns “I like Hearns in this fight because of his boxing ability. I managed Willie Monroe, one of the two boxers who beat Hagler, and Willie’s style was similar to Hearns. Hagler is great when you let him come to you and dictate the terms of the fight. But when he is forced to back up or counterpunch he is not effective.”
This shows how much of a pick ’em fight this was, with great minds like Futch and Dundee disagreeing on the outcome. Maybe Futch should be forgiven since he was one of the very few men to ever see Hagler lose in person.
Ed Schuyler (Associated Press boxing writer) – Pick: Hearns “I like Hearns, I think that he has matured physically and mentally. The kayo of Duran was a great confidence booster for Hearns. If Hearns doesn’t get to him early, he’ll box for the rest of the fight.”
Schuyler should have made this statement to describe the fight in Hagler’s favor for his assessment, instead of using it to justify a Hearns win. Again, we see the influence the brutal kayo of Duran had on the decision making process of the experts. Much like the exceptional win of Pacquiao over Barrera had for the current crop of prognosticators.
Larry Merchant (HBO Analyst… even back then) – Pick: Hagler “It comes down to temperament, ambition, and need. Hagler has fought and beaten every good middleweight for about a decade, this is a case of an outstanding middleweight champion fighting a smaller man.
To the amazement of all Merchant managed to make the correct pick without using an analogy.
Michael Katz (New York Times boxing writer who now writes for the boxing website of record) – Pick: Hagler “Hagler probably can’t lose to any middleweight around, but welterweights with fast hands, like Duran, can give him trouble. Can Hearns hurt Hagler? What it comes down to is a great middleweight fighting a great welterweight. Hagler is just too strong for Hearns.”
Katz gives the long form answer for ‘A good big man beats a good little man’.
Nick Charles (CNN sportscaster and now ShoBox color man) – Pick: Hearns “I think Hearns will win by decision if he listens to his corner and fights from the outside. He has the kind of strong jab that Marvin will have a hard time countering. I don’t see this as a collision fight, primarily because Hearns will move. But it won’t be a dull fight.”
Anyone who watches ShoBox knows Charles has fine-tuned his evaluation skills when it comes to boxing, and developed into their best blow-by-blow announcer. Although it must be said that if Hearns had tried to jab and move his chances would have improved dramatically.
Gil Glancy (CBS analyst and famous manager/trainer) – Pick: Hearns “Hagler just isn’t as good when he has to back up. Hagler will try to bully Tommy around the ring and work his body, but when a guy is Marvin’s age you never know when he is ready to be taken. If I have to pick a winner it would be Hearns by decision.”
It is a good thing Clancy was never asked about Bernard Hopkins’ defenses over the last five years, since age seems to be his determining factor.
Bobby Goodman (matchmaker for Don King) – Pick: Hagler “Tommy remains one of the finest welterweights in the world. But a middleweight? No!”
You see, if Hearns was with Don King he would have never lost to Hagler…or even worse, never fought him.
Jack Fiske (San Francisco Chronicle writer and senior boxing writer) – Pick: Hearns “Hearns by decision. I think Hearns is coming, and Hagler is going. I think Hagler has made a lot of money and is not as hungry as he used to be.”
Sounds like heresy now, especially when everyone talks with reverence about Hagler’s work ethic.
Ken Picking (USA Today boxing writer) – Pick: Hearns ?This could be a fight in which not one body shot is thrown; both men are strictly headhunters who are out to end it all as early as possible. Hearns will win with speed and stop Hagler on cuts in the 13th round.”
He had the cut portion right, but otherwise I value the opinion of the most recent USA Today boxing writer, Dan Rafael, much more.
Bennie Georgino (Manager-trainer) – Pick: Hearns “I like Hearns because of the way he has fought in his last couple of bouts. Hagler has already fought his good fights, and he has reached his peak. This is a case of a fighter on the way up, meeting a fighter on the way down. I look for a dull fight, one that will go the limit.”
A prediction that makes one wonder how Georgino was able to lead Danny Lopez and Alberto Davila to world titles.
Michael Spinks (Legendary light heavyweight, and decent heavyweight champion) – Pick: Hearns “I like Hearns, he’s got all the tools necessary to win this fight. He can outbox, or outpunch Hagler.”
Spinks shows that Hall of Fame boxers are not only inept as referees.
Emile Griffith (Hall of Fame boxer) – Pick: Hagler “I think it could be the best fight of 1985. Hagler will be up for Tommy Hearns, I like the way he switches from southpaw to orthodox in the blink of an eye. Hagler was just too careful with Duran, I see him knocking Tommy out.”
Good ol’ Emile, he redeems the pugs with his reasoning and pick.
Donald Curry (World welterweight champion) – Pick: Hagler “Hearns has his best chance of winning in the early rounds. He has to to go out and try to stop Hagler between the first and the sixth. The longer the fight goes, the better Hagler’s chances will become. I think that Hearns might have problems with Hagler’s left handed style because Thomas has not fought many southpaws.”
A third boxer breaks the tie, and gives the most accurate analysis, in favor of eventual winner Marvin Hagler.
Nigel Collins (Editor of The Ring) – Pick: Hagler “I always go for the guy with the shaven head.”
I wonder if Nigel amended that statement with the debut of Butterbean?
Russell Peltz (Hall of Fame boxing promoter) – Pick: Hagler “A late round kayo for Hagler, Hearns has not impressed me as a middleweight.”
Even if he had the time of the stoppage wrong, it would not have prevented him from turning in a winning ticket stub in Vegas.
Thomas Hearns – (The victim) – Pick: Hearns “I will knock out Marvin Hagler.”
Marvin Hagler – (The mugger) – Pick: Hagler “Somebody tell me when to laugh.”
What a blowout; Marvin even won the war of words.
