Why didn't Hagler ever move up in weight

Nothing to prove, plenty of money fights in his natural division and he would have suffered sizewise, he was not a big framed man.

 

...

 

It's a more efficient question to ask "Why would Hagler move up in weight?"

...Therefore, I will simply post this:

This content is protected

 

Elementary..... Hagler was a natural at 160..... Hagler never strained to make weight..... Also, Hagler weighed 157 to 159 pounds during some of them defenses.... Why move up when 160 is perfect???

MR.BILL:huhbbb

 

I think some fighters move up too soon and do not establish themselves at a weight for a long enough time and that hurts them. I think Hearns moved around too much around 1986-1990 and it hurt him. Hearns moved up and down 6 times from 86-90. From June 1986 to Nov. 88 he fought 6 times and moved up or down in weight 5 times, and one time in March 1987 beating Andries at 175, then moving back down to 160 to fight Roldan. So that is a case where moving up or down is not good. But on the other hand moving up for a guy like Hagler who stayed at middleweight for so long would have maybe showed his diversity to deal with bigger stronger men. Sometimes it is good to move up. It does add to the legacy. It added to Hearns legacy, yet staying at middleweight for longer might have added to his legacy there, where on this message board he is a little underrated at mid.

 

Hagler never expressed a desire to move up to 175.Does anyone have any idea why Carlos Monzon never moved up even though he was taller than Marvin and had a frame more suited for lightheavy than Hagler did?

 

Because Bob Foster, Jorge Ahumada, Victor Galindez, John Conteh, etc. etc. fought there. Not to mention it's not like he was running out of fights at Middleweight. I don't see the issue with dominating a single division, so long as it's a good one.

 

Hagler was solid like a Ford truck at 157 to 160 pounds........ Hagler was safe and secure there, as well as a legit haller, too.....

Carlos Monzon strained to make 160, but, he was really built for 168, yet it didn't exist in the 1970s.... 175 was a smidge too heavy for Monzon.... Plus, yes, Bob Foster was there.....

MR.BILL

 

Yes.My point is that why would anyone question Hagler's not moving up-as it's been done in contris here many times,but no one would question why Monzon never moved up?Both wanted to make their marks dominating their division and make a ton of money doing it.:good

 

Plenty have questioned why Monzon never moved up, just not in this thread, as it's about Hagler. But I digress. We're in agreement on the topic at hand.

 

Yeah, I don't think any middleweight in history would have looked forward to moving up and facing Bob Foster at 175.

 

...

 

Hagler was short, even for a Middleweight. He was only 5'9". He had long arms, though. He'd have to go up to 175, and that was too big for his frame, which was already thick.

 

I was in America to watch the Harding Andries fight and encountersd Hagler in a NY restaurant, I am 5-10 and 175 and was very surprised how amall he looked, it was something I didn't expect.

 

I can't believe that I'm responding to a 3 year old thread but the answer is that he was way too short. He would have done OK at 175 but he would not have held a belt.