Was Marvin Hagler Denied Greatness?

He's a ****ing bum

 

I dont think the 'loss' to SRL affects Haglers greatness in any way at all.
It was a controversial loss after all, its not like he was beaten from pillar to post.

Haglers a genuine ATG with nothing to be ashamed of and he retired at the right time. He had nothing else to prove

 

The loss to Leonard has to effect his standing -and I don't even think he lost! That fight exposed Hagler's very real strategic limitations and his failure to adapt during a bout.

 

yes dodgy loss



**** off

 

He'd already cemented his legacy before the Leonard fight, even if he'd got the decision it would of been clouded in controversy the other way, plenty thought Leonard won it.
It probably did him a favour in the long run. I don't think he had too many fights left in him at the top level anyway, better to go out like that than to one of the young guns of the time.

 

SRL didn't put him into retirement, if anything he kept him out of it.

 

The two options are losing a close fight to an atg in his last ever fight or beating a ww who was coming out of a 5 year retirement.

Not a huge difference in legacy there.

 

Don't me wrong, a win is always better than a loss but a win over leonard wouldn't have meant much to me.

 

There's very definitely a third - "losing a close fight to a ww who was coming out of a 5 year retirement."

 

That was option 1.

 

agreed. also frankly how much his ego could affect his performance

 

Losing a debatable decision to Leonard doesn't effect his standing at all.
If he'd blasted Leonard out in 2 rounds it would have added nothing to his legacy either.

If anything effects Hagler's greatness it is his choosing to defend his title after a 13 months absence against a challenger who had done nothing to earn his shot, and keeping guys like Herol Graham and Iran Barkley and James Kinchen etc. on the sidelines.
Obviously, for the money it is understandable.

 

i have to disagree. blasting leonard out in 2 rounds made sense, losing a decision did not. his performance, regardless of scoring, needs to be considered and that shows flaws even within the context of his own age and inactivity.

 

Hmmmm. Option 1 it was deemed "losing a close fight to an atg". In option 2 it was "a ww who was coming out of a 5 year retirement." The descriptions and therefore the meaning are quite different for mine.

I get your drift, that's what the perception would have been if he actually won. I agree. In losing however many still see SRL as that ww who was coming out of a 5 yr retirement. Well, that's basically what it was.

 

Well leonard was both a ww and am atg so the label is neither here nor there.

If he beats leonard it doesn't matter because it's a 5 year retired ww.

If he loses then leonard becomes an atg and it's hagler's last fight so it doesn't matter that much neither.