Did Marvin Hagler dare to be great?

Oh dear You Moby.

The only person on this thread who looks clueless now is you because you obviously can't answer the question.

I posted, You quote me and call me pathetic, so I ask you to educate me, I wasn't rude or insulting, I expected to be told something I didn't know and I'm open minded enough listen to others on here and quite often I learn things I didn't know.

That's why I like this site, lots of very knowledgable boxing fans, unfortunately for me you are not one of them.

I simply asked you a question and you have a ridiculous mini meltdown and run away.

Anyway, have a great weekend.

 

You've not made one valid point yet. How did Hagler dare to be great? He didn't fight Duran until fight 62.

At fight 34, he was avenging a defeat to Willie Munroe.

 

Not sure. I can't remember who the Paul Smith of that generation was. Basically some glorified journeyman

 

Well all, I'm off to the pub.

When I come back I want to see Golovkin haters get their knickers in a twist over this.

toodle pip

 

This is obviously a GGG thread disguised as a Hagler thread, so let's address that question first.

This MW era is not weak. Golovkin could quite legitimately have had:

Sturm
Martinez
Chavez Jr
Cotto
Canelo
Eubank Jr
Froch
Ward

as fights on his resume. I would favour him over all on that list except for Ward, and given Ward's last performance, I'd give GGG a good shot at beating him too. Frankly I reckon that resume would be looking pretty damn fine right now, if the folks that he was in the pipeline to fight, HAD actually fought him.

To address Hagler: he had a lot of the same problems of being dodged. But folks in that era had larger stones than folks in this era, so he was actually able to have the legacy-defining fights that he needed, in the end. I think that asking Hagler who was a small MW, to step all the way up to LHW to face Spinks was unfair and unnessecary.

The same way, to ask GGG who is a small MW to step up all the way to LHW for legacy defining fights (there's really nobody at 168 who stands out to me. Maybe De Gale? Ramirez?) is also unfair and unnessecary. No offense, but Golovkin is a small dude next to the big cannons at 175.

Frankly if I were a fighter I'd be chuffed to be mentioned in the same breath as Hagler, Monzon, Greb, Hopkins and the rest. If that's not greatness, then what is?

 

The fighters he fought and beat made him great. Who has GGG beat let alone fought that is anywhere near guys like SRL, Duran Hearns or Antuofermo? That can't be refuted so just take your L like a man and move on.

 

GGG's whole resume is basically that of journeymen.

 

Right okay, well get back to me when you've thought of someone. Otherwise it kinda looks like you grabbed a gun and aimed at your shoe with this thread....

 

Yes this MW era is weak and many of those fighters listed aren't even middleweights

 

You cant compare Haglers opposition at 160 to GGG its not even close.

 

Why do you hide behind an alt Mr. Tough internet guy?

 

Hagler never moved up, for the most part, because there was no super middleweight division during his career. He would have had to go straight up to light heavy and there was no incentive or expectation to do so.

Hagler retired in 1987. The super middleweight division, as we know it, wasn't established until around 1988. Even then it wasn't considered especially prestigious and took a while to catch on. Hearns and Leonard were the first widely recognised super middle champs.

 

According to the dumbass newbie idiots on this board, no. His best wins are versus guys who came up in weight, and Hagler did not attempt to be great and challenge himself by moving up.

 

Stick to the f*ckin topic. YOU are making this about 3G more then the TS did.