Marvellous Marvin Hagler Vs James Toney at Middleweight/Super Middleweight?

It's a tough call ... we know Marvin was a monster but pretty much right after him a different breed of middleweights started to show up than anything he ever fought ... Toney, Jones, Nunn , very fast, strong, elusive natural middleweights opposed to type that Marvin feasted on ... Toney was extremely fast, had excellent defense and an iron chin ... he was faster than Marvin but the prime Marvin was close ... Marvin had possibly one of the best all time chins so I'm pretty sure he takes takes Toney's best ... I'm just going to say Marvin outworks him in a tough , close bout where he gets hit, misses a lot but throws more shots and outworks Toney who at times had a bot of Eddie Mustafa in him, a bit too cool for his own good ..

 

If both are in form, Toney is too physical for Hagler and has too much technique on both offense and defense. Hagler is a pure boxer but Toney is probably one of the most sophisticated technicians ever at his peak, and also has greater physical strength, punch selection, reflexes, etc. If you're banking on Toney pulling a Tiberi, then yeah, Hagler wins 10/10. I think Toney would beat him on the outside and beat him worse on the inside. I just don't see how Marvin could impose himself on James.

 

Weight classes have been conquered hundreds of times across history.

Minority barely reflects it. To think Toney has no style disadvantage vs Hagler and also has a style advantage over Usyk is beyond asinine.

I don't want anything and never did. If you look back i ignored your picks whilst you wanted to debate mine. It's really that simple.

 

Weight classes have been conquered and James Toney conquered from middleweight to heavyweight. However you are basically asserting that a middleweight would beat a light heavyweight, little different.

You are judging a lot. But are not you the one who picked Hopkins over Hagler?

 

I think people forget just how good a 100% motivated Toney really was. But Hagler was a different kind of animal. I think I would slightly favor Toney’s speed, counters and reflexes but Marvin has a very good chance to prove me wrong.

 

Hagler a close hard fought UD at middleweight. It will be a tough day at the office for Marvin that's for sure.

I'm not gonna argue people siding with Toney on this one because of how good he was when he was on.

 

Well we used to see ATG welterweights beat ATG middleweights so it's certainly not a stretch.

What Toney did from 160 all the way thru Heavyweight is amazing, absolutely it is. Jones did the same of course while also gaining a strap at heavyweight. Toney did it via awesome durability and great skill. He's a technician not a weight bully or someone that uses weight to wear someone down. As he went up in weights his opposition on the whole got slower and less mobile which played nicely into the attributes I've already stated. His problems throughout his career usually came against faster mobile types, big tough heavy slower guys played right into his skillset thanks to that great durability of Toney's allowing them to.

So i still see a technical battle vs Hagler at 168. Could Toney win? Perhaps. Could Hagler win? Perhaps. It's hard to say conclusively either way.

Toney if he was disciplined like a Hopkins could have fought at 168 for a long long time IMO. I don't see him as a 200 pound guy just busting to get out. Mike McCallum made 154 for 6 1/2 years. It's fair to say he was a natural 154 pounder given his results there and the most one would be able to argue, on a whim, is that middleweight would have been his upper ceiling weight wise if he wanted it to be.

Now McCallum fought Toney north of 180 in the last fight of his career. Whether he had a reasonable frame to carry it is mostly irrelevant as he was a natural 154 or 160 tops and they were manufactured pounds above that. Despite fighting Toney at this manufactured weight and while miles past his best the world didn't cave in and Toney didn't knock him out or anything like that.

That's where i am giving Hagler leeway. There's a decent chance IMO he overcomes these pounds.

Yes i did pick Hopkins. Was that the pick you tried to call me out on and complained i pick Hopkins all the time? I still pick Hopkins in a razor close one. I think he'd go better than Toney vs Hagler at 160. Better judges than i have also expressed the opinion Hopkins would win and they also pick him over Monzon.

Personally i'd pay good money to see Toney vs Monzon. While i wouldn't pick Toney i'd love to see how such a battle would unfold. It would be fascinating.

 

I love this thread as there are good points from both sides.. If Hagler goes up for the first time for this fight, he his not weighing 168 , and will lose speed... I think of this matchup as a Pryor SRL fight .. Pryor aint coming in at 147 . and Hagler probably comes in at 165 .. imo ... Now my example isnt the best because Hagler is way better than Pryor and Toney is no SRL .. but I think for the most part, both fighters will lose noticeable movement and speed carrying around the extra weight for the 1st time... imo

where are ya @robert ungurean
havent seen your post on this yet

 

Leonard went from 145 straight to 153 against Kalule and still was extraordinarily fast. I also think back to Leonards pre title days when he slipped in at 153 clothed against Marcos Geraldo who weighed the full 160 and was estimated by one guy to have been 165 in the ring. Raty was cat like fast as usual in a fight. I believe Geraldo was Ring ranked around #4 at 160 at the time they fought so it was a bit of a risk. Of course the talent gap is bigger than it is in this thread but i find it notable nonetheless.

I just don't think it's a foregone conclusion at 168. It would be a fascinating fight that would IMO give us an insight into a lot of what Blade and myself are debating.

 

all good points as usual.. since they miss anyway given their careers. there's just too many variables involved, We already saw what going up and down in weight his entire career did for a Tommy Hearns ... it's a difficult thing to do as the who and when is most of it .... I will say I generally favor a fighter that has settled in over a first time mover .. but as you point out that has been foiled countless times .... I mean at the end of the day its a close 50- 50 fight
thats why I said I really like this thread because its realistic ,, Hagler takes the fight ... Its not like the million threads that are started on how Mayweather schools SRL, Hearns, Hagler , and SRR, all fights he doesn't even take , so why start the thread .... I mean this thread really is a breathe of fresh air

 

Hagler is the type of guy, to me, who would be squeaking by a prime Toney or Hopkins in fights that shift and turn all over the place but are ultimately decided by one guy more consistently taking calculating risks to score enough to get the job done with exceptionally crafty, talented, durable guys. Because he's got those attributes and a better ability to get off more. And by get off, I do mean orgasm. There's a reason they called him Multipleous Marvin Hagler. That was even his legal name. He changed it after earning that nickname in adult films done in Italy. Where they really loved them some Hagler.

 

Fair calls all around surf. It's an interesting thread given it dictates two weights....which is why there's quite a few extra replies.

 

What type of criticism would Hagler have if he squeeked by Tiberi? Is that fight overlooked? I doubt it--it would be the sole reason why he would lose a fight to Toney.

The same could be said for the McCallum fights---if it was Marvin barely getting by, just what would the hindsight be?

Marvin's ability to switch--especially earlier in his title defenses is being criminally overlooked.

 

Well the votes that actually picked a winner at this point are 22 to 4 for Hagler so the fat ladies singing pretty loud tho the poll is ambiguous due to two weights.

 

I got Toney, speed difference will be too much