Marvin Hagler vs Gennady Golovkin

Hagler would have destroyed all of Bud`s welter opposition and could match Bud`s reach, his 75 inch reach would be too much for any welter, his constant long jab would be far too much. Bud has a 74 inch reach and GGG only has a 70 inch reach.

 

Really you post this rubbish when Hagler beat much better than Lil g like Hearns, Duran, Leonard((I gave it to Marvelous Marvin), Bernie Briscoe, Eugene Hart, Sugar Ray Seales, John Mugabi etc to name a few. Lil g could not beat Canelo in 3 attempts then makes stupid excuses with his catch phrase “come on guys”. As per your name put a “Cork” in it Sir.

 

RJJ
Michael Nunn
James Toney

At their best would all have a good chance at beating Hagler, they possess speed and defense which Hagler didn't face during his title reign.

 

Actually plenty of tough contenders.

Earl Hargrove
Frank The Animal Fletcher
James Green
Curtis Parker

These were all highly rated tough contenders.

 

Hagler also had alot more professional fights than Golovkin 67 to 45 and many more tough fights aswell.

 

Golovkin had like 350 amateur fights. Perhaps Hagler's professional fights were tough because he was learning on the job Golovkin was already old by Hagler's standards when he started as a pro.

 

First of all the man was 25-0, all KO’s before he faced Hagler. When he did face Hagler, he was a man on a mission and dead set on winning that fight and busted up Hagler in a way that was never done before. That fight was more brutal than Hagler/Hearns and neither fighter was the same afterwards. He was stopped in his next fight in under 3 rounds and never really got any other big names besides Norris and McClellan. IMO, he would have had a far more successful career if he hadn’t been broken by Hagler. When he was at his best, he was a freak.

 

Amateur fights are different to professional ranks though, Hagler was fighting tough opposition before he become champion vs the likes of Monroe, Finnegan, Briscoe, Seales, Watts. Golovkin didn't have alot of wear and tear in professional ranks like Hagler did, Golovkin's first semi competitive fight was vs Murray. And then he obviously had competitive fights vs Jacobs, Canelo, Derevyanchenko, etc.

My point is Golovkin was more fresher than Hagler was at the age Hagler retired at.

 

50/50

 

I agree but - 350 of them?
,

Sure those guys were good. GGG was fighting dudes like Bute and Dirrell in the ams though. No joke either.

The obvious counter argument to that is: Golovkin was that damn good. Guys like Murray and Macklin gave the previous big dog at 160, Martinez, all he could handle. Proksa was rated by some as better than Pirog at the time believe it or not. Golovkin ran over them like a truck.

Sure - at what is an old boxing age of like 35+. Hagler was done at 32.

Sure, no argument from me that GGG was better at 32 than Hagler. But my point still stands that his hard fights were later, at an age when boxers are eyeing retirement.

 

Agreed.

Mugabi was a monster at that time and was dead set on KOing the fading Marvelous One. Even though Hagler was at the end of brutal career in which he'd absorbed untold amounts of punishment, he came through like a true champion and KO'd his adversary.

But he was done.

 

None of those fighters faced a jab like Hagler`s, Nunn was very easy to hit when he fought Toney, Jones was bigger than the middleweights he fought.

 

Amateur fights are only 3 rounds in length.

 

He was much bigger than those fighters.

 

Hagler in this era UD win,Hagler back in his era stoppage win. But as mentioned would Hagler even be a middleweight in todays era ?