How good was Barry McGuigan?

I agree with that Gaz. Starling was a really good fighter, i was totally impressed with his '87 win over Breland and he dominated Honeyghan. Styles make fights and i dont know the Honeyghan 'personal' story as much as you. Was he inconsistent in his training for fights ? Did he believe the hype after Curry ? Because your right, he should have been a bigger name considering the kind of fighter he was .. Always entertaining though with heavy hands ..

 

TBH I don't think it was too much the Curry win or his conditioning, after the Curry win he fought his mandatory,a guy called Maurice Blocker who was 6'1 and a good boxer, Honeyghan fought a very good fight and outpointed him so he still "had it in him".

The "problems" IMHO began when he fought Bumphus and Hatcher either side of Blocker, both were career 140 lbers having their first fights at welter. Bumphus was a boxer with no punch whose legs had gone after 300+ amatuer fights and Hatcher was a tough guy type pressure fighter but without a big punch. Predicably Honeyghan blew both fighters away in a combined total of under 3 rounds by just winging power punches. He tried that same against Vaca and lost his title to a guy he would have outboxed easily if he'd have tried, regained it against the same guy but then met Starling who I think is one of the most underrated fighters of "recent" (20 years ago!!:roll times.

At the time it seemed to me that after the two blowouts, Honeyghan saw what Tyson was doing in the heavyweights and changed his style to try to emulate that (he mentioned this in a few interviews) and went away from what had got him the title in the first place.

If you can get a copy of Honey-Mittee you'll see what I mean, that was a MASSIVE domestic fight at the time and Llloyd boxed beautifully and stopped Mittee around the 8th. Contrast that with the flights after Curry (Blocker execepted) and you can see a big difference.

 

Cheers for that Gaz, that was an interesting analysis of the Honeyghan career. I'll try and get the fights you've mentioned.
I love the way a thread that was posted 'How good was Barry Mcguigan?' can morph into a breakdown of Lloyd Honeyghan's career .. Forums are great !!

 

This thread is about Barry Mac???:huh:huh


Sorry Joe....:good

 

i reckon he had enough skill, intelligence, strength and power to beat naz. he was a clever attacking fighter who cut down the ring really well and never took a lot of shots. he was really powerful

I think nelson and co may have been too much but he would of give him a great fight

 

I think he'd have lost to Naz but beaten Ingle fairly easily but may have struggled with Robinson both due to styles.

 

McGuigan was a very good fighter, who took advantage of the transition of the division. Added to the fact he was beloved by the Island of Ireland and more importantly Irish Americans, Barry made the most of his talent.

 

Hey!! I'm just trying to get your thread back on track.....

 

Cowdell was better than that though. He'd moved from featherweight to super feather because of weight making difficulties a couple of years earlier and went back down to 126lbs at the end of his career because of the title chance and I think he really suffered for it.

Remember Cowdell took a prime Sanchez the full 15 rounds.

 

I used to love to watch McGuigan fight. Great body puncher.

 

Mcguigan was like Scott Harrison but with far better boxing skills and a wicked left hook. Mcguigan reached the top of the division at a time when boxing was generally of a much higher quality. Would Naz have beaten Juan La Porte or Pedroza- its debatable. I think Barry would have given Nelson a far better fight then he gives himself credit for. If he were boxing now he woul be h2h p4p number 1 or 2.

 

Hit the nail on the head.



As for McGuigan vs. Naz H2H Naz annihilates him.

I like McGuigan but he doesn't make my top 50 list of FW's.

 

In fact he took Sal to a SD :deal much better than THAT uppercut suggests