It seems as if no one, or few people at least, give him a chance at beating Monzon, for example. I'm not saying the consensus is that he would be dominated, but when a name is brought up to beat King Carlos its usually Hopkin's from what I've seen. Is it the fact that, unlike Hopkins and Carlos, he lacks a large frame and the potential to carry more weight? Is it the fact that unlike Hopkins and Monzon he "failed" to destroy his smaller opposition? Such as Duran and Leonard? Thoughts? Is he becoming even mildly underrated?
Marvin Hagler - Is He Becoming Underrated? If Bernard Hopkins is being mentioned in the same breath, then the answer is YES.
On ESB definitely. I've even seen a thread in which some morons picked Calzaghe to win over Marvin. That's f*****g ridiculous.
He's one of the most well rounded and complete fighters ever. Many other fighters are as well but Hagler could switch and fight effectively from either stance. He was an excellent boxer with a good defenese, decent speed, and had very good power. He was an extremely durable fighter and had one of the best chins in the history of the sport. But he was hardly one dimensional.
Both Hagler and Monzon are overrated look at their skill sets, they are very good but they arent the best of the best by any means at 160 or P4P
Hagler was ready for his title shot in 1977. Had Monzon or Valdez given him a shot he would have broken Monzon record easily. Hagler failed to destroy Duran because Duran was solid at the weight and was a much better boxer than Napoles. Does anybody believe Hagler wouldn't destory Napoles? Hagler failed to destroy Leonard because Hagler was well past his prime and Leonard is slick. Does anybody believe Monzon would destroy Leonard? I don't. Yes, I believe people do underrate Hagler.
how are they not the best of best @ 160 or Pd 4 Pd, explain (I think that is one of the most stupid comments I've heard on here
I give him a great shot against Monzon who I love but feel is slightly overated. I feel Hagler was faster and harder hitting. Even thought Monzon was 3" taller his reach was only one inch longer. I think Hagler is top five no question.
I agree. I don't feel Monzon has the speed to keep Hagler off of him. He does have great reach, but his hand and footspeed were pretty average. That's what you need to beat Hagler and Monzon didn't have it. I would favor Hagler by decision. Hagler Vs Roy Jones would be another story of course.