Emile Griffith vs Marvin Hagler

He was at his best for a lot of those poor midddleweight losses

Do we ignore them?

 

I grossely underrate a small 5'7 160 fighter because I don't think he would beat a peak Marvin Hagler, possibly the greatest of all time at 160?

I rate Griffith top 5 all time at 147, that's fair

 

Monzon would kick the ass of hagler

 

Lol Boxeo, no one did that to Prime Hagler … It would be Hagler's toughest fight, but it would be Monzon's as well

 

Yet a natural lightweight gave Hagler a very good fight. A natural welter 5yrs retired came out of retirement and defeated Hagler at Middle weight. Look I love Hagler, and against Brawlers and aggressive punchers he was the best their was in my opinion. But fighters that were able too give him angles, make him lead, made Hagler tentative. Made him think instead of being instinctive. If you look at his early losses against Watts and Monroe. Same pattern, look at the 15rds with Duran, same pattern look at his loss too Leonard, same pattern. A fighter like Griffith would make him think. And would take him out his comfort zone. Would he win, probably not. But it wouldn't be easy for him either. Again styles make fights...

 

Monzon defeated an old Griffith and a old Napoles fighting at a weight not natural to either men . He was a big but slow fisted boxer puncher that depended on his strength. He didnt have the foot speed or esp the hand speed to deal with Hagler, and is one of the most overrated fighters on this site. He I'm sure wanted no part of Hagler, and retired at the right time. He was tailor made for what Hagler did best. I know I will get a lot of flack from the Monzon fans, but I've watched him fight plenty of times. He never impressed me. Hagler would've beat the hell out of him. Sorry Monzon fans.

 

Lmao the biggest bunch of trash ever.. Congratulations

 

Good fight .. I feel a few too many are basing picks on the Leonard match and not a prime Hagler who was the natural middleweight and the better middleweight .. I see Marvin, with a longer reach, with a even better jab, as a southpaw dictating the fight and winning a decision in this battle of great fighters with iron chins ..

 

I don't think Hagler was that much bigger than Griffith,but my memory might be fading.

 

That type of comment is expected coming from you. All bluster, but no substance. See I can tell you that Monzon reminds me of F. Obejemas, they fought basically the same way, both were boxer punchers, who fought with little head movement both had good jabs, and big right hands, both were basically 1-2 punchers rarely used combination punching but Monzon didn't have the foot speed Obejeimas had. In fact, in my opnion in the pure skills department, Obejeimas was better, but he didnt have Monzons chin or toughness. Hagler may not have knocked Monzon out, but he would beat him convincingly, perhaps forcing the referee or Monzons corner to stop the fight in a prime vs prime scenario. Unlike you sir, I base my opinions on Watching the fighters 1st, 2nd, I check and watch their opposition. I know who they fought, and when they fought them, and the key reasons they were successful against that opposition. ( Like knowing both Griffith and Napoles were both beyond prime, and fighting at a weight they shouldn't have been at. And knowing Hagler had issues against fighters that gave him angles) I check common opposition and how the fighters looked against that opposition. In other words I love the sport of boxing, and since 1975 their have been very few world class fighters at all the weight classes that I haven't seen. Esp if their fights were televised. And back in those days thru the early nineties their was a lot of boxing on network tv,espn, and USA. But sir your entitled to your opnion, but wait, you actually didnt give an opnion, you attacked me by calling my post trash. Again, all bluster and no substance from you. ( But that's usual)

 

Hagler 5’10 75” reach weighing 158-160lb in his title defenses

Griffith 5’7 72” reach weighing only 150lb when he beat Tiger for the middleweight title in 66, also weighed only 154lb when he regained the title from benvenuti

 

Jesus what a parrot.... My friend.. The motive why i did not reply you with any boxing argument is simple... I did not take you and your comment seriously.. I am a bussy guy... And yes.. My reply is still LMAO!!

 

Because you think Greb is a face first come forward slugger easy to hit? Lol. Greb was no Antuofermo... oh wait, Hagler had all kinds of problems with him also...

Greb was incredibly strong, considered the fastest fighter of his era, used constant footwork and upper body movement and was supposed to be very hard to hit clean. Factor in that he was tireless (unlike Hagler) and scored hundreds of points over the course of a fight and I think the idea of Hagler destroying him is laughable.

 

*busty?

 

Busy* but yeah my pectoral is big too lol