Marvin Hagler vs Charley Burley

pretty sound post, I agree, we just can't know with any certainty...

would Hagler do as well in Burley busy Era, for me these comparisons are 'always' the better questions.

the Marvelous one, would HAVE too fight many, many more fights, fight many, many more Catchweight fights, in other words a Middle cum L-HW, and probably finish at HW in a few battles with some Big boys, just like near all the other 1940 fighters...

anyway Hagler would defo remain a Top Fighter, he just might not have been Champ and even if he did become champion, he may not have reigned as long.

Double & triple the number of Fights for ANY Fighters, will definitely lead to very different Career Outcomes...

but for those Fighters that already DID That, well, their Proof is Already & Historically sealed!

it would be a good fight, I'd bet Burley and I wouldn't be upset if he lost to Hagler either.

 

Moore was great for sure given that he beat top notch middleweights and murderers' row fighters, but Moore hadn't yet matured into the longevous light heavyweight that he would become later on. I think what Burley's fight with Moore shows us - even though there's no film of it - is that Moore learned from Burley... He cited Burley as one of the primary reasons he was able to master his defensive techniques in the ring... why he became the legend he would be, I doubt Burley could take on that version of Moore. Burley is one of my favourites, he was a real defensive wizard from what his only film shows us, but I think he just was too reactive in his style - he'd display little activity and was hesitant to initiate engagements. IMO Hagler would take this one in a very narrow decision; he probably wouldn't knock Charley down, but he for sure will get him in a lot of trouble with his pressure and switch-hitting.

 

A come backing Sugar Ray Leonard did on April 6 1987 after not having fought for 3 and a half years, the official judges said so.

 

Those are excellent points.

 

Charley Burley fought 98 fights and was never stopped and neither was Hagler so this one is going the distance. Looking at Burleys opponents list is stunning. 3 Fights with Fritzie Zivic, 7 with Holman Williams! ,Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore ,Jimmy Bivins, Lloyd Marshall, Bert Lytell,,,,Charlie taking a decision here is certainly not out of the question.

 

Hi Buddy.
Your post, and more importantly your observations coupled with your synopsis are, for me anyway, are hard to dispute ( although some may ) your description of Burleys style is on point and accurate, I myself have posted as much a few months ago, for all the plaudits, and retrospective admiration for Burley, he was not very proactive as a fighter, Zale, Cerdan, and Graziano may well have avoided him whilst holding the title, but I believe it was as much to with him not being a draw, as to probably losing their crown, the above trio were aggressive walk forward attacking fighters generally, unlike the rather one paced Burley, articles have highlighted his punch stats, which were very minamall, from what I read over the decades, he only threw when he was 100% sure of the punch landing, exciting he was not, a sound technician yes, as to who would win, not easy I suppose, but will go with Hagler's higher workrate as the main reason I would pick him, that said it will not be easy, Moore : " Charley Burley was one of the best I ever fought, you couldn't land on him, he was slick as lard, and twice as greasy " liked your post JFK, a promising start to hopefully a long stay .
stay safe , chat soon.

 

Appreciate the comment and stay safe as well!

 

It is pretty unlikely that he was better at 36 and up than he was at 28. What he did have was a ton of experience fighting really tough guys so, as he fought bigger, dumber, less experienced guys he had an edge.