Best Fighters of the 1980's, 1-10

Hagler went 10 years unbeaten, 6 and a half years as undisputed champion, made 12 consecutive title defenses with 11 KOs and dominated his division. He fought a Hearns who was at the top of his game and he ultimately crushed him. His dominance at middleweight against his other opposition automatically should put him in the top 3 of the decade in my view, but the win over Hearns absolutely cements it. If that was the only thing he did, then sure, Hearns would probably rank above him but he was the most dominant champ of the decade so that victory does cement his place over Hearns.

Hagler absolutely did not need to beat Spinks to secure his legacy. He beat all the best middleweights of his era and he beat Hearns at the Hit Man's peak - that is more than enough.

Leonard ranking above Hearns is probably more debatable than Hagler ranking above Hearns. Leonard fought sporadically after 1981 but beat Duran, Hearns and ultimately Hagler to secure his own legacy.

At no point have dismissed Hearns' achievements. I have Hearns at no. 3 for the decade. I think he was a fantastically exciting and brilliant fighter but he ultimately fell short in the two biggest fights of his life and that ultimately affects his standing.

Hagler fought from 1980-87 and lost once at the end in a decision that will remain a topic of debate as long as there is the sport of boxing. Not fighting in 88 and 89 does nothing to affect his legacy negatively as his body of work in the 80s was already enough and stands up to any level of scrutiny people want to throw at it.

I have Ray at no. 2 behind Hagler, which should be evidence enough that I don't rate fighters positions based on just one fight.

 

I don't think Hagler beating Hearns and his reign makes him over Hearns. If you look at Hearns wins Cuevas winning a title. and Cuevas undefeated for many years and 11 title defenses knocking him out in two rounds.. Benitez.. fought best at 154 and shut out Duran months before, Hearns outboxes him for title 2.. Knocks out Duran who was fellow 154 pound champion in 2 rounds Draws with Ray in a fight Tommy should have won. And gives Ray and Duran betters fights and beats them up much better than Hagler did, as well as knocking out Roldan earlier. and the 4 and 5 titles. first man to win the welterweight title and then move up and win the lightheavyweight title. If you think Hagler beats that out so easily that is fine, but the fight Marvin and Tommy had was a gamble. I never thought Hagler had a better career than Hearns. I would edge a little bit.. on his wins and title wins.. Better top opposition wins at all weights. I am not mentioning Virgil Hill because that was 1991. But even there 10 title defenses and undefeated Hill.

 

I think for Hagler to be over Hearns if you look at Hearns quality of opposition and wins below middleweight and light heavyweight Hagler would have to beat Spinks. to assure him over Hearns. Beating him is great.. People saw Hearns knock out Duran and who ranks Hearns over Duran. And he absolutely dominating him with speed and power. So. Yet with Duran I say this and the excuses will flow.

 

Hey Bud,

So it's:

13 for SRL
6 Hagler
6 draw

I'm not feeling that is too lopsided for SRL, and more importantly, SLR generally was the more popular guy who would see favoritism his way on cards before Hagler would (Look no further than one of the cards for that night). So when taking all that into consideration, I simply don't think the voting was lopsided for SRL.

 

I respect both you and Unforgiven and the people you just named. McGrain has way more knowledge about boxing than me, but frankly I found his card to be significantly off for this fight. Obviously many others think SRL won, but his card seemed to favor SRL even more than expected. JoJo McGuerra? lol

 

hagler had a way better career than Hearns. The problem is you're not familiar with his opposition that was before your time, and since that is the case, the significance of those wins is lost on you

Hagler was a better middleweight than Ali was a heavyweight

 

lmao ..This is Hilarious !!!!

 

No, I don't think Hagler beats Hearns' résumé easily- I think Hagler, Leonard and Hearns were the three best fighters of the 80s and all by a reasonable margin from the rest but the gap between the three of them is not huge so when it comes down to the finer details, the head to heads they had in their primes do play a significant part in their final placement in my top 10.

But if you think Hearns résumé makes him deserving of a higher spot than Hagler, we can just agree to disagree - always enjoyable to have a good verbal spar!

 

That argument is flawed because you aren't taking into account what happened in the other years that they did not both win P4P #1. There were 5 other years in the decade. Who was better in those years?

I'm not stating Ray was better, I'm just stating that this argument only considers half of the decade.

 

Hearns style of going for the knockout left him open a few times. It was a flaw as well as his excitement. But I think his opposition and wins compare favorably to anyone in boxing history.

 

Well that is the argument. Hagler lost to Ray at middleweight which hurts his legacy. Ray beat them all, although the Hagler which Ray beat was not the Hagler that Hearns fought. I don't think so anyway.

 

Probably been mentioned but Chavez went 67-0 in the 1980's beating Laporte, Rosario, Mayweather x2, Martinez, de la Cruz, Bumphus, Castillo, Ramirez... That might deserve a place on this list.

 

It has. Although, I didn't list his opponents. Either way, I currently have him at number 3.

I've also just realized that Chavez might well have had a 90% KO Rate, during that period (tbc).

 

As long as he stayed out of lightweight.

 

Yes I am

Ray fought in 1982 but why give him p4p honors for fighting Bruce Finch? He could have done something useful with his career by fighting Pryor, but instead took a step backwards by ducking his challenge

Since hagler faced two top fighters in his division, and blew them out, I put far more weight in his accomplishments that year

see? leonard had his chance but didnt make the most of it

and keep in mind that it was Hagler who had a real reason to sit out that year when he had his ribs broken in sparring

As for 1984

it wasnt Leonard fighting Roldan

It was hagler and since it was Hagler who did the honors, it has to be hagler given the credit for it

around the same time, Leonard was having another one of his cheapie fights the public falls for, and barely got by Kevin Howard, a fighter with a 20-4 record, and even then, lost his taste for battle and retired

Why should i bestow him honors for that?

Hagler then went on to dispatch the number one WBC contender Hamsho

Therefore, Hagler easily wins the p4p title those two years

as for 1983, & 1985, his masterpieces against Scypion, Sibson, & Hearns, how are you going to compete with that?

Hagler wins those as well and so that makes 1982, 1983, 1984, 1985, and 1986 by a Hagler barely running on fumes but just enough to destroy Mugabi in his last great performance