Did Marvin Hagler dare to be great?

Carlos Monzon is rated in the top 100 and he never got his Hearns , Duran and Leonard fight. Naples
and Griffith were too small for him . Apart from Canelo there is nobody at MW that can give Golovkin a
real challenge and even then there will be a asterik.

 

Hagler was a great middleweight, he came to fight.............he was cheated against Leonard.......................

 

lol I don't believe it would personally put GGG in Top 100 at all, but I'm making a case for it if people are very high on Hagler's career.

 

In an earlier post, when Drew wrote a list of good big middleweights that were over 6 foot that Hagler beat, he responded with Hart, Monroe, Seales, Watts and Hearns. In response, you wrote,"I was hoping someone would say that as Hearns was a former ww....." Well that former welterweight beat a lightheavy that you have claimed to have been a great light heavyweight in Virgil Hill. You know, that same former ww that was destroyed by Marvin Hagler. And yes, the good, big middleweights I "touched on" were listed by both Drew and myself. As far as in who I believe to be Barkley's best middleweight wins, probably Hearns and Kinchen.

 

None listed here as good as Hearns

 

McCallum was a great fighter but he is full of **** for the reasons you have listed here. Thanks for the truth.

 

Bumped for my good friend Uppercut Artist

 

Hopkins faced "the man" at 175? Who? Nobody clearly on the level of lightheavyweight Spinks. Believe me considering his past behavior, Hopkins NEVER would have moved directly to lightheavy to face Qawi or Spinks.Hopkins is one of the most overrated lightheavyweights ever. His 175 record is 9 wins 3 losses 2 draws/no contests and NO KNOCKOUT VICTORIES. His best victory there is weight drained Antonio ****ing Tarver and he lost to Chad Dawson there lol. He NEVER would have moved up to fight prime Spinks or Qawi and only would have fought one of them in a cash out fight like he did Sergei. Btw, allow me to amend my post. I didn't include Hopkins' debut loss at 177 or his recent ko loss to Joe Smith because they were impertinent to the discussion. But those losses don't help his case anyway.

 

I would have favoured all at MW against Hearns at MW

 

Really? I most certainly wouldn't have. Tommy would have boxed their ears off like he did Virgil Hill. Just for the record, would you have favored them over Virgil Hill at 175 as well?

 

Some fighters are far more impressive at certain weights than they are others. For example J Taylor at MW beat Hopkins, Joppy etc but at SMW didnt make an impact at all. Years later he drops back to MW and wins a world title.
G Johnson was not a top SMW, but at LHW he became the champ. He dropped back to SMW and wasnt as effective.
Pascal didnt do much at SMW and had not looked impressive but at LHW became the champ.
A more modern example is with A Broner who wasnt as effective at WW but has gone back to SLW.

Certain weight divisions often dont work for certain fighters

 

Bernard was bigger than Marvin.

 

Whats your point concerning Hearns or Hill or both? And you didnt answer the question. Which of those fighters you listed would you favor over Virgil Hill?