Did Marvin Hagler dare to be great?

Wheres the self pwn in saying much further gone? That doesnt mean they may not be suited to a weight. Seems you really are getting all tied up and looking for something after being owned

 

How so? Explain, please oh butthurt one, lol.

 

That lightweight was a great fighter, something you yourself previously admitted on this thread. And again, as always, you have avoided the question as you have when I listed what, 10 points that you ignored? Are you denying Barkley was faded at 175?

 

The only one here that's being owned is you. In fact you're getting beyond hammered, and you can't take it. Are you drunk by any chance because your posts are nonsensical at this point (although, they have been for awhile lol. And your grammar sucks too, btw lol). This is what you wrote, "Where have I wrote Leonard was better suited at a certain weight in that post? Your squirming has taken you to a new level." And in an earlier post, you wrote,"Leonard was much further gone (emojis). He had just got off the floor and beaten a LHW in LaLonde at SMW which once again agrees with what I have said about some fighters are better suited at a certain weight than others." You have brutally pwned and contradicted yourself and are now feeling the embarassment. And you're simply denying your own posts. Just stick to the 90s and early 2000s 168 pounders, because you know nothing else of boxing lol.

 

Marvin begins his career in 1979 as a full MW, McCallum in 1981 as a JMW, Hagler retired in 1987 and Mccallum fought for the MW title and loss in 1988, Sumbu Kalambay was his opponent, I hope this could help with your education on the matter...

 

Yes he is great because his resume is filled with some of the greatest to lace them up. But in comparison to the likes of duran hagler or leonard he is not as great in my opinion

 

Well you clearly are based on your poll options. But to be great you have to fight greats. I dont think there are any real threats to GGG at 160 and i dont think there are any future HOF ATGs there either. So unlike hagler whos resume reads off like a whos who of boxing greats GGGs simply does not so you are comparing apples to organges in that regard.

Its kind of unlucky for GGG because i dont believe physically he belongs at 168. I think his body is perfect for 160. Where he went wrong was saying hed fight anyone from 154 to 168 but would not entertain a fight with ward, im not going to mention lara because lara truly is a low reward fight with nothing much to gain. Ward is a future HOF fighter and is top 3 lock p4p. It may not have been may v pac in the ppv sales department but the reward for your legacy and resume is undeniably huge.

Alot of people claim ward was the one who ducked and thats all speculation as is mine that GGG ducked ward. But when you consider the fact since then ward has moved up to 175 taken 1 tuneup, then taken on a good fighter in barrera to top it off with fighting one of the most feared and highly ranked fighters in boxing (which ALOT of you thought hed duck or pull out of). Comparatively GGG has gone on to do next to nothing of note.

I wanna say i like GGG i really enjoy watching him fight but when he and his fans cry wolf over being ducked it just leaves a sour taste

 

Yes Duran was a great LW. Do you think he was a great MW also?
You mention faded fighters but do you feel Duran was prime when he fought Barkley?

 

You know when someone is struggling with the debate when they comment on grammer, when on a forum where often there are quick replies.
You are going on about Leonard. Saying someone is past best and suited to a weight division are completely different things and it is you who is struggling with that. Not sure why. I can only think you have tied yourself up so much that you cant think straight anymore. At least not in this debate anyway

 

Above 147, he was past prime and completely hit or miss, no question. But he was definitely capable of great performances as were both the Moore and Barkley fights. And he was definitely better against close to prime Barkley at 160 than Hearns was against the past prime version of Iran at 175 in their second. Are you denying those facts? But then again, you feel Hearns was a better lightheavyweight than middleweight, so I'm not surprised about anything you write.

 

Actually, concerning Leonard, I resubmitted 2 of your earlier posts about him which were nonsense. I'm not struggling with anything. "Suited to a certain weight" doesn't carry any weight in this situation, because Leonard clearly wasn't as good at super middleweight as he was at welterweight. Here's another question which you will avoid. Was Leonard as good at SMW or LHW as he was at welter. Uh oh I edited my post,lol. The only one struggling in this debate here is you, as you've refused to address several points that I've put forth knowing full well that if you had to answer them truthfully, you'd be exposed even further.

 

Yes. I know Bailey seems like a child wanting to get the last word on a debate he lost several weeks ago as he's clearly ignored points and questions that have blown him out of the water.

 

Oh dear Clinton. You have been shown up and now making yourself look a bigger fool.
I will have a read over your other drivel of posts a bit later and continue your schooling later. But for now try and pull it back a bit as other posters are now seeing you as a joke.

 

I think Leonard was an outstanding WW and that is where he is best remembered. Not so much at MW where he beat a great MW in an era of MWs who werent overall as big as the MWs in Hopkins era.
You see. Right back round to where it all began when you were originally squirming