Gerald “the Gman” McClellan vs Marvelous Marvin Hagler

Unless of course we are to believe JohnThomas1 over Emanuel Steward?

You couldn't write this lunacy.

 

It's a crock of **** to say McClellan was a cruiser.
I doubt he ever weighed much more than 170 in a boxing ring.

He fought professionally from 1988 to 1995, just after Hagler's era.
It's crazy to think middleweights suddenly went from being tiny in 1987, to massive in 1988.

 

He struggled mightily to put on weight when he moved up to fight Benn at 168. There's a few porky pies floating around in this thread that's for sure.

 

To my eyes at least there seems to be a clear shift with the generation right after Hagler. Nunn, Benn, Eubank, Barkley, McClellan and Watson all looked like big MWs to me - Barkley (who went all the way up to HW) and McClellan especially so. But McCellan was never a cruiser, of course, and from recorded weights not a LHW either, so one shouldn't be too sure of how things look.

Would be really interesting to know their weight in the ring, though.

 

Why does everyone dispute Gerald's dehydration claim like it makes the fight, in this case it is even a factor it’s 20lbs of irrelevance when he’s put against Hagler it’s his undeveloped skill set and questionable resume that are his glaring weaknesses you don’t put an unfinished fighter against the most complete middleweight fighter ever.

 

Looking at his recorded weights it seems he wasn't I have to say, even though he sure looked huge.

 

Barkley was a contender Hagler's era. Barkley weighed 153 against Kalambay in 1987. That's junior middle. Yeah, he was kind of "big" but he was light. He was just small in frame, lower body, but tall and wide in the shoulders. He was at 160 up until he was over 30 years old. He was a classic middleweight.

Benn was not a particularly big middle, I think he moved up to 168 for money.

Fulgencio Obelmejias was a "big middleweight", as were some of the others Hagler fought.
McClellan had huge long arms and powerful shoulders, but again, he was skinny in the legs. I doubt he was a legit 6'1 either.
It's all a bit of an illusion. He was a big middleweight but not a weight-cutting freak that people make out. He weighed 165 against Benn, didn't even fill out the super-middle division.

I mean, realistically, Hagler v McClellan, at fight time, might be a 164 pound guy against a 170 pound guy or something like that.

 

Of course, that's true as well.

 

How may rounds and how much does Gerald weigh?

 

Gerald McClellan, the most overrated fighter in the history of Boxing forums. His entire profile on here is mostly hearsay and mythos, on the level of other Classic Forum monsters such as 'TUAMINATOR' Tua and Jim Corbett. Totally insufferable.

Hagler would give him a systematic schooling and beating.

 

No doubt he out-weighed Benn by 15-20+lb in the ring.

Eubank said he catered his ring weight based on his opponent, limiting what he ate if he wanted to move more. He was 180 against Benn II, 182 against Close II and 174 against Rocchigiani, Storey and Wharton. He looked FAR better at 174.

 

Eubank 'The Real Me' docu and Boxing News

 

Yes. he was ranked for 1986, but he was a title holder and had all his main fights post Hagler, so therefore I included him in the post Hagler era. Not a perfect science, but I thought it appropriate since he made his main dent in the division after Hagler retired,

156 according to Boxrec.

Looking at how he weighed 161 and 162 for several non title bouts, it could actually be so, but I don't know the stipulations for those fights.

He looked huge against Toney in 1993 in either case and Toney himself was big in the ring. 182 lbs against Jones.

That could well be, yes.

 

92% have Hagler winning. If McClellan was the most overrated fighter here I'd think he'd get more votes.