GGG is - at the very least - the Greatest middleweight since Hagler

[url]https://gifimage.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/hysterical-laughter-gif-1.gif[/url]

Come on, who do you think you are bullshitting here?

Kalambay was an active fighter in Italy for most of Hagler's reign. He failed to capture the European title to a foreign fighter in his native Italy. You might know Ayub as a Euro-level fringe contender who got knocked out by every American talent he was matched against in the early 80s. Kalambay than lost his American debut in 1985 to one, Duan Thomas.

Kalambay doesn't capture the European title until 1987 from Herol Graham, his first noteworthy win against an opponent rated by a major organization...despite being an active fighter for 7 years to that point. Graham really not a very good fighter either, his best win curiously came against Ayub.

And with Hagler retired and the WBA title vacated...all of sudden Kalambay makes his move out of the European scene to challenge Iran Barkley for Hagler's vacated strap. You are telling me a guy who spent his prime hiding from Hagler, was great and could beat him? NONSENSE.


Kalambay was not a bad fighter, he was a good technician as an older man. He outboxed Barkley, but most good technicians of the time were able to accomplish that. He was on the wrong end of an infamous knockout to a guy not known for knocking people out. And he had two close fights to with a declined McCallum who was moving up in weight. This is your idea of a Great fighter who could beat the greatest MW Champion of all time?

 

The great European champion, Kalambay...who was "great" and could "beat Hagler" I mean, Kalambay won the title Hagler vacated. That's pretty great..

This content is protected

Are we sure, that the early 90s MW scene after Hagler is not being overrated, because there wasn't a dominant fighter there to keep these guys in check?

Hagler retires, old men like McCallum move up, European fighters like Kalambay step up. And all of sudden, you think it's better than ever that these guys could have beat Hagler, they were just waiting until he retired so they didn't have to. Are you that gullible?

 

Your ass is getting owned in this thread. I suggest you log off and take the rest of the day off.

 

Well I thought we were having a decent debate, then you go and post this horse manure.

What a joke you are.

I said: "COULD"

Do you understand?


Sumbu Kalambay COULD have beaten Marvin Hagler.

Graham and McCallum COULD have beaten Marvin Hagler.

I'm a huge fan of Marvin's.

I love the guy. But he wasn't unbeatable. Styles make fights.

The Kalambay-McCallum fights are great. Very technical.


"Graham not really a good fighter either"


Now I've just lost all respect for you as a poster.


You're a joke.

Kalambay and Graham weren't great, but your d*cks all hard because GG beat Danny Jacobs?

GG's resume is REMARKABLE?


What a waste of time you are.

 

What does the video prove?

I can post a video of Tommy icing Duran.

I can post a video of Pirog knocking out Jacobs, who GG only scraped by.


Are you seriously going to tell me that Marvin could have ruled the MW division of the early 90's, by beating all of those guys I listed?

You're living in a fantasy.

I listed you that stacked division, yet you think it wasn't that great, and it only appeared that way because Marvin had retired?

Have a day off.

If you don't think a guy like Mike McCallum COULD have beaten Marvin, then don't even bother replying to me.


GG's current era is nowhere near as strong as the early 90's, he's still yet to beat an elite MW, and he still hasn't convincingly beaten a very good one.

His resume is about as remarkable as your posts.

 

You would cheerlead Charlie Manson as long as he was arguing against the relevance of a certain type of fighter.

 

If they could have beaten Hagler, they would have stepped up when Hagler was the active Champion. They waited him out and sought out vacated titles immediately after Hagler said he was done; and they should be called out on that if you are proposing them as threats to Hagler. That's bull****.

The guy is known for losing to everyone except a washed up Vinny Paz and the great Ayub.

You boys really dig the homo stuff.

I recognize Danny Jacbos for what he is. He's not a great fighter, but he's a tough near man that presents stylistic challenges. You drop him in the early 90s mix, he would win some/lose some just like Kalambay or McCallum. I'm not going to try to sell you that Jacobs COULD beat Hagler and was a great fighter, I'm not going to shove bull**** down your throat like you just tried to do to me.

 

That Kalambay had a chance to prove he was great and blew it.

Go the **** ahead, I'm not trying to argue Jacobs was a great fighter that could beat Marvelous Hagler.

Well Kalambay, Graham, and McCallum were active in Marvin's era and stayed the hell out his backyard for a reason, they had no chance.

And yes, Hagler could have ruled the early 90s. Because with the exception of Roy who was relevant all but two years in the division, all the young guys had flaws and couldn't pull from the pack.

You are sleeping on Minter, Hamsho, Vito, Sibson. If Hagler wasn't there to clean up, these guys would all have looked pretty damn great trading titles too.

The fact McCallum hung out at Light Middle for years and waited until Kalambay was a Champion before moving up to try for a Middleweight Title tells me all I need to know about his chances against Hagler. He didn't dig them either.

 

Yes, Golovkin is the best since Hagler but the bigots are trying to make him lose................Oscar won't allow him to fight anymore, will wait until he is 40 years old to fight El Pollo again, that's their plan! I like fighters who fight a lot, El Pollo does not like to fight very often, Golovkin likes to fight 3 or 4 times per year, it's crooks like Oscar who cause us to watch fighters not fight for a year or two....................

 

The Kentucky Cobra,

Another pile of horse manure.

Mike waited him out?

Ha!

Of course he did.

Mike didn't wait him out. They were just at different points of their careers that's all. Marvin hardly fought for the last 3 years of his career, and he had huge money making fights with Tommy and Ray. Mike was a high risk/low reward fighter to all of the Fab Four.

Marvin told Mike that he always admired and respected him.

Duran gave up his title at JMW to instead face Tommy.

Manny Steward set up that fight, and he didn't want Tommy to fight Mike. He had them both together at the Kronk.

Nobody can say that Marvin ducked Mike. I don't believe that for a second. It just wasn't viable. But if you think that Mike didn't want him, or that it wouldn't have been possible for Mike to have beaten him, then you're both ignorant and clueless.

Mike could definitely have beaten Marvin Hagler.

If you think otherwise, then you need to educate yourself on Mike's career.

Mike fought top class fighters from 3 divisions, all with different styles.

He fought: Jackson, Kalambay, Graham, Watson, Collins, and peak versions of Roy and Toney. So don't try and kid to me that he wouldn't have fought Marvin had he have had the opportunity.

Mike's a very underrated fighter.

Only if you look on BoxRec.

Sure.

Danny is tough.

Yeah, if you'd have dropped him into the early 90's mix, he'd have won and lost.

He's a good fighter, and he's big and strong. But he's far from great.

GG has just scraped by him.

Along with his win over Canelo, it's his biggest win.

So please tell me what's remarkable about scraping by Jacobs, and beating
the likes of: Canelo, Lemieux and Murray etc?

There's nothing remarkable about that at all.


Regarding Mike, I don't have to try and sell/convince anyone that he could have beaten Marvin.

Anybody knowledgeable knows that it would have been possible for Mike to have beaten Marvin.

Duran gave Marvin all he could handle in 83.

Mike would have been an extremely difficult proposition for him.

 

The Kentucky Cobra,

You don't know anything about the guy.

I don't have to argue a case for Mike.

Again, anybody with any knowledge of Mike or that era, knows that he was capable of beating Marvin. Also, I never claimed that he would definitely have beaten him, only that he could have done.

Regarding Jacobs, if he wasn't a great fighter, then why do you think GG has a remarkable resume, when that's one of his biggest wins, and he only scraped past him?

You're absolutely clueless.

No, he really couldn't have done.

Nobody in history could have done.

Roy at his peak couldn't have done.

There were just too many great fighters with different styles.


Marvin was one of the greatest of all time.

Nobody can deny that. But he wasn't superhuman.

He's 5'9, and he used to often weigh-in below 160 in the days of same day weigh-ins.

He'd be a JMW today.

There's no way he'd have ruled against: Roy, Toney, Mike, Benn, Eubank, Watson, Collins, Graham, Kalambay, Jackson, McClellan, Johnson and Nunn etc.

You're living in a fantasy.

I'm not sleeping on Marvin.

I know exactly what a great fighter he was.

There's only one of us here that's being ignorant.

This comment tells me all that I need to know about your knowledge of the era.

Under different circumstances, Mike could have fought Duran and/or Tommy, and then moved up to MW much earlier as a much bigger name.

 

depends when you were born - there have been a lot of MWs since hagler.

 

We can speculate motivation all we want, and I'm telling you what McCallum's actions say to me.

The fact McCallum didn't set foot in 160 until Hagler had a foot out the door and the WBA belt was on the waist of a lesser fighter he was favored to beat is pretty damn telling.

Let's talk about what we had for breakfast while we are at it, it would be about as relevant to the present topic.

Why the hell would anyone even say that?

Interesting word play, you are flirting with all out double speak. You are trying to make a case for McCallum and my ignorance while ambiguously interchanging confident and uncertain verbiage.

[url]https://m.popkey.co/fa7875/ajKjk.gif[/url]

This is a listing of opponents spanning a decade with no regard to specific context. You even list Kalambay, who I specifically signaled out as a weaker under dog opponent, McCallum was willing to move up and face.

McCallum willing to move up and face Kalambay once he won Hagler's WBA strap is exactly my point.

He was a south paw spoiler with no power who didn't even have the speed, discipline, or reflexes to make his style work; he never beat anyone of note in his prime or was rated very highly outside of the UK. You are claiming he COULD beat Hagler. Chances are, Hagler would walk right over him as quickly as Jackson did.

Minter is better than Graham in almost every regard, and he actually has the wins and performances to back it up. Hagler crushed him. Get real.

Because you are willfully ignorant of context.

 

[url]http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/yok.gif[/url]

[url]https://m.popkey.co/1002e3/y68M7.gif[/url]

Well, I apply context. I take into consideration that Golovkin has dominated lots of fighters throughout his career that are not normally dominated and thus, established himself as a stand out for a very long time. A fighter can only be measured in contrast to his contemporary peers.

Regarding Jacobs. I saw Golovkin concede every physical advantage and outbox the toughest challenge of his career while in his mid 30s. I find that impressive.

Maybe but I'm not wrong. Graham and Kam were active during Hagler's reign, and never held in a high regard.

No, the only one who maybe had the ability to be a dominate force outgrew the division.

The rest were wildly inconsistent, flawed, had no desire to unify, stuck to their region, couldn't control their weight, and usually came to disappointing ends.

Hagler should be rightfully favored over any of these men at 160. Jones is the only toss up, and that's because on top of his ability he would have a considerable weight advantage if he's allowed day after weigh in.

It's not a question of knowledge. We live in a glorious age where everything is at the press of a button.
Mike being Duran and Hearn's mandatory isn't magical secret knowledge only you have access too. It's a question of application and logic.

Hagler emerged from a chaotic period not unlike the early 90s in the shadow of a great Champion's retirement, unlike Nunn, he was the real deal and ruled the MW division for damn near a decade, and when he was stripped of his titles and finally retired, it opened things up. We see this all the time in boxing throughout history.