Only haters trying to take a great fighter down a peg will use a performance where they struggled and won and paint it as a loss.
Eh, Golovkin had a longer am career and stepped up to world level before Hagler. Hagler currently has the edge in opposition but the story isn't finished with GGG and Hagler's opp was less than spectacular. Jermall Charlo is really good and at 160 and the possibility of fighter 168 guys exists too.
Am careers don't factor much at all in end of career ATG ratings, it's what you do as a pro. Hagler was fighting top 10 Ring rated fighters in his third year (world level) as a pro. GGG didn't step up earlier than this.
Maybe his trainer told him he was one of the biggest hitters in the gym. After all it has happened before, lol.
Amateur careers don't super excite me when talking pro boxing. Hagler's sparring sessions would have been tougher than many amateur fights.
Leonard wins. 83' Duran would be a slight favourite in my opinion, I think he would pull it off. Hearns is a pick them fight, because of his chin. GGG probably beats the rest, Roldan and Mugabi would be very tough fight but GGG is technically better
Duran wouldn't stand much chance against a prime Golovkin. The knock on Hagler is he showed Duran too much respect and boxed too civilized. Even so, the score cards were a joke, Hagler won much wider than the judges saw it. Can't see Golovkin losing to Duran. He'd probably smash Hearns to pieces too. Seriously. And I doubt Golovkin is anywhere near the top 15 middleweights of all time. But Duran and Hearns were not great middleweights.
You forgot the part Hagler fought tougher fighters before he won the title.for years people ducked hagler.Haglet didnt have Hbo hyping him up.Marvin fought those tough middleweights from philly
Disagree with everything you said. I also think 83' Duran was better than Canelo. GGG would have major problems connecting on Duran