Hagler Never Got Rocked But He Was Pissing Blood After The Mugabi Fight

Don't stop there, he'd beat Monzon, SRR, RJJ and all the rest of them for sure. The prime undamaged Mugabi beat all sorts of fantastic fighters getting to Hagler and is one of the most proven contenders ever to fight for the title. Post Hagler he was a mere shell of himself, totally shot after one career loss. If not for Hagler he would have reigned anywhere between 5-15 years unless he decided to move up and win a couple of 175 crowns.

 

The Mugabi bout was certainly a display of Hagler's toughness; but, it also showed where he was, in terms of his career. It was the end (or very nearly so).

A great bout to watch - but one which was competitive, due more to the respective stages each Boxer was at in '86.

 

I agree with this.
Mugabi was an absolute monster. Not only did the Hagler fight mentally crush him, the payday and adulation he received sent him on a binge of drinking and gambling apparently.
He looked shot and tentative in his next fight against Duane Thomas and might have been a bit unlucky there with the ending, claiming a thumb caught him in the eye.

 

I agree.

 

He probably beat better middleweights than Leonard or Duran or Hearns did getting to Hagler.

 

At least they were proven greats and had done something. Mugabi is 90% myth, i'm surprised you would fall for it. Shot after one fight? Not for me, just exposed as soon as he fought better opposition. An active Hagler from a couple of years earlier would have put paid to him much more impressively.

He did put up a top effort against a twilight Hagler but most do in first title shots. Intangibles have seen it blown out of proportion.

 

Mugabi before Hagler were quite like Joshua today. Impressive against lesser opponents but basically untested.

So if Joshua looks good in a hard fought losing effort against Wlad and then does nothing more of note except being wiped out by a very good up and coming boxer? Nobody but Wlad fans would think very highly of his qualities.

 

Mugabi is generally not highly regarded, so I can't see how he's "90% myth".
Hagler was still very good against Mugabi, just less mobile and easier to hit than he'd been 3 years before.
Mugabi did far better against Hagler than Hearns did just 11 months earlier.
You protest against the claim that Mugabi dropped off dramatically after Hagler beat him but you're more or less implying that Hagler dropped off dramatically between the Hearns and Mugabi fights ?
Hagler-Hearns wasn't a particularly punishing fight for Hagler, all things considered. But Hagler-Mugabi was punishing for both fighters.

Duane Thomas beat Mugabi in 3 rounds, so Hagler was at that point worse fighter than Duane Thomas?

Not nearly as much as Thomas Hearns's 15 seconds of success against Hagler.
Not nearly as much as Roberto Duran's 15 rounds of survival against Hagler.

Hearns and Duran seem to have multiple multi-page threads threads dedicated to how the "nearly beat" or "could have won" or "desrved a rematch".

 

If Hagler was as far gone as Wlad must be now, (at 40), already, in 1986 ..... then how far gone was he 13 months later and AFTER he'd gone through war with Mugabi ?
Leonard must have had an even more seriously depleted Hagler than I'd ever imagined.

 

It was reliably reported that Thomas Hearns TWICE paid John Mugabi step-aside money when Mugabi was his #1 contender for the WBC 154 title.
They paid Mugabi off and matched Hearns with Fred Hutchings instead.
Then they paid Mugabi off while Hearns challenged Hagler.

Apparently James Shuler, #1 middleweight, didn't want any part of Hagler yet so they matched Shuler with Hearns (a mistake on Shuler's part ... not that it made any difference, the poor guy died in motorbike accident a few days later).
They matched Hagler with Mugabi, who by that time was ranked #1 by the WBC at both weights, I believe.

 

Actually it was RING magazine who had John Mugabi ranked #1 at middleweight AND at light-middeweight at the end of 1985.
I don't think their ratings are infallible but it does suggest Mugabi had an earned reputation.

 

nah, don't see it

 

Mugabi hit too hard.
People think his chin's weak because Terry Norris and Gerald McClellam knocked him out early years later, but the Hagler fight shows his chin was better than Hearns's.
I doubt Leonard could have stood up to that either. Luckily he was smart enough to grab and run his way to that disputable decision.

 

Hagler was very wise to walk away from boxing and call it a day.

 

No, Joshua faced some undefeated guys who've never really faced anyone either.
At least Mugabi took on the likes of Curtis Parker, James Green, Frank Fletcher, and came through at least one tough fight there.
His 1-round blow-out of Parker was especially impressive, seeing as Parker had twice gone 10 rounds with Mustafa Hamsho losing close and controversial decisions when Hamsho was rated as the logical challenger to Marvin Hagler.
No one stopped Parker again until 1988 when a prime Michael Nunn did so.