Hagler vs SRR at MW. Who do you favor over SRR at MW?

I feel Hagler`s jab would bother Ray in the same LaMotta`s did in his final fight with Robi except Hagler`s reach was better than Jake`s, I think that`s a key factor because Ray`s style was all about exploiting his reach advantage via a constant jab, a great equalizer though was Ray`s right hook to the body, that`s what made LaMotta gas after taking numerous hits to his side.

 

I think SRR's speed at his "middleweight" best would see him home via decision.

 

SRR does just about everything better than Hagler. Robinson punches harder, boxes better just a more talented fighter. Take nothing away from Hagler but SRR was the greatest fighter that ever lived.

 

He's overrated at middleweight, but he has the style to beat Hagler. SRR by decision.

Embittered by the slight, Hagler retires to Italy and spends the rest of his life muttering to himself about injustice.

 

Being exposed to Sugar seems to have that effect on him ...

 

Robinson beats hagler but monzon beats both them

 

Agree. In his prime Hagler's footwork was exquisite. He wasn't flashy like Robinson but he got the job done. It's close to a toss up.

 

SRR would prevail, I think Monzon offers a game fight but SRR, young & fit beats them all except Greb

 

Monzon and based on resume Greb.
Walker stands a very good chance too.

 

How many people on this planet today have seen Greb fight? How many films are their of Greb or Walker? Again , your basing their greatness on long dead men who were probably not around to see R.Robinson at middle weight , much less Monzon, and esp Hagler. But Robinson had the ability to do the same thing to Hagler what Leonard did, and to a lesser extent Duran. Hagler was undeafeatable when fighters came at him. Look at his best wins, all were against fighters who were aggressive. But against fighters who could counter, use angles, slide left or right, Hagler had issues. ( see his losses even in his prime against Monroe and Watts) Robinson had that ability. But would he have been disciplined to do it in a 1st fight scenario? That would be the question. I don't know if he would've. I actually see Hagler winning a dec against Robinson. But I see see Robinson adjusting in all future fights.

 

I have seen Tunney fight on film many times and he was one of the most talented boxers of the era, he was a big lightheavy and a decent sized heavyweight, Greb fought very competitively with Tunney & had a deep resume & avoided no one. Take that depth of resume and speaking to the most knowlegable boxing people over the last almost 50 years Greb was a true legend. Robinson was like 132-1-1 when he lost to Turpin then destroyed him in a rematch, the older version of SRR may have lost to Hagler but a prime version would be something of the likes that Hagler never seen & SRR rose to the occasion when needed. Remember SRR was no kid when he KO'd rock jawed Fulmer going backward.

 

In the 50's, Turpin, Tiger Jones, Fullmer, and Basilio beat SRR. (Plus, Pender in early 1960).

Do they get any consideration?

 

I've always felt that if SRR had kept fighting between 52 and 54 there wouldn't be much debate about the greatest middleweight but he retired and came back and fought way past his prime - which is when most of those defeats happened. It ended up being a different route to middleweight greatness than he could have taken.

But I think a peak middleweight Robinson - the one that fought LaMotta in 51 - would beat Hagler in a very close fight.

 

You could even go back a bit further if it suited because Robinson was fighting big men often while over the weights himself.