If Hearns had faced Mugabi at light middle?

Hey JT,

As you may or may not recall, I'm firmly in the 'Mugabi was Ruined by Hagler' camp. But you make some really good points and, in turn, raise some interesting questions about the pre-Hagler version of Mugabi. This leads me to think I might need to take a another look and perhaps rebalance my perspective on the matter.

In any event, I'd agree that Hearns would have had the measure of Mugabi (perhaps, taking a different route to victory) - and I apply this perspective to both 'pre' and 'post' Hagler versions of The Beast.

 

Little wonder you are one of my favorite posters. There are a handful of guys that when in opposing camps make me start to second guess myself - of course you are one of them. Tho i stay with my opinion on SRL - Duran 1 you being in the opposing camp re-affirms that i could well be 100% wrong in my belief.

At the end of the day what were Mugabi's 3-5 best wins? This is a question that matters.

I am not in any way in the camp that says if you haven't beaten a guy on x level you can never beat a guy on x or z level either. But i think in this case it tells a bit of a story.

To be long winded i give guys like Curry, Foreman and Tyson quite a bit of leeway in their losses post first defeat. These guys however are a dozen times more proven than John.

I seem to be in the same camp as yourself, Bojak and ETM at least 90% of the time.

 

If I'm honest , I find myself re-examining fights and fighters on the basis of other viewpoints I read on here, from several posters; your good self included. It's actually quite refreshing to have cultivated a viewpoint over many years and then for it to be shaken up by plausible alternatives.

These types of exchanges I appreciate the most, along with posts, which reproduce and/or debate age old accounts from Boxing's history. I definitely spend more time reading than posting on here.

His top-3 wins precede Hagler, in my opinion. These would be:

- Earl Hargrove
- James Green
- Curtis Parker

The above are all pre-Hagler. After this, I begin to struggle finding wins better or on a par with those listed.
(It may come as no surprise that this observation contributes to my belief that Hagler ruined Mugabi.)

If the contracted weight of 156lbs for the Parker bout is true then the impressiveness of this win does deserve to be scrutinized. However, Mugabi still got the job done against a seemingly game Parker. I will, nonetheless, be taking another look at this fight, with a fresh perspective.

Your point about Green's efforts, at times overwhelming Mugabi, are quite valid, as well. This and the fact Green stood up to Mugabi's power well until his eye blew up. All I'd say is that Mugabi never seemed to me to be in trouble here. But, again, I will take another look.

The Hargrove win was just excellent. Mugabi showed zero fear against a considered puncher.


I think Mugabi was not a proven enough fighter by the time he met Hagler. I also feel that this is what contributed to his dramatic decline, after the Hagler defeat. Not only was Mugabi not ready but, to increase the impact of fall he would suffer, Mugabi had been convinced by others that he was supremely ready (Duff talking Guff).

I somehow think this debate will go on for a good time to come. I'll be interested in re-reviewing the fights mentioned.

 

He also beat Frank Fletcher, although it is true it was not a prime Fletcher - he had already lost to Scypion and Roldan.

 

Yep - I overlooked Fletcher. But then, one should consider that this was a legit Middleweight bout and Mugabi landed an hellacious right-hand to end it. And, as it turns out, it looks like Fletcher might still have held on to his Top-10 Middleweight Ring Rating, going into '84, so it's probably not a bad shout and he should be up there.

 

Can someone answer me what was Frank Fletchers finest win? He quit with an overall 18-6-1 record. Both Scypion and Roldan exposed him as a pretender despite what the 80's hype machine tried to convey.

Be great if he ever beat a top 10 contender?

 

I can't be certain but I think Fletcher beat James Green, when he was Top-10 Rated at 160, and Green had had a win over Scypion, earlier the same year.

Other than that - there's not a lot more to write home about.

 

This fight would have been made after Hearns brutal ko loss to Hagler.
Hearns showed in future fights a vulnerability to overhand rights with Juan
Roldan and Iran Barkley. Mugabi that showed up for Hagler was like a man
possessed . If Mugabi showed up like this a upset is not out of the realm.

 

He stopped a few "rated" top 10 contenders

Noberto Sabater
Ernie Singletary (the guy who took Thomas Hearns the full 10 rounds later.)
James "Hard Rock" Green - who had decisoned Wilfred Scypion a few months previously.

He also stopped William "Caveman" Lee who got an undeserved shot at Hagler.

He beat Tony Braxton and Clint Jackson who were world rated at 154 lbs but moved up to 160 lbs.

His quality of opposition was much better than Fully Obel, who got two shots at Hagler.

The only contender Obel beat to get two shots at Hagler was the also unproven and overrated Chong Pal Park.

Fletcher would have gotten a title shot in early '83 after stopping Green, but his idiotic manager agreed to face Scypion in a defense of his USBA title. The Title Shot had already been offered. Scypion decisioned him and took his place.

Fletcher wasn't great but he was very solid for a few years.

 

He was a much more proven than Fully Obel, who got two shots and William "Caveman" Lee who got a shot.

 

It's fairly obvious the Hagler war diminished Mugabi significantly. He too a lot of punishment before finally going out in the 11th round. Of course, he dished out quite a bit to Hagler, as well. It was a great fight.

I can understand you believing Mugabi was an overrated hype machine if he had been blown out by Hagler.

There was doubt about his legitimacy before the Hagler fight - who has he really beaten? I was one of those people.

But after the fight most experts were in agreement - Mugabi proved himself a legitimate contender against Hagler.

Hagler had a ATG great chin.

What if Mugabi landed a bomb on Hearn's fragile chin before Hearn's was able to hurt him?

To completely dismiss Mugabi's chances against Hearns goes against your usual display of sound logic.

I think you are a great poster but maybe you are a little biased with certain fighters - Lewis and, it seems, Hearns?

 

Yes, he was. 'Proven' was probably the wrong word to use.
Instead, I'd say that it was reasonable to suggest that he wasn't quite ready.


EDIT:

@Saad54 - Having given some of this a little more consideration, I wonder - Do you think Mugabi was a proven enough Middleweight to have been given the shot at Hagler?

Also - A related question - Which guys at 160 had Mugabi beaten to take the number one slot in the Middleweight Ring Ratings for 1985?

 

I remember all that well. Hagler was quite angry that Fletcher's camp had gone and ruined what was building toward a nice little money fight for him. Not much later he got himself battered by a Roldan who i think it would be fair to say was an unknown quality. Hagler then cleans up his conquerors.

A lot of these guys were around the fringes and whilst lacking a bit in class put on some brilliant action fights.

 

I haven't completely ruled out Mugabi's chances but i have gone to deep lengths showing why i have the confidence in Hearns to get this done.

I don't think myself heavily favoring in this particular Hearns shows bias toward him. At the end of the day Mugabi never got the job done and lost every time he stepped up. I gave him a punchers chance.

We are definitely in different camps per Lewis and i would (in a friendly way) counter that i think you are solidly biased against him. Ages back i did see you call him a certain pet name (and damned if i remember what LOL) that showed me a level of disdain for the man. I'd add Tszyu and Hopkins (taking Roldan over Hopkins is a fair dinkum gee up) to that list.

I think you are a top poster tho and we all have our news and views. boxing isn't simple enough for us all to agree and big up the same guys. We lived the exact same era and are the around the same age and i remember most of what you post and you are always spot on. It was an amazing era.

 

I think we have to take on board that Hearns was, in the main, fighting a class of Boxer above that of Mugabi, at 154, and being quite devastating in many of those bouts - certainly no less than Mugabi was.

Hearns at 154 is the most unbeatable I saw him look.