Is there a chance that Hagler is just a little overrated these days?

A little bit probably.

 

You can be a shade overrated but still historically great. IMO he’s somewhere in the top 5, not No 1.

 

Overrated in what respect ? Hes rated a top 5 Middleweight which is fair, attribute wise he has no real glaring weaknesses and is good in pretty much every department, aswell as having a titanium chin so logically he rates pretty highly H2H aswell.

 

Definitely top 5 but struggled against champion Vito Antuofermo on Nov 30 1979, title bout declared a draw after 15 rounds, could not intimidate Vito, both were marked up. Struggled against a blown up lightweight Roberto Duran, who ventured into middleweight on Nov 10 1983 before winning a decision to retain his title. Lost to a fighter that had not had a fight in 3 years, Sugar Ray Leonard on April 6 1987, after claiming he would destroy the smaller fighter, decision by the licensed judges was just. Failed to break the record of title defenses held by Carlos Monzon, who had defended his title 14 times from Nov 7 1970 until his retirement as champion on August 29 1977.

 

I have him #3, which is pretty accurate I think. There's been enough time gone by now to where people are reasonable and level-headed about him.

 

I wouldn’t say so. He’s regarded as one of the greatest middleweights ever. Sometimes posters rank him #1, but usually he’s listed as 3rd or 4th.

He only had one clear loss in his career, and was one of the most versatile and well-rounded boxers there’s been.

 

Overrated? No . Reason being most of the great Middleweights
in history he matched up well against other than Ray Robinson.
But he could be taken out of his game, as was proven by
Watts and Monroe, (He destroyed both in rematches) Anterfermo,
(Also destroyed in a rematch)
Duran (One of the greatest fighters in the history of the game,
also one of the smartest) and Leonard (Also A great atg)
In my opinion most of the fighters considered great at
Middleweight he'd do very well against.
But a few not really considered great, like Nunn and
Toney a few others he'd have serious issues with.

 

You younger guys with all of the "revisionist" crap...Hagler is an all time great...

 

No.

 

Number 3?!!?? Surely ye jest!

 

Hi Buddy.
For me is at 4, behind Greb, SRR, and Monzon, so I would say you are pretty accurate, some will disagree, that's their privilege.
Stay safe Sal, like you, like your posts, chat soon amigo.

 

Hey there Mike. Yeah, pretty similar, indeed. I have Greb and then Monzon ahead of him. To me, SRR was just too uneven at 160 to consider him the better career middleweight, but as you say, opinions do differ on that.

 

Hagler was a great fighter ... incredibly focused, strong, good speed, polished skills, very hard puncher with either hand, tricky/cagey, solid defensively and had an all time great chin ... he belongs in discussions of the all time greats ... how high up , who knows ... it has an exceptionally deep division history and styles always matter .. that said he's be a dreaded opponent for anyone ...