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

He's rated well both H2H per the thread implication and historically. Plenty of people pick him in notable fantasy matches and plenty go against him. He also has very few haters and nuthuggers which helps give him that even keel type of rating across the board.

 

He definitely belongs in the discussion of top middleweights of all-time, but judging by the comments he gets on social media, I think he is one of those fighters who has a rabid fan base.
He had the goods, was always in shape, could punch, a great chin, but he wasn't perfect either.
He gets the same kind of reverence Ali gets, (another one that gets overblown like a Christ-like figure). They were both great yes, but people go to insane proportions. They'll excuse all their shortcomings, all the while bashing and putting down Rocky Marciano who never even lost a fight!

The three blips on his record are mainly Antuofermo, Duran, and Leonard.

I'm surprised fighters like Robinson and Pep don't get the kind of reverence Hagler gets. Both those guys had OVER 200 fights. That is insane by modern standards.

I wonder if, had their been a way in fantasyland to match Hagler against all the greats of his division, would their reputations have caused Marvin to "choke"?

 

Not at all.

 

Hagler fans seem to be fairly rational overall from what I've seen, and he's not the type of fighter that has lots of haters so I would say Marvin has been rated pretty much evenly across the board.

 

Pep and SRR are too removed from our time and there is a lack of footage on them. SRR also seems unassailable as the consensus p4p #1, which paradoxically works against him sometimes. People like the idea of standing up for an underrated Great everbody else is sleeping on. Hagler was also a pretty good lad outside the ring, which helps his case.

 

It's difficult to overrate a fighter who has for years been regularly, almost without exception, rated in the Top 5 All-Time Middleweights but rarely, if ever, stamped as the #1.

Place Hagler wherever you like from #5 to #2. The finest of lines exist amongst the select company residing there.

 

No

 

Robinson and Pep do get reverence on here.

 

Don't know if I'd call Hearns a natural WW. He was only there until his early 20's and was probably always destined to end up at least at MW. Maybe he could have stayed at 154, but not at WW in the same-day weight in era.

Anyhow, as others have said, Hagler was tremendously complete and well rounded and has the resume to go with his abilities. He is regularly ranked in the top 3 at MW and that seems very reasonable.

 

I rate him above Monzon, Greb and Robinson above him though.

 

Hi Buddy.
Pitch perfect analisis from you, some posters are getting a tad carried away, not you. Kudos
stay safe Levook, chat soon.

 

I don't hold the loss to Leonard against Hagler, One I didn't think he lost, and two that was I thought the first time Hagler looked like he had slipped a couple of notches. The fight against Mugabi took a lot out of Marvin and he fought and looked like he was much older . That said, Marvin is a consensus top 5 all time middleweight by anyones measure. Marvin and Monzon would have been an absolute war and I have a difficult time picking this fight. I rate Greb and Robinson higher though Marvin may have gotten a decision against Robinson if they fought a trilogy.

 

The main point of debate with Hagler tends to be whether or not he deserved the nod against Leonard or not. But even with that final, razor-thin career defeat, his legacy was already secure.

The argument that his best wins and toughest opposition came against guys who were coming up in weight could be used as a stick to beat him with but I’m not sure how it really devalues anything he achieved. If he had never fought Duran, Hearns or Leonard, he’d be tougher to rate because he’d be seen as the best fighter ruling a division over a lesser group of fighters. Such is the curse of any truly dominant champion - you beat your opposition convincingly and it’s seen as a problem with the opposition. But the truth is that Hagler was an ATG champ in the making beating a crop of non-great fighters but doing it in a great way. Just look at his punch-perfect performance against Mustafa Hamsho in their first fight or the way he dismantled a tough challenger in Tony Sibson for evidence of that.

So when he met Hearns, he was already considered one of the two best fighters in the world - the other being the man he was facing. There was no-one else who he should have fought so Hearns moving up a division was an irrelevancy, really. Hearns also showed he could fight as a middleweight later when he beat James Shuler and Juan Roldan. He wasn’t undersized - he just met a greater middleweight/fighter than himself the night they fought in April 1985. No shame on Hearns and no shade on Hagler - it was a matchup between ATGs and exactly what we watch the sport for. There is no negative to be drawn from that win in my opinion.

The Duran fight was probably the worst performance of Hagler’s reign prior to the Leonard fight and he still won and won fairly. It’s a bit trickier to rate because Duran was a former lightweight and welterweight champ coming up, but he also showed later that he could hang with some pretty good middleweights too, including Robbie Sims and, more significantly, Barkley (who would knock out Hearns too). Duran was an ATG fighting outside his best weights but still a tough proposition. Had Hagler fought him again, and given Hagler’s improved performances in rematches, I suspect he’d have won more convincingly. As it is, Duran tends to get credit (rightly so) but Hagler gets criticism that I think is a little harsh for that performance.

As for the Leonard fight, that’s been discussed so much that I don’t really have anything to add, but ultimately that defeat didn’t significantly affect Hagler’s standing. He remains top 5 all-time at middleweight and it would wrong to rate him lower - he earned his place fair and square.

 

Hagler is rated fair. People like him because he had no entourage and carried his own bags. There could be a case made Hagler should be 65-1-1. I thought he clearly won the first Antofurmo fight and the SRL fight if he didn't replace Harry Gibbs (who scored the fight 115-113 for Hagler) and replaced him with Jo Jo Guerra who scored it 118-110 for SRL he would of won