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

Define your rating system before starting a thread about someone being "overrated".

This happens all the time. Thread is posted about someone being overrated, but no rating is given by the OP.

He is top 4 absolutely. SRR, Greb, Monzon and Hagler are the top 4. Place them however you want.

 

Hagler is one of my favourite fighters. Nightmare of an opponent, iron chin, slick southpaw with deceptive reach, good power, terrific stamina and never say die attitude. In my opinion underrated during the early years of his reign as everyone considered him a blue collared fighter without the star quality of the Leonards of this world. This changed after the Hearns spectacular victory.

Nonetheless I see how some might see him as overrated. He was not impressive in his 1st victory over Kevin Finnegan, by all accounts he seemed lucky that he won on cuts after being repeatedly hit by rights hands from the courageous Brit. He had struggled in the first 2 fights with slick Sugar Ray Seales. Though robbed in the 1st Bobby Watts fight he was not impressive and Willie Monroe boxed superbly in the first battle that Hagler conceded that he clearly lost. Interestingly Marvin destroyed Finnegan,Seales, Watts and Monroe (twice) in rematches!

Marvin also didn´t look good against Marcos Geraldo coming up and was critized for his tactics in the first title tilt against the gritty Vito Antuofermo and Duran fights and lets not forget he gave away the 1st four rounds to Leonard which ultimately lost him the fight. Also, he was far too easy to hit by strong but crude Roldan with some saying he thumped the Argentinean on purpose.

Some have questioned his opposition in Caveman Lee ( koed by Frank Fletcher), Wilfredo Scypion (got title shot by beating the easy to hit Fletcher and with 3 losses), Fulgencio Obelmejias (fought Hagler twice even though beat no one of repute), Hamsho (strong crude fighter who barely beat an old Minter (massacred in his next fight) and who struggled with Scypion and Curtis Parker though did beat an old Benitez and undefeated Bobby Czyz before the 2nd bout, Tony Sibson who had cleaned up Europe and beaten the difficult Dwight Davison but lost to Finnegan and koed in a round by a light-heavyweight. Let´s not forget Duran who was a former lightweight, quit against Leonard and lost to Benitez and Kirkland Laing and would get destroyed in two by Hearns following his fight with Marvin.

It´s very easy to start to pick holes in a fighters opposition. You could do the same with Monzon or Sugar Ray Robinson at middleweight. Personally I could never see Hagler losing to Randy Turpin for example or having any trouble (maybe Emile Griffith who was still tough) with
any of Monzon´s opposition. I bet you Hagler would have faced Rodrigo Valdez a lot earlier than Monzon who has been critized for avoiding the dangerous Columbian.

Sorry for being so long winded but basically an argument for can be made to over or underrate any fighter. Personally I think Hagler was one meanest middleweights who on his best day would beat most all time greats with the exception of Robinson and Monzon.

 

Disclaimer: Hagler is my favorite fighter of all time.

Widely considered a top 3-5 MW of all time (but never 1 and I agree he's not 1).

1 clear loss (avenged)
1 loss that could've been a win (avenged)
2 draws that should've been wins (avenged)
12 defense reign over 8 years.
Final loss which was arguably a win

Also, his best wins were before he even won the title, Hearns and Duran were not his best wins............he was older at that time. His best win was against Bennie Briscoe. Those are just his two most celebrated wins.............It could be argued that Hagler really went into the Leonard fight with only one legit loss which he avenged twice. Also, the Duran fight was competitive but not all that close and calling Hearns just a WW when we can look back on his career at how he snatched belts in higher weight classes and some of his best wins were above MW is crazy.

And irrespective of weight they began their campaign at, Hearns was much bigger than Hagler. Hagler could probably have made JMW today with day before weigh ins. There's literally no one at the weight he missed except Monzon (who was on his way out) and Ronnie Harris.

I don't see him as being even slightly overrated, I'd say he's properly ranked (behind Sugar Ray Rob and Monzon). He had a hell of a career. I admit I'm biased but even saying he's overrated is crazy to me.

 

No .Not at all

 

Top 3 ATG middleweight for sure. I personally thought he beat Leonard.

 

Not given enough credit for being a road warrior. And just how many of the elite fighters ever had to take that path?

 

I’ve always seen Hagler very fairly rated. A great champion in a reasonable 160lbs era - back in the old days he would’ve been on the murderers row with all those guys and fit in perfectly. I don’t know about top 5 - I don’t know boxing that well though

 

Yes he is top 4,my no 4,and you wouldn't argue about anyone placing him at no 1.

 

No ****ing way.

 

This is a ****ing great post, Double M. Cheers!

 

Great post as usual, John! No surprise there.

 

Not overatted at all .. In fact he has an equal argument to be # 1 MW imo , same as Greb and Monzon do ,, some even say SRR. I think given the fact he cleaned out the division twice, had to wait a long time to get a title shot , he was road warrior as previously mentioned, had a very high KO percentage( especially in Title fights ) , ... If anything , I would say maybe the other way around , a tiche underatted because he has that case to be #1 and ...
I have never seen anyone here go after a hard case that Hagler was overatted. In fact you will see several posters here make a case that Monzon is overatted or even Greb .. which tells me all I need to know about Marvin

 

Like you Sal, I have it 1) Greb 2) Monzon 3) Hagler 4) SRR at MW.

Many years ago I ranked SRR below Hopkins because I preferred the latter's longevity of consistent domination over a lower regarded MW era, over the former's uneven world title record in a more highly regarded MW era. Essentially I thought of SRR as a WW until he first fought for the MW title.

A few years ago I did more research & realised the bulk of SRR's pre-MW title work was done in fights contested at MW.

According to my notes, SRR went around 39-0 in fights contested at WW (allowing up to 150lbs for slightly over the weight non-title fights).

Whereas he went around 104-17-6 in fights contested at MW (allowing up to 164lbs for slightly over the weight non-title fights). Crucially, relative to the term "uneven", he went around 66-1-2 in fights contested at MW before turning 30, with the sole defeat being to LaMotta who he won a series against 5-1.

So, SRR was a pretty dominant MW in & around his prime years, only losing twice in around 70-fights, to LaMotta & Turpin, both of which he avenged. All other losses in MW fights came post a 2.5-year retirement & post the age of 33, when I consider him past prime, though he did continue to bag some notable victories.

The above research, combined with analysis of the quality MWs he beat relative to Hopkins, led me to rank him above Hopkins, and now, as with others in this thread, I see Greb, Monzon, Hagler (who I agree, typically is not overrated) & SRR as a clear top 4 at MW.

 

Excellent points. Gives me pause.

 

For me, Hagler's rating always comes down to the fight versus SRL.
That was his defining career moment, his lithmus test, and as great as Hagler was, he still came short.

Hagler beats Leonard and he has the prime claim to be considered the Number 1 MW. Hagler beats Leonard in commanding fashion by stoppage and forget about Greb, Monzon, Robnson, etc. Hagler is a lock as the undisputed Number 1 MW and this thread wouldn't even exist.

However Hagler lost and that is an asterisk mark in his legacy.
The problem is not as much that Hagler lost, but the way he lost: fooled and frustrated by the antics of a master schemer, who was widely seem like the underdog but at the end ran circles around Hagler.

Understandably many felt dissapointed by the outcome, because they were expectting Hagler to dominate Leonard, but somehow it was like Hagler defated himself that night.
I can stil remember my old man (who was a huge Hagler fan) yelling and cursing at the TV and wondering why was Hagler wasting rounds and allowing Leonard to run away with the win.

No surprise Hagler was always bitter about his fight with Leonard. It was supposed to be his marquee victory, even more than KOing Hearns, but he has only himself to blame.

Thus, I don't think he is overrated at all.
He is properly placed in the top 5 in most ratings, but unless you are a serious Hagler homer you don't put him as number 1.