Marvelous Marvin Hagler appreciation thread

That´s a good description (when I understand what this mean in my language), Hopkins is/ was a very talented, very good fighter with a cool old-school-style, but to have him "surely" in a Top10 MW- ATG´s list, or to compare the DLH-win (Oscar never defeated someone at MW) to Hagler´s Duran-win (who beat later the champ Barkley) is just biased IMO...

I never said Hopkins is so bad or that he doesn´t deserve a high ranking, but the bias towards some fighters is just to much for me (Brownpimp88 has Nunn for example at 10th or so, Toney at 6th ca., etc.)

My question is, why a fighter like Bogash (I take him as an example, because he´s almost unknown here today) who beat great fighters like Tiger Flowers, Tommy Loughran, Mickey Walker, Mike McTigue, Panama Joe Gans, etc. isn´t even mentioned and a fighter like Nunn in a Top10 in a deep era like the MW´s? :think

 

Why does Hagler need an 'appreciation thread', when he is the most overrated, best supported fighters on this board. Bearing in mind, he was basically a good all-rounder. But nothing particularly strong (neither a great boxer, nor a great pressure fighter) in any style.

There isnt a day goes by when there isnt a thread regarding Hagler


edit: One more thing, how did he get on against the best fighter he fought?

 

Hagler was an excellent middleweight champion, and, at minimum, a Top 3 atg middleweight. Hopkins is, at absolute minimum, a Top 10 atg middleweight who had the misfortune of fighting in a weaker era, but still would likely have been a champion in just about any middleweight era.

That should be the end of the dicussion...but, it probably won't.

 

Exactly. the 3 rd. knockout was just the latest in a long line of accomplishments. #1 fighter of the 80's

 

was Hagler small for a middleweight? Its just that he looked much the same frame size as Duran.

 

Agreed to an extent. Hagler was brilliant versatile fighting machine, and was without question of the best of the 80's. Its up for arguement that he was the best fighter of that decade.

Many people tend to go with Leonard, based on the factual evidence that he beat Hearns, Duran, and Hagler. Especially since he had one fight in five years before before sharing a ring with Hagler. Nobody thought Leonard would last 12 rounds, never mind winning a controversial decision. All the Hagler fans would have been licking their lips before the first bell rang, expecting an easy nights work. The excuses poured out after Leonard won.

Hagler's status as a true middleweight great was always in question until he beat Hearns. Minter, Obel, Hamsho, Sibson, Roldan, etc. All very good middleweights, nothing more. The Duran performance was hardly convincing, especially as Duran was a natural lightweight. Not the perfomance of a middleweight legend, far from it.

 

i saw him up close once in sparring. he is kind of small in person. maybe 5-8

 

Perhaps the reson therefore is, that you underrate Duran at 160 lbs.? For me personally, Hagler could have fought a bit more aggressive, but he fought smart, he knew how good Duran even at 160 lbs was...

 

Hagler knew how good Duran was even at 160lbs?.

Duran prior to facing Hagler had never fought at 160lbs. His punch resistance was untested at the weight, as was his chin. And Duran moved up for money not because he was struggling to make 154lbs, hence the reason he moved back down after Hagler defeated him. Also, nobody expected Duran to fight cautiously and so defensively.
The press, Hagler, and everyone in the fight game expected Duran to press the action. For you to say Hagler KNEW how good Duran was even at 160lbs is something you have said in hindsight, after the fight has taken place. 24 years later.

Before they stepped into the ring, Hagler never knew how good Duran was at 160lbs. To make matters worse Duran started off at lightweight, thus making your ridiculous statement look laughable.

 

You´re the one who has a Hagler-avatar, but who is in reality a Hopkins-fanboy. IMO that´s laughable and ridiculous. Hagler´s these that Duran is even at 160 lbs a hell of a fighter was getting confermed later when Duran beat Barkley, a good fighter who has just beaten Hearns there and who was a big MW...

 

Hagler in my avatar should have nothing to do with your response. I happen to be a Hagler fan, but it doesn't mean I should gloat and overblow his achivements just because pictures appear of him at the left handside. Thats what you call being biased, not me I'm afriad.

Sugar Ray Leonard I personally don't like. However, that doesn't mean I should scrutinize and downplay his career.

You happend to previously quote my post by saying "Hagler knew how good Duran was even at 160lbs". Thats not true, and its factually incorrect. Thats like me saying "I'm going on holiday to Spain tommorow and I will know the weather will be sunny and over 80 degrees". Wrong, I wouldn't actually know how good the weather was until I arrived.

Hagler never knew how good Duran was at 160lbs, and for any person on the planet to say otherwise is a fool.

He certainly knew how good Duran was after he won a lacklusture 15 round decision, and was made to look ordinary under the lights at Ceasars Palace. Duran performed well against Hagler, considering it was his first fight at the weight. He was untested against a middleweight, as was his ability to take a punch from one, and his own power was questioned as well before he squared off against Hagler. As is any fighter moving up who previously never fought at a higher weight.

Yes after all that you have corrected yourself, it was further established how good Duran was at middleweight when he fought Barkley six years after Hagler.

 

Whats wrong with putting michael nunn in a top 10 middleweight ranking? He beat tate, roldan and barkley at 160, 3 very good fighters. He knocked out kalambay in 1 ****in round and he beat the two best welterweights of the era, starling and curry. Even before his title run began, he beat about 4-5 ranked middleweights. He accomplished more at 160 then fighters like nino benvenuti and even stanley ketchel for that matter. Ketchel's top win is against jack o brien and that was NOT at middleweight. Rodrigo Valdez is another guy that is usually top10-15 at 160 and Nunn has the better title run too.

Lou Bogash never beat mctigue, his win over flowers was at 175 and he lost 3 times to him. Walker and Loughran were green when he beat them, its not like he fought the prime versions.

 

I don´t know what you want, I said in my last post, that Hagler with his chin and power should have fought more aggressive and all that, but right now, when we look back and see what Duran later did to Barkley, we knew Hagler´s win isn´t as disappointing as we first thaught, you know what I mean?

 

Vasquez knocked him down 5 or 7 times

 

I don't want anything. You happened to say "Hagler knew Duran was good at 160lbs". That was your reponse after my post about Hagler's lacklusture display against a former lightweight. You said Hagler fought cautiously and should have forced the fight more, but he knew Duran was good at 160lbs.

My question to you. How did Hagler know Duran was good at 160lbs, when he previously never fought at the weight?.

Nobody knew how De La Hoya would perform against Sturm, and nobody knew how Mayweather would perform against De La Hoya. Nobody knew how Leonard would perform against Hagler.

The Barkley fight happened years after the Hagler fight, so did Hagler look into the future?