Marvin Hagler vs Gennady Golovkin At MW

If he had a bad performance vs Brook , he's going to have absolute nightmares vs Hagler. I'll tell ya that right off the bat.

His fight with Ouma and his flat out refusal to face Lara proves he is insufficient vs Southpaws . Hagler's crisp , clean straight shooters would land down the middle while 3G hooks are still in flight. Brook showed you can get off on him first with fast straight shots.

 

3G said no thanks to Ward and Lara. Avoided fighters DO NOT turn down fights.

 

Actually, Hagler had a lack of ring generalship in a few big fights. Duran and Leonard came to mind. Hagler wasn't a stick and move type. The more skilled fighters he fought landed on him. Hagler was also a slow starter in most cases ( Bad thing vs GGG ) and in my opinion, a bit to risk adverse.

Wasn't Hagler floored by Roldan? Yep.

Didn't he draw with Antufermo? Yep.

GGG would blow these guys up.

If Hearns hurt Hagler in two rounds, GGG can do the same.

 

Floored by Roldan? Everybody knows that was a slip and a bogus knockdown. You're creating myths again to make a case for your man because there's just not enough evidence you can put forward.
3g would have a tuff time with Mugabi , let alone Hagler. No man on GiBoys record would even give Marvin the slightest bit of trouble.

 

did hagler get hurt by hearns. i mean a p4p atg puncher like hearns didnt stun hearns anymore than brook stunned ggg.

 

haha - haggler had problems with leonard and duran yeah? no shyte Sherlock he was facing ATGs, not a part bit titlist with one good win like brook.

why always gotta try iceskate uphill Mendoza.

 

The referee later admitted that he had gotten it wrong and Hagler slipped against Roldan, though, mate. True...

 

That's pretty stupid logic. Who has Golovkin beaten that is anywhere near the level of Roldan, Antuofermo, or Hearns? Golovkin looked like crap against a welter who has no good wins other than Porter. Anyone who knows boxing knows it and is saying it.

Hagler has no problems starting fast. Have you seen the Hearns fight? Hagler picks guys apart methodically starting from the opening bell the the end. He touched guys up with the jab then went for the kill which he got 52 times.

Hagler's ring generalship was just fine. Watch the Briscoe fight. He purely outboxed him.

Hearn's power makes Golovkin look like Malignaggi. Not even on the same level. Golovkin couldn't so much as floor a welterweight.

Hagler by ko rd 10

 

This is false and Brook wasn't a welterweight.

 

Golovkin would have a good chance.

This is coming from me!

 

It's called exaggeration and it is a rhetorical technique used for the purpose of getting the point across.

And yes Brook was a welterweight. Fought nearly all of his fights at welterweight=welterweight. He fought at Light welterweight during his career would you call him that? If you are going to throw all common sense out of the window then don't bother responding.

 

Leonard was miles above Brook in every sense. There isn't a single thing that Brook does better.

 

Brook is better than Roldan at least, that guy gets overrated. I agree that GGG's resume is pretty much crap though. Brook is his best win and Lemieux, Stevens, Murray, and Proksa are a cut below that and pretty run of the mill.

 

I think GGG has a breaking point that requires a lot of punishment to reach, much like Tyson or Margarito. He's obviously lacking in defense and that's what's keeping him from being truly first tier in an ATG sense. I think Hagler and Hopkins--especially Hopkins--would be able to exploit his weaknesses and basically dish out a terrible accumulation of punishment on him either stopping him late or taking unanimous decisions.

 

I don't consider Roldan nor Brook anything special in historical terms. But everything else you said I agree with.