prime hagler top ten?

-best news I've heard all day.

Check your email.

 

How you know that McGrain

 

D T [ delirium tremens?] without provocation, obscenely insulted, just about the most inoffensive,politest guy on this forum [next to me :yep ] ,poor old BB, respected by all ,and a terrific poster.
DT will not be missed ,but I do ask for clemency ,should he return, [not soon I hope], as his condiiton is very rare,and, at the moment ,untreatable.
He has Computer Tourette's Syndrome.
So ,should the little ****ing, scumbag, slime -ball show his ****ing ****- arsed , nose here again, show some understanding to a fellow human being in pain.:-((
Remember, God sees all.

 

Hagler is #1 middleweight. Only Roy Jones has the speed to make a fight of it before he goes down

 

Burt,it's not as if Freddie is underrated.It's just that we don't see enough of him.His resume is obviously terrific.But,the coverage is limited.Cheers and thanks for your always brilliant contributions.:good

 

here are a list of Actual world champions that Hagler could have fought but didnt.

WBC light middleweight champions - Gianfranco rosi, Duane Thomas
IBF Junior middleweight champions - Buster Drayton, Mark Medal, Carlos Santos.
WBA Junior Middleweight Champions - Mike McCallum

I wouldnt expect any to beat him, but what would i know. Some would have given him good fights. And How many actual world champions did Tony Zale not fight during his time? The point is though, that the great alphabet and weight splits had a bigger effect on challengers than the war. And i dont think people understand just how hard this makes it for current fighters to build great legacies that compete on quality. Even when they unify titles, they still need to unify divisions to do what older fighters can do with a single win. And it is even harder once there, because the best contenders will chase the other available titles. In fact, i will go so far as to say except in very rare circumstances, if your title defence is not against another world champion, it does not mean as much as an older defence against a top 5 contender and/or possibly top 10 contender.

You should note that i said that Tony Zale's reign is similar to Hagler's in length of time. This is not arguable. By any calculations, 7 years is similar to 7 years. Yes, i agree Hagler was more dominant and had more defences, although not so much to the extent that is normally accepted. I would never rate Tony Zale ahead of Hagler (in fact i dont rate many). I would say only Monzon and Fitzsimmons at the weight and possibly Greb who i flip a bit on, simply because his achievements were a couple of pounds over the limit (sorry Burt). But the whole point is that this is a very deep division and it is not totally unreasonable for others to find different fighters they think are better.

 

Great ****ing avatar,dude.Your contris are massively missed:good

 

'preciate it.

 

Hagler v Greb?

It would be like Flowers vs Greb

Superior physical attributes over dirty fighting/tricks/thumbing/gouging

 

The Pittsburgh Windmill was creaking by the time of the Flowers title defenses.

Hagler -as much as I love his glimmering dome- just ain't gonna beat Greb. Bet your house on that.

 

Hagler could have fought those world champions and IMO he would have beaten them, but there was middleweights who Hagler should have fought and didn't like James Kinchen, Herol Graham, Mickey Goodwin, Frank Fletcher as well as taking on Dwight Braxton in a huge money fight which he declined.

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMA6Pd6tT3Q[/ame]

yeah, bet your house on it

 

I was referring to MIDDLEWEIGHT CONTENDERS.
Apart from McCallum, I would not pick any of those you mentioned over those I did ,and mine were all ranked MIDDLEWEIGHTS,let's not kid ourselves, Zale avoided the Murderers Row and pretty much all those I mentioned.
Zale can reasonably be in anyone's top 10, but if any one puts him near Hagler, for resume, and ability, they will have to show me fights that haven't been discovered yet.

Greb is hard to classify, similar to Langford,and ,to some extent Fitz.

 

B,when we compare great fighters of different era's,as we do Harry Greb
against Marvin Hagler, i mull things over in my mind and dissect them...
Such as these points you make ...
1- Yes Greb did tackle and whip great big men such as tunney, loughran, Gibbons, Dillon,Levinsky,etc, while he scaled a few pounds over the 160 lb mark.True. But why would you or I train ourselves to 160,when we could come in a few pounds heavier to fight lightheavies,and not be penalized for it.? Doesn't make sense to torture yourself for nothing.
2- Harry Greb ,past his peak, still trained down to 158-9 ,when he put on a whipping to the great PRIME Mickey Walker, just before Greb's unfortunate
death. So Greb was ,and did fight as a middleweight til the end of his 300
bout career. B, do you honestly think that if Marvin Hagler,fought another
TWO HUNDRED and THIRTY bouts,as Greb did, he would be as successful
after all these weekly bouts against the likes of Harry Greb's bigger and
stronger opponents ? For gosh sakes ,Hagler was winding down in his 65th or so bout with Ray Leonard. Greb on the other hand fought more bouts in TWO years than Hagler did in Marvin's ENTIRE career !!!And against better opposition, for certain.
3-If Hagler ever, BOLDLY took on lightheavies ala, Mathew Saad and company
[wisely he refrained], Hagler would have come in at 165lbs or more, which is closer to his walking around weight, and still be able to defend his 160 pound crown.
4- So B ,Hagler was a great middleweight, whilst Harry Greb ,accomplished ever so more in his truly astounding career, and with only one orb in the last part of Greb's career... Cheers...