Primes: Hagler versus Pavlik?

Pavlik is not in his prme yet

 

VITO is is no way better then PAV ! save that **** for the young guys who dont know any better ! :deal And for the record REASONABLE PEOPLE realize there is no way to KNOW who would win a hypotheticle fight ! :hi:

 

Marvin cleaned out the middleweight division, whereas Pavlik beat a mediocre champion and nearly got knocked out in the process. Hagler showed no weaknesses against any of Pavlik's strengths. He's outboxed better fighters than Pavlik, knocked out tougher fighters than Pavlik, and destroyed every fighter who fought like Pavlik.

Pavlik has a "ghost" of a chance here. There's nothing to indicate he will win.

 

atsch Are we talking about the same HAGLER that had a hard time with a lightweight and lost to a welterweight and lost to VITO ? Yes I think its possible he could lose a desision ! You peple are lunatics the way you glorify your heros !:bart

 

Monzon is like Pavlik? :rofl

Pavlik beat equal competition to Marvin? :rofl

Fer heaven's sakes, boyo...look at the Ring rankings and count up how many top 10 fighters each guy beat.

What do "we know" that would lead us to pick Pavlik? Name it.

And when did Marvin have trouble with the intangibles?

So people underrating Pavlik means he'll beat Hagler?

 

Why do you keep pointing out the obvious? We know there is no way to know for ****s sake, it's not as if Hagler is going to fight on his zimmerframe (in which case he'd still win.)

However all boxing logic says its a very easy fight to pick, and that is reflected by the number of posters that think this thread is a ****. You just seem to like being contrary for the sake of it.

 

And what fighters did he face like PAV ? And so now PAV beat a guy who is mediocur ! the same guy who won the title from the current lighhtheavyweight champ and just fought a draw with pound for pounder WINK ? Your completely dilusional if you think MARV beat lots of guys better then PAVLIK ! th3en again statements like HE WOULD CERTAINLY win when refering to fighters is rediculous in its own right ! :bbb

 

I don't know what Marvin you're talking about, since he didn't lose to Vito (it was a draw) and beat Duran.

Is this the same Pavlik who was almost knocked out mediocre champion and only fought two ranked opponents in his entire career? Or is this an imaginary Pavlik to go with the imaginary Marvin you created above?

 

Actully dip**** I have an opinion that I am being critisized for and all common sence doesnt point to MARV destroying this guy and I already gave reasons why ! Why have a debate if according to YOU GUYS its a forgone conclusion ! CHAPS get dthroned by underdogs all the time ! are the people who picked the underdogs stupid ?:hi:

 

Who knows maybe if Pavlik got on his chest and worked Hagler back it could be a hard night like the Briscoe fight. Haglers quality would shine through and he'd win a decision

 

Didnt the same DURAN get starched by HEARNS ? the same DURAN MARV couldnt even hurt ? This sounds like the idiets who claimed LL was going to lose every fight becasue he as dropped by OLIVER and ROCK ! But quess what he didnt ! And I know it was a draw he actually should have won ! Im simply pointing out he had a tough fight against a guy I dont think is as good as PAVLIK ! Anyway we simply disagree on this !:rasta

 

:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

I answered that THREE TIMES!


HEARNS
MUGABI
OBELMEJIAS

Yeah. That's the word on the street.

The same guy who went life or death with former welterweights...?

The guy who almost lost to Hopkins twice...?

Yeah, because we all know it's ridiculous to pick a proven fighter who cleaned out the middleweight division and has no stylistic weaknesses against a novice with two wins over top fighters.

 

Underdogs are underdogs because they aren't expected to win, and usually don't.

That sums up Pavlik's position here.

 

He makes some valid points. Not everything is one-sided.

Who did you pick to win the Berto-Estrada, Taylor-Pavlik fights again?