Ray Arcel on Hagler - Hearns.

Lol. Have you any idea how bad you are making Hill's resume look here?

 

I get that, but you didn't tell the truth which hurts your credibility.

 

Believe me, we totally get that, and I couldn't agree more. In fact Duran made excuses even WHEN HE WON lol. But you are a supreme excuse maker as well.

 

Then why not just say the truth?

 

Give him a break ,geez .. That's his business. Doesn't discredit him at all on wanting to talk about personal life .. He is a knowledgeable poster. He posts facts and has his opinions, just like the rest of us.. I don't agree with some of his positions on Duran either. But I like the discussions and do not take things personally.. And whether I agree or disagree, I enjoy his posts and his knowledge on the era

 

It is a decent resume. It is filled with guys who were there in the late 1980s, and he fought often so they threw in the contenders they had. That is one of the effects of fighting often, like Tyson did, they throw guys in on short notice and they fight everyone, regardless of how good they are.. I don't think Czyz was a bad fighter. Leslie Stewart fought Marvin Johnson. I think it was Feb. 9, 1986 since that was my mom's birthday... and I seem to recall it for some reason.. He fought Tate... I cannot look at the resume, I know he was good decent fighter who had a great jab and fast hands and feet, a terrible right hand and a great counter hook if he could trap the guy moving in. I think he was underrated for sure, but he had a ceiling.. and in someways Duran did also.. Which of course upsets people.

 

My credibility? What is that? I have personal friends who know who I am and know I am as honest as they come. I don't know why I am even saying that, just to prove a point. So that is what matters to me, whether I say who I am on a message board for boxing. Listen, if my status as mag1965 meant so much, eastside would not have cancelled that name. And you know what it was about, I remember now. They cut off posts in certain areas to make space, and everyone's post numbers went down by significant amounts. and people who questioned is were booted. At that time, I liked to see where I ranked as far as posts, since it was something to follow. It was about posts and questioning eastside on it, because I don't remember anything else. So someone with eastside had a power thing and what could I do, but they did not see me in a personal way, they just cut me out and no one here I knew personally defended that or got my name back for me, so what do I owe people here as far as saying who I am. I don't owe that. When someone asked me who I was, I felt almost offended like, what if I am mag1965.. What does it matter? You either want to discuss boxing or talk about my personal stuff. My personal life means nothing here. None of our personal lives do or who we are. And you know that. Saying my credibility is affected, no because nothing on this board was based on saying who we are.

 

What are the times I made supreme excuses which match what a professional legend Duran made? You really think saying I make supreme excuses makes Duran's excuses less. That is where your line about me being an excuse maker comes from, but it does not take away from Duran's numerous excuses. You are reaching here. If Hearns or Leonard or Hagler or Benitez made these excuses, I would accept. And Benitez did say he never trained, but I think that was exaggerated. And when did I say anything about anyone like Hearns drinking 2 gallons of water and eating steaks, and that was the story in 1980 June, the night the fight happened that story came out. Then Benitez, he didn't train.. Hearns he didn't train.. Leonard 3, Leonard fought like a sissy. He couldn't say he didn't train because he knew he used that one numerous times before.

 

You are answering why I didn't say who I. I didn't want to talk about me and who I was for a month as though it matters. You either want to talk about boxing and things surrounding that, or you want to talk about me. Here is your answer..

 

Thank you. I enjoy all your posts also and everyone elses. Which is why I come here, for the knowledge other people have. Talking to people who know about boxing is much better than talking to people who have light knowledge. Before the net, I couldn't find people to talk boxing with. So the net brings people together who love the sport. I just come on here to talk and posts opinions. I didn't know we had to answer everything about who we were apparently is what Clifton is saying. Eastside boxing, which owned this site before whomever owns it now (I guess now it is called boxingforum24), booted my name for no reason- or at least no good reason. I didn't see a reason. I wish I could get that name back, but I can't. 34,000 posts. Then I joined checkhook boxing with the mag name which I try to post at sometimes, but the amount of people there is so much less than here.

 

Can anyone show me the exact right hand that was supposed to have hurt Hagler as I cannot ever find it on tape .. maybe the angle but at what point in the round was it ?

 

There was no right hand that hurt hagler... merely a right hand that stop him and got his attention for a moment.. before he went back to work. Nothing more to it. The way people talk it's like Halger was out on his feet

 

I'm not talking about opinions... I'm talking about you misrepresenting facts to try and make your case. I've seen you over and over again cite than Duran fought at 154 for years prior to meeting Wilfred or Hearns. On face value, it would seem that Duran was fully in the 154 pound division well before Wilfred was and was full acclimated to the division. That couldn't be further from the truth is it Mag? So much so, that you've now (hopefully it will last) come to your sense and don't use it anymore when you were called out on it. When it was factually pointed out that Duran wasn't fighting at 154 because he wanted to make that weight.. he was fighting there because he couldn't make the LW limit from being out of shape. They still wanted him active so he didn't get further out of shape... so they took fights they could where he was at. NOT because he had acclimated himself to that division properly and was preparing to go there. He wasn't going there... He was still defending his title at LW after some fights at 154.. then moved to WW fights and then to SRL. Clearly illustrating he wasn't really wanting to fight 154 and wasn't acclimating himself to that weight.. he was out of shape. Period. That is just one example of you misrepresenting the facts.

 

This was one big excuse.. Not proving to me Duran is top 10 ATG, which is what I am looking for, and none of you have shown me that. How did I come to my senses? It is only an opinion, but mine is that Duran is a little overrated just on his wins. Had he beaten Hearns or Benitez at 154 then I would say yeah he proved something against great fighters. He reached that level and found a way to win.. But he didn't beat them an I hear excuses on why not. Ok fine, but where are the great wins at lightweight? He didn't have the competition there to make him top ten atg.. All fighters struggle with weight and many of the greats move up and beat great fighters, and if they can't they shouldn't get credit, and losing? Well that is part of boxing, but Duran never beat a great fighter after Ray in June 1980 or before. That is significant. And he did fight at 154 before Hearns,Benitez and Leonard did that is a fact. Who is misrepresenting anything. My point always has been he is not top ten ATG because he did not beat enough greats to be at that level. I didn't say he was not ATG.

 

I believe it was the uppercut where Hearns fractured his hand on Marvins forehead. I haven't seen the fight in a while but it was early/mid round 1... You can see he briefly wobbles him. Hurt? I would say no because Marvin recoups fast and continues the pressure, more of a stun if you will, imo