robinson was faster, more accurate, harder puncher, probably he had better stamina too. robisnon by ud or late tko
Very hard one... Will wait with deciding. One question, though. What do you think of Hagler's chances coming inside like he did against Hearns? I don't mean that he'd blitz him like he did Hearns, just coming inside often enough to start wearing Robinson down and winning a UD. What do you think of the chances of that happening?
Robinson had better durability than Hearns did and more importantly, was much superior at recovering when hurt. Hearns wasn't incredible on the inside, whereas Hagler would find that SRR was a beast on the inside in terms of the damage he could inflict. Look at how SRR creates space to whip in the right hands to the body and follow up with uppercuts to either sternum or face, and how quickly he fires back when hurt. If Hagler bores into Robinson like he did with Hearns, he'd likely find a guy with superior footwork that can turn him and keep him off balance, a guy with timing that can walk him onto shots and a guy that can do damage with the power that he possesses.
I made a thread about this 2 years ago, one of my cases i put forth for Hagler was this- Hagler: he was strong, he was rugged-Gene Fulmer he had a great chin- Jake LaMotta he could impose himself- Randy Turpin he could work combos like nobody's business- Carmen Basilio It's not that simple, but Hagler definitely has a desirable CV in terms of his attributes for this job. Robinson for me has a chance to win not because he 'is like Leonard' which is silly to me, because Robinson is guaranteed to not come into the fight with a gameplan to steal rounds, he has a fine chance because he is most probably the best fighter that ever lived. I think i'm going to take Hagler, hard one to pick
The thread should ask who was a better P4P fighter, because Robbie in his "prime " was a welterweight. P4p Robinson was unsurpassed in his time. And I think that Robinbson at the beginning of his middleweight venture would still beat any version of Hagler...
T, I'm stumped by your pick of Hagler over robinson. You cite all the great virtues of Ray Robinson.You then call Ray Robinson, "probably the best fighter that ever lived "! But you then pick Hagler over the "greatest fighter that ever lived". Contradiction ???
wouldn't bet a cent on this one, too many probabilities. I think Robinson would take a split decision but hagler would make it a war
Nah Burt i was citing all the similarities of between Hagler and the fighters that beat Robinson at 160 (which was clearly not the best Robinson), I meant that Hagler has attributes in common with Turpin, Basilio, LaMotta and Fulmer. Sorry if i didnt explain that properly. But then I said on the flipside that Robinson is probably the best fighter ever, I just picked Hagler because he has strong attributes here and this is not the best Robinson when all is said and done, but I acknowledge that Ray could definitely win.
well. really, robinson weighed 145 pounds when he did beat lamotta in the second fight... lamotta weighed 161 pounds and he was stronger,he had better chin, he was better inside, he was better pressure fighter than hagler. robinson was absolutely much faster than hagler, he got great combinations, he had great chin and great stamina,he was harder puncher. and i would not be surprised if robinson stops him late
