Who was the best middleweight Hagler ever beat?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by PH|LLA, Jun 5, 2011.


  1. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,144
    13,100
    Jan 4, 2008
    If you're ranking Dempsey that highly it is laughable to be critical of Hagler's title reign, since it was of course much better than Dempsey's at HW. It's also a laugh than you mention Zale - who ducked the smaller Burley - as better than Hagler. But at least you're consistent.

    Try and find the Wills during Hagler's reing. What you're doing is faulting him for actually facing the Grebs of his time, which Dempsey of course didn't.

    Hagler fought the best out there, pure and simple.
     
  2. Bummy Davis

    Bummy Davis Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    23,667
    2,153
    Aug 26, 2004
    Roldan was tough....Hamsho...Anterfermo was past it in the 2nd fight but the 1st fight Vito was tough and so was Minter
     
  3. Stevie G

    Stevie G Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    25,143
    8,608
    Jul 17, 2009
    Thomas Hearns.
     
  4. sugarsean

    sugarsean Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,496
    14
    Jun 2, 2009
    Benvenuti ? - Napoles ? - Griffith ?
     
  5. red cobra

    red cobra Loyal Member Full Member

    38,042
    7,558
    Jul 28, 2004
    Yes, definitely Hearns.
     
  6. bodhi

    bodhi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,229
    257
    Oct 22, 2009
    Benvenuti and Griffith are more proven than Hearns, Leonard, Duran or Mugabi at mw. As proven as any mw and quite a few people have them in their Top15/20 there. That´s the same as saying guys like Langford or Charles aren´t hws.
     
  7. sugarsean

    sugarsean Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,496
    14
    Jun 2, 2009
    The point was that they weren'nt natural middleweights.
     
  8. bodhi

    bodhi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,229
    257
    Oct 22, 2009
    This whole natural thing is bs anyway. It´s about if you are proven or not at a certain weight. Griffith and Benvenuti certainly were.
     
  9. sugarsean

    sugarsean Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,496
    14
    Jun 2, 2009
    Where in any of my post does it say they were'nt proven at the weight
     
  10. frankenfrank

    frankenfrank Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,965
    68
    Aug 18, 2009
    Regardless of who won , SRL was never a MW .
    Even 4 years after Hagler , SRL still made 154. Which means @ age 35 .
    Whomever fights at a certain weight at age 35 , was probably never bigger than that weight.
     
  11. frankenfrank

    frankenfrank Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,965
    68
    Aug 18, 2009
    Good point.
     
  12. D.T

    D.T Guest

    He means stuff like my MW ATG list...


    1. Hagler
    2. Robinson
    3. Greb
    4. Monzon
    5. Ketchel
    etc
     
  13. bodhi

    bodhi Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    19,229
    257
    Oct 22, 2009
    Calling them blown up lws/wws does the trick.
     
  14. Unforgiven

    Unforgiven VIP Member banned Full Member

    58,748
    21,578
    Nov 24, 2005
    I would certainly class Hearns as a middleweight when he fought hagler.
    People call Hearns a "natural welterweight" but I find that a bit absurd. He was a very unusual build, he looked bigger than Hagler anyway, and carried himself up to a pretty strong 170 even.

    But whether Hearns was the best middleweight Hagler beat, I don't know.
    Could be.

    I'm a huge fan of Hagler, loved his ability and his old school professional approach.
    But I do see the merit in some of these resume criticisms.
     
  15. Vic-JofreBRASIL

    Vic-JofreBRASIL Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    22,981
    5,331
    Aug 19, 2010
    Danke !!