Your top 20 middleweights of all-time?

Neither of them fought at 168, but style-wise, I'd definitely favor both over Toney. No question.

McCallum and Nunn were not much better, if at all, than Hearns in actual terms at MW, and a faded Hagler beat Hearns a lot more convincingly than Toney beat McCallum and Nunn(considering how he was getting outboxed against Nunn).

And guys like Valdez and Benvenuti are on the level of Nunn.

 

Some ******ed as **** lists flying around

1. Greb
2. Robinson
3. Monzon
4. Fitzsimmons
5. Hagler
6. Ketchel
7. Zale
8. LaMotta
9. Hopkins
10. Walker

 

that's right I forgot about my top 25 list. I was referring to Norfolk as a middleweight.

 

Iran Barkley beat hearns twice, james toney gave him a paintjob. Let me guess that wasnt Hearns at his absolute best. Toney fought harder comp than hagler did.

 

These would probably be my 10.

Greb
Monzon
Hagler
Robinson
Hopkins
Fitzsimmons
Ketchell
Tiger
Walker
Burley

 

Hearns was dominating Barkley in the first fight prior to getting caught. Hearns was far past his best for the rematch, that's unquestionable. Toney may have fought harder comp at higher weights, but he also lost to much lesser comp, and this is a MW thread anyway.

 

The thing with MW's is its easily the most stacked division, it's incredibly difficult to seperate guys, especially guys where footage is hard to come by. I have Greb, Robinson and Monzon 1-3 every time, after that I'm open to changing guys around if people convince me

 

Well this is how i look at it, hagler liked bullying smaller men, toney liked fighting everyone around. When you go up in weight, you are leaving yourself open for defeat. Hagler didnt have the balls to step up to light heavyweight or heavyweight. He was to busy fighting blown up guys and then bitching when one of the smaller guys outpointed him after a 5 year layoff.

 

Hagler liked bullying smaller men? He was often the smaller man in the ring in his defenses, he was hardly a big MW, where the hell do you come off saying that? Just because he wasn't a lazy fat ass who ate himself out of numerous divisions like Toney doesn't mean he was the ***** you're making him out to be. He'd have beaten Toney at MW, both at their best, that I'm sure of.

 

yeah hearns, duran, mugabi all moved up in weight to fight him. There is no doubt James Toney or even Michael Nunn would have been the biggest test of his career.

 

James Toney shouldn't be anywhere near this list, that much is obvious

 

Regardless of whether or not they moved up, Mugabi and especially Hearns were not the smaller men. Those two may have been the toughest tests, but I don't see Nunn causing much more stylistic problems for a prime Hagler than Hearns did a past prime version. I see him taking th efight to Nunn and taking him out of his game, which he was capable of doing in his prime as well, along with boxing very well.

Toney wouldn't be KO'd, but he'd be in against a more versatile fighter I believe, and one who holds key stylistic advantages.

 

Mugabi was a blown up light middleweight, not big at all at 160lb. And for Hearns, although it was his natural weight, but he was too fragile here, doing much better when he was facing opponents from/at lower weights.

 

If we take Norfolks best fighting weight to be light heavyweight then I honestly doubt that you could name 25 fighters of who you could say the same who acomplished more over the course of their careers.

I think 15 would be a tough asignment.

 

I agree. Tommy was spectacular challenger but couldnt cut it at middleweight. he possessed great athleticsm but not the durability to last at middleweight and I dont believe he was ever of true championship material. Once he won WBC middleweight title he predictably lost it in his first defense against a fringe contender. Tommy ranks about 8th among Hagler's career opponents.