Castillo vs Corrales or Hagler vs Hearns?

Hagler is my favorite fighter of all time. That was the best 3 rounds I ever seen. But I have to go with Chico VS. Castillo. It went on for 10 rounds. So that's why I'm voting for Chico & Castillo. The best round I ever seen is probably round 1 Hagler & Hearns.

JLC/Chico is my choice just for the simple fact that hagler/hearns was only 3 rnds.

Im going for Cas/Cor as my boy won that one - as opposed to my boy losing the other!.

if i was a mod, id delete u asshats accounts for saying castillo corrales just because it was more rounds

silly ****ing novices..

if i was a mod, id delete u asshats accounts for saying castillo corrales just because it was more rounds

silly ****ing novices..

It wasn't just more rounds. It was more rounds that were every bit as good as the 3 in Hagler vs Hearns. Chico vs JLC > Hagler vs Hearns.

i gave all you ****ing morons a well deserved dose of bad karma. im gonna jet to goto breakfast, later.


the reason hagler hearns was better is

nobody pussied out at the end spitting out their mouthpiece

way more elite moves were used, check out hearns using the ropes for leverage in round one,

hearns broke his right hand on haglers head in round one, that was an epic punch and proves he had an epic chin..not to mention add hella drama to the fight and show how brave and great hearns was for continuing to throw that right hand even after it was broke


it was war from the opening bell very much on a different level than jlc castillo

and finally i will add its mostly latino ****heads voting for jlc -corrales..you chumps are only voting because you want a mexican fight to go down as the all time great fight, you guys are morons.. you dont see me voting for the lesser fight just because their skin is lighter do you?

i gave all you ****ing morons a well deserved dose of bad karma. im gonna jet to goto breakfast, later.

ohhh nooo please don't do that!!!!



ARGGGGGG the dreaded bad karma


lol you tool.

if i was a mod, id delete u asshats accounts for saying castillo corrales just because it was more rounds

silly ****ing novices..Your an idiot. 2 1/2 great rounds VS. 10 great rounds. Guess which one wins. This is coming from the biggest Hagler fan.

i gave all you ****ing morons a well deserved dose of bad karma. im gonna jet to goto breakfast, later.


the reason hagler hearns was better is

nobody pussied out at the end spitting out their mouthpiece

way more elite moves were used, check out hearns using the ropes for leverage in round one,

hearns broke his right hand on haglers head in round one, that was an epic punch and proves he had an epic chin..not to mention add hella drama to the fight and show how brave and great hearns was for continuing to throw that right hand even after it was broke


it was war from the opening bell very much on a different level than jlc castillo

and finally i will add its mostly latino ****heads voting for jlc castillo because they want a mexican fight to go down as the all time great fight, you guys are morons.. you dont see me voting for the lesser fight just because their skin is lighter do you?

I've just came to the conclusion that your Iwatch.

Oh no more bad karma from a another source! please stop!


:) :) :) :)

Castillo/Corrales was the better fight. 10 great rounds vs. 3 great rounds doesn't even out, simple as that.

castillo corrales was a great fight

hagler hearns was legendary, there's a difference, but i dont expect novices to understand that. carry on.

castillo corrales was a great fight

hagler hearns was legendary, there's a difference, but i dont expect novices to understand that. carry on.We know it was a bigger fight. It was to legends of boxing fighting. This Thread didn't ask which fight was more legendary, it asked which one was a better fight. Do you get it now or not.

It has to be Hagler v Hearns for me, might have been just three rounds of boxing but WHAT three rounds of boxing they were.

We know it was a bigger fight. It was to legends of boxing fighting. This Thread didn't ask which fight was more legendary, it asked which one was a better fight. Do you get it now or not.

that display of ignorance right there owns yourself, you seriously thought i was talking about how legendary each fighter was? rofl.

i expect jlc-corrales to get a higher vote, the ignorant masses always win when it comes to a vote, just look at george bush election.

that display of ignorance right there owns yourself, you seriously thought i was talking about how legendary each fighter was? rofl.

i expect jlc-corrales to get a higher vote, the ignorant masses always win when it comes to a vote, just look at george bush election.Man you need help, you should go back to smoking what you smoking. You say one thing, now you say another thing.

I'll give Hagler-Hearns the slight edge.

Hagler-Hearns....is the BENCHMARK for ferocity & breathtaking excitement.

Since 1985....it's the fight all others are compared to....

Corrales-Castillo is an all-time great fight....certainly the best in a long time.

But.."Hagler-Hearns"......that fight meant so much, it has almost become a boxing cliche.

Man you need help, you should go back to smoking what you smoking. You say one thing, now you say another thing.

actually you're just full of ****.


the reason hagler hearns was better is

nobody pussied out at the end spitting out their mouthpiece

way more elite moves were used, check out hearns using the ropes for leverage in round one,

hearns broke his right hand on haglers head in round one, that was an epic punch and proves he had an epic chin..not to mention add hella drama to the fight and show how brave and great hearns was for continuing to throw that right hand even after it was broke


it was war from the opening bell very much on a different level than jlc castillo


When did I say the fight was legendary because the fighters are legendary? I said the fight was legendary because the fight itself was legendary you illiterate novice child.

anyway that's kind of a paradox, legendary fighters make legendary fights, great fighters make great fights. the fighters make the fight.. what's the confusion?

actually you're just full of ****.



When did I say the fight was legendary because the fighters are legendary? I said the fight was legendary because the fight itself was legendary you illiterate novice child.

anyway that's kind of a paradox, legendary fighters make legendary fights, great fighters make great fights. the fighters make the fight.. what's the confusion?Still you're an idiot that doesn't make any difference, Marvin Hagler was my idol when I was kid. But I know difference between a 3 round fight & 10 round fight, Hagler dominated Hearns in round 2 & 3. Coralles & Castillos was a brawl for 10 rounds.

I'll give Hagler-Hearns the slight edge.

Hagler-Hearns....is the BENCHMARK for ferocity & breathtaking excitement.

Since 1985....it's the fight all others are compared to....

Corrales-Castillo is an all-time great fight....certainly the best in a long time.

But.."Hagler-Hearns"......that fight meant so much, it has almost become a boxing cliche.



Fights and fighters are just like wine, they get better as the years go by in the eyes of the public.

Give the Castillo v. Corrales fight 5 or 10 years to ferment, let the tale/legend grow...also after 5 or 10 years have gone by and no one has seen a better fight then it will really ring true as to how great the fight actually was.

Hagler/Hearns was a benchmark as you said and it was an unfair one because it was almost impossible to equal, Castillo/Corrales is the new age benchmark and fans will slowly realize that this fight is not going to be equaled anytime soon.

Tough too pick but 10 rounds of war is 10 rounds of war.

Fights and fighters are just like wine, they get better as the years go by in the eyes of the public.

Give the Castillo v. Corrales fight 5 or 10 years to ferment, let the tale/legend grow...also after 5 or 10 years have gone by and no one has seen a better fight then it will really ring true as to how great the fight actually was.

Hagler/Hearns was a benchmark as you said and it was an unfair one because it was almost impossible to equal, Castillo/Corrales is the new age benchmark and fans will slowly realize that this fight is not going to be equaled anytime soon.

Tough too pick but 10 rounds of war is 10 rounds of war.

Scap.....

Hagler-Hearns was an instantaneous benchmark. No marinating necessary.
It was remembered as fondly in '85, '87, '93....as it is today.

But, yes....Castillo-Corrales will look even better (is that possible) years down the road.
Good point.

castillo/corrales was great, but it was just a lot of infighting. hagler/hearns was a lot of SLUGGING, outfighting, and all at a vicious pace. castillo/corrales was nowhere near as fast as hagler/hearns.

It has to be Hagler v Hearns for me, might have been just three rounds of boxing but WHAT three rounds of boxing they were.

The BB22 is correct again.

The right answer is Hagler v. Hearns.

Spitting out the mouth piece twice was what tainted Castillo v. Corrales, and quite frankly turned an otherwise awesome fight into a bit of a sham.

first of all, in my opinion, hagler-hearns is overrated. yeah i said it, OVERRATED. its a 3 round vicious fight, but theres been many of those, and ive seen worse street fights last longer. everyone gets their panties wet over less than 6 minutes of action.

now as far as castillo-corrales, it was already a GREAT fight, but the whole mouthpiece **** made it memorable. it added drama, let us witness a great comeback within a round, allowed for a rematch, and maybe sets up one of the best trilogies of all time.

ps. im not mexican, but both of these guys are on my favorite fighters list now.

or in other words, hagler-hearns was a quickie, castillo-corrales was an all-nighter.

both great fights, but let's make it black and white:
let's assume none of you guys have either of these fights on tape,dvd,
whatever and one of these fights was never to be shown again.
which one would you can you live with never seeing again?
when i saw this thread i immediately thought, well, c/c was 10
rounds, so i thougt c/c was the better fight.
but, if i had to pick one, of which i'd never see again?
i'd have to let c/c go...
i need to pop the hagler hearns fight into the old vhs every now and then.

i gave all you ****ing morons a well deserved dose of bad karma. im gonna jet to goto breakfast, later.


the reason hagler hearns was better is

nobody pussied out at the end spitting out their mouthpiece

way more elite moves were used, check out hearns using the ropes for leverage in round one,

hearns broke his right hand on haglers head in round one, that was an epic punch and proves he had an epic chin..not to mention add hella drama to the fight and show how brave and great hearns was for continuing to throw that right hand even after it was broke


it was war from the opening bell very much on a different level than jlc castillo

and finally i will add its mostly latino ****heads voting for jlc -corrales..you chumps are only voting because you want a mexican fight to go down as the all time great fight, you guys are morons.. you dont see me voting for the lesser fight just because their skin is lighter do you?

hey slip not only was it more rounds of action it was to evenly matched opponents. As for Hagler Hearns they were evenly matched in some areas and both had different weapons but the thing that stuck out significantly was Hearns galss jaw.You have to be a very big fan of Hearns or Hagler to pick their fight over Castillo Corrales, Im trying to as honest and as unbiased as I can. Their it is plain and simple not only more rounds but more evenly matched guys in (key words) every department.

they were both good, but i guess i could go either way. but the corrales fight u dont c as good fights now as u did then, so with that being said i guess i'd pick that

hey slip not only was it more rounds of action it was to evenly matched opponents. As for Hagler Hearns they were evenly matched in some areas and both had different weapons but the thing that stuck out significantly was Hearns galss jaw.You have to be a very big fan of Hearns or Hagler to pick their fight over Castillo Corrales, Im trying to as honest and as unbiased as I can. Their it is plain and simple not only more rounds but more evenly matched guys in (key words) every department.


Exactly! It was the lack of a Hearns chin that makes Castillo vs. Corrales better...Hearns is not the type of guy that is going to eat big punch after big punch. His weak Chin made the fight look pretty damn brutal. Castillo vs. Corrales was just as brutal, I think more brutal the difference being that both guys ate big punch after big punch. Hearns eats a big pnch and then goes into his patented chicken dance, man I loved it when Hearns would get wobbled!

if i was a mod, id delete u asshats accounts for saying castillo corrales just because it was more rounds

silly ****ing novices..
Dude, your an idiot. Do you even watch boxing. I mean reading some of your posts is like listening to a conversation in a special ed class.

Castillo-Corrales was good, but it was mostly two guys leaning on each other's shoulder for 10 rounds.

Hagler-Hearns is a true classic. Two masters at the top of their game, going all out, with skills unseen in the Cas-Cor fight.

Castillo-Corrales was closer to a Ward-Gatti than Hagler-Hearns.

Exactly! It was the lack of a Hearns chin that makes Castillo vs. Corrales better...Hearns is not the type of guy that is going to eat big punch after big punch. His weak Chin made the fight look pretty damn brutal. Castillo vs. Corrales was just as brutal, I think more brutal the difference being that both guys ate big punch after big punch. Hearns eats a big pnch and then goes into his patented chicken dance, man I loved it when Hearns would get wobbled!

thx scap for agreeing with me, I dont see any other logic to it.
Hearns was hurt with a jab :rolleyes: a punch that was hardly seen in the Castillo fight.The hype around the Hearns Hagler fight was 1000 times greater than the other, but no way was it better.

Castillo-Corrales was good, but it was mostly to guys leaning on each other's shoulder for 10 rounds.

Hagler-Hearns is a true classic. Two masters at the top of their game, going all out, with skills unseen in the Cas-Cor fight.
it was a brawl what skills did I miss in this fight.

Castillo-Corrales was good, but it was mostly two guys leaning on each other's shoulder for 10 rounds.

Hagler-Hearns is a true classic. Two masters at the top of their game, going all out, with skills unseen in the Cas-Cor fight.

you learned about the hagler-hearns fight in some song lyrics or on a message board, since you started to watch boxing about 3 years ago.

then, you downloaded the hagler-hearns fight off of kazaa, and immediately praised it as the greatest of all-time to gain some credibility.

what skills?

if anything, corrales-castillo had more skills with all the inside fighting, and two warriors fighting, as opposed to a guy with a glass chin only being able to go 3 rounds.

i wouldve felt ripped off if i had gotten a PPV for hagler-hearns and it was done after 3 rounds.

the mouthpiece **** corrales pulled off only made it more memorable, and made it clear buddy just wants to fight. he took a nasty blow in the first knockdown, GOT UP. kept taking a nasty beating, GOT UP.

whether the mouthpiece helped him or not, he wanted to keep fighting even though he was pretty much out, and he ended up winning. most other fighters wouldve pulled a clifford etienne and taken out the mouthpiece, but not gotten up and collected their paycheck.

it was a brawl what skills did I miss in this fight.
A brawl, yes. But at least give it the title of "precision brawl" or "master brawl", 'cause the guys were not intent on giving us the Castillo-Corrales throw-back style of "you-lean-on-me-I'll-lean-on-you". I'm guessing you're saying that both Hagler's and Hearns' display of boxing prowess compares with that of Castillo/Corrales?

you learned about the hagler-hearns fight in some song lyrics or on a message board, since you started to watch boxing about 3 years ago.
Actually, watched it live on ABC Wide World of Sports.

Castillo-Corrales was more brutal...

but Hagler-Hearns, they were both BETTER fighters, more power, etc.q

I can only say it one more time ..... Hagler and Hearns = masters. They gave us a classic. In another five or ten years it will still be viewed as classic because it was two top-tier guys, in their prime, going full pull. Whereas, Cas-Cor was a very good throw-back fight, but not classic material, but will be memorable to some.

i gave all you ****ing morons a well deserved dose of bad karma. im gonna jet to goto breakfast, later.


the reason hagler hearns was better is

nobody pussied out at the end spitting out their mouthpiece

way more elite moves were used, check out hearns using the ropes for leverage in round one,

hearns broke his right hand on haglers head in round one, that was an epic punch and proves he had an epic chin..not to mention add hella drama to the fight and show how brave and great hearns was for continuing to throw that right hand even after it was broke


it was war from the opening bell very much on a different level than jlc castillo

and finally i will add its mostly latino ****heads voting for jlc -corrales..you chumps are only voting because you want a mexican fight to go down as the all time great fight, you guys are morons.. you dont see me voting for the lesser fight just because their skin is lighter do you?

**** you. seriously, **** off.

no.

hagler and hearns mightve been better fighters, "masters" or whatever, but they didnt show any mastery of anything in their fight.

there was no skill in that fight, besides a few common boxing tactics, but it was pretty much a street fight with one hard ass, and one guy with no chin.

you learned about the hagler-hearns fight in some song lyrics or on a message board, since you started to watch boxing about 3 years ago.

then, you downloaded the hagler-hearns fight off of kazaa, and immediately praised it as the greatest of all-time to gain some credibility.

what skills?
Call off the attack dog. We have a difference of opinion, but it's only that. I'm not sure why you feel so strongly about Corrales-Castillo's inside skills. It was a great display, for sure, but it was largely limited to a throw-back inside game. Corralles and Castillo have attained a certain place in boxing history based on their overall skills, while Hagler and Hearns have also attained some stature in the boxing game, based on their skills.

Check out Hagler-Hearns again and you'll see two guys with masterful skills, while all-out brawling. It was a display of top-tier speed, ability, heart and skill. I'd just rather see it again right now than watch Castillo-Corrales give each other targets for 10 rounds.

nah, i usually just hate the oldie syndrome where people try to fit in by always saying anything old school is always better, but if you honestly think hagler-hearns is better, so be it.

i disagree. :cool:

Call off the attack dog. We have a difference of opinion, but it's only that. I'm not sure why you feel so strongly about Corrales-Castillo's inside skills. It was a great display, for sure, but it was largely limited to a throw-back inside game. Corralles and Castillo have attained a certain place in boxing history based on their overall skills, while Hagler and Hearns have also attained some stature in the boxing game, based on their skills.

Check out Hagler-Hearns again and you'll see two guys with masterful skills, while all-out brawling. It was a display of top-tier speed, ability, heart and skill. I'd just rather see it again right now than watch Castillo-Corrales give each other targets for 10 rounds.
If there is guys that belong on the p4p list it should be Castillo and Corrales. You cant say hagler and hearns was on another level if anything this was a way bigger clash of styles than the over hyped match up of hearns and hagler. For what it lasted it was very exciting but hearns had already been exposed and got exlosed further more in just 3 rounds.

nah, i usually just hate the oldie syndrome where people try to fit in by always saying anything old school is always better, but if you honestly think hagler-hearns is better, so be it.

i disagree. :cool:Good point, I agree!

it was a brawl what skills did I miss in this fight.
hearns using the ropes for defense and to add leverage to his punches

didnt expect a blockhead liek u to recognize that tho, no wonder u think castillo corrales is better, you dont even recognize skill when you see it

how come all the latinos are voting for castillo corrales? you just want a fight thats fought by mexicans to be the best fight of all time, thats all it is

why cant people be unbiased like me and look past that ****?

u all are no better than iwatchboxing's opinion that tito was better than ali

nah, i usually just hate the oldie syndrome where people try to fit in by always saying anything old school is always better, but if you honestly think hagler-hearns is better, so be it.

i disagree. :cool:


Papi....

The day after Hagler beat Hearns.....it was already being hailed as the most furious, thrilling fight in history. After the initial shock of it wore off, it still retained that praise.
20 years later, still the same.

What I'm saying is....Hagler-Hearns isn't a case of nostalgia getting the better of people.
It was legendary from DAY ONE.

hearns using the ropes for defense and to add leverage to his punches

didnt expect a blockhead liek u to recognize that tho, no wonder u think castillo corrales is better, you dont even recognize skill when you see it

how come all the latinos are voting for castillo corrales? you just want a fight thats fought by mexicans to be the best fight of all time, thats all it is

why cant people be unbiased like me and look past that ****?

u all are no better than iwatchboxing's opinion that tito was better than ali

Using the ropes? wow that is some skill slip, wrestlers use it all the time to get leverage to use their fake ****. How long did this very rare skill last him?you always got to turn everything a latino says into a biased opinion.There is no way around it Castillo and Corrales was a more evenly matched fight than Hearns Hagler making it the better fight.It has nothing to do with any of them being mexican or PR or Latino.Comparing posters to i watch is just palin stupid slip. when have you seen my sig read **** american fighters Mexicans are better. Go back and read the facts i put in my post and tell me where it says this fight was better cause their was a Mexican involved.
Slip i know your as stupid as you sounded in your last post, you seem like you like to argue just for the sake of arguing without a good argument slip it is just plain DUMB.

**** you. seriously, **** off.


Completely brilliant Fuego, what would boxingscene be like without you, I cant ****ing imagine it!

****ing dip****!

Papi....

The day after Hagler beat Hearns.....it was already being hailed as the most furious, thrilling fight in history. After the initial shock of it wore off, it still retained that praise.
20 years later, still the same.

What I'm saying is....Hagler-Hearns isn't a case of nostalgia getting the better of people.
It was legendary from DAY ONE.
I agree that the fight was between 2 legends making this a super hype since the day it was signed. it lived up to the hype answering questions like Hagler being able to take Hearns right hand.He did take it and got a big ass cut on the top his because of it, but the thing is Hearns could take a punch and the whole 3 rounds of the fight showed that. unless your into guys using the ropes to get leverage on their punches and go as far as calling that SKILL.

i gave all you ****ing morons a well deserved dose of bad karma. im gonna jet to goto breakfast, later.


the reason hagler hearns was better is

nobody pussied out at the end spitting out their mouthpiece

way more elite moves were used, check out hearns using the ropes for leverage in round one,

hearns broke his right hand on haglers head in round one, that was an epic punch and proves he had an epic chin..not to mention add hella drama to the fight and show how brave and great hearns was for continuing to throw that right hand even after it was broke


it was war from the opening bell very much on a different level than jlc castillo

and finally i will add its mostly latino ****heads voting for jlc -corrales..you chumps are only voting because you want a mexican fight to go down as the all time great fight, you guys are morons.. you dont see me voting for the lesser fight just because their skin is lighter do you?


Man, you shouldn't even be talking, no offense but white people never make it big, so stop talking ****, youll be sitting down watching a latino, black, etc, boxing fight on TV just like it always happends.

Papi....

The day after Hagler beat Hearns.....it was already being hailed as the most furious, thrilling fight in history. After the initial shock of it wore off, it still retained that praise.
20 years later, still the same.

What I'm saying is....Hagler-Hearns isn't a case of nostalgia getting the better of people.
It was legendary from DAY ONE.Yes it was legendary from the day one. But it was one round of a brawl, round 2 & 3 was dominated by Hagler. I still think round 1 Hagler & Hearns is best round I ever seen. Noway I will compare a short fight to a 10 round brawl. I don't no why some idiots bring stupid racial stuff in this, latino, black & white etc.. Any person make there opinion about race, seriously needs help. I don't judge fights or boxers by race or color.

Yes it was legendary from the day one. But it was one round of a brawl, round 2 & 3 was dominated by Hagler. I still think round 1 Hagler & Hearns is best round I ever seen. Noway I will compare a short fight to a 10 round brawl. I don't no why some idiots bring stupid racial stuff in this, latino, black & white etc.. Any person make there opinion about race, seriously needs help. I don't judge fights or boxers by race or color.

tell that to Slipx

tell that to SlipxSlipx is an idiot, I don't think I want to waste an hour arguing with him.

nah, i usually just hate the oldie syndrome where people try to fit in by always saying anything old school is always better, but if you honestly think hagler-hearns is better, so be it.

i disagree. :cool:
Fair enough. I respect differences of opinions.

Hey, I'm not trying to start something, but I'd say that Corrales-Castillo was actually the "old school" style fight, mostly because Corrales chose early to fight Castillos inside game. Those two guys literally leaned on each other for most of the fight, which is a throw-back to times older than Hagler-Hearns. Don't you think?

Yes it was legendary from the day one. But it was one round of a brawl, round 2 & 3 was dominated by Hagler. I still think round 1 Hagler & Hearns is best round I ever seen. Noway I will compare a short fight to a 10 round brawl. I don't no why some idiots bring stupid racial stuff in this, latino, black & white etc.. Any person make there opinion about race, seriously needs help. I don't judge fights or boxers by race or color.
PAROD .... check it out. How ironic that XCARET agrees with you. He must not have read your "stupid racial stuff" comment. Check some of his recent posts and you'll see that I mean.

Fair enough. I respect differences of opinions.

Hey, I'm not trying to start something, but I'd say that Corrales-Castillo was actually the "old school" style fight, mostly because Corrales chose early to fight Castillos inside game. Those two guys literally leaned on each other for most of the fight, which is a throw-back to times older than Hagler-Hearns. Don't you think?
Munn if you have ever been in the ring you would know that what you call leaning on each other is actually inside defense.

PAROD .... check it out. How ironic that XCARET agrees with you. He must not have read your "stupid racial stuff" comment. Check some of his recent posts and you'll see that I mean.Show me a racial comment by me. Stop talking out of your ass. IDIOT!

Hagler-Hearns was a tad more fast paced. Castillo-Corrales was alot of in fighting while Hagler Hearns was a fought at perfect slugging range for both fighters.

I don't no why some idiots bring stupid racial stuff in this, latino, black & white etc.. Any person make there opinion about race, seriously needs help. I don't judge fights or boxers by race or color.
PAROD .... relax, really. Your post showed you don't like the racist ****. What's funny though is that XCADET jumps in and agrees with your post (or part of it anyway) despite his own racial talk in practically every one of his posts. That's ironic and that's all I meant.

PAROD .... relax, really. Your post showed you don't like the racist ****. What's funny though is that XCADET jumps in and agrees with your post (or part of it anyway) despite his own racial talk in practically every one of his posts. That's ironic and that's all I meant.

i aint racist, but if someone's gonna talk **** about a race and knows he shouldnt be talking im gonna jump in and burn his ass
:boxing:

if u want a fight with skill and brawling at the same time check out the best fight ever.morales vs Barrera 1..but between both fights i just believe that castillo and corrales was more brutal and more even of a fight.........hagler vs hearns was 1 great round and the rest is just a beat down......i saw both fights as just fights and not thinking about their greatness and fight per fight castillo vs Corrales was better...

Munn if you have ever been in the ring you would know that what you call leaning on each other is actually inside defense.
Yes, I have been in the ring. I had little success, but still love the game. I spar and that's it. I workout light one or two days a week.

I can fully appreciate what Castillo-Coralles gave us. It was an awesome display of inside work. Corrales did not have to choose that style, because he can be effective at a distance. Many fight fans probably thought Coralles lost his mind when, in the early rounds, it was obvious that he was content to stay close. You have to admit, going into this fight, that Castillo would be favoured if the inside game was established? But, Coralles showed us he can fight Castillo's fight, and do it well.

At the end of the night, it was 10 rounds of the same stuff, by two guys with heavy hands and lots of chin, banging on each other, slipping punches. A very good inside offensive and defensive show. I appreciate what they gave us, but it was by no means a classic.

Yes, I have been in the ring. I had little success, but still love the game. I spar and that's it. I workout light one or two days a week.

I can fully appreciate what Castillo-Coralles gave us. It was an awesome display of inside work. Corrales did not have to choose that style, because he can be effective at a distance. Many fight fans probably thought Coralles lost his mind when, in the early rounds, it was obvious that he was content to stay close. You have to admit, going into this fight, that Castillo would be favoured if the inside game was established? But, Coralles showed us he can fight Castillo's fight, and do it well.

At the end of the night, it was 10 rounds of the same stuff, by two guys with heavy hands and lots of chin, banging on each other, slipping punches. A very good inside offensive and defensive show. I appreciate what they gave us, but it was by no means a classic.

Wow not a classic? You are hard man to please munn, I guess their names arent big enough for you considering they are in one of the toughest divisions and they both were talking on all comers. not to mention both guys are p4p material, everyone has a different opinion and I can respect that. trust me 20 years from now there will be people watching and talking about this fight.there will be people talking about the mouthpiece scenario and people talking about what a great come back Corrales put together. Something that the Hagler Hearns fight didnt have.

Wow not a classic? You are hard man to please munn, I guess their names arent big enough for you considering they are in one of the toughest divisions and they both were talking on all comers. not to mention both guys are p4p material, everyone has a different opinion and I can respect that. trust me 20 years from now there will be people watching and talking about this fight.there will be people talking about the mouthpiece scenario and people talking about what a great come back Corrales put together. Something that the Hagler Hearns fight didnt have.

exactly.

hagler-hearns was pretty definitive, and short.

corrales-castillo had what-ifs, had controversy, had action all the way through, etc.

they're both classics...

hagler-hearns is like a quickie with a supermodel that you'll never forget.

corrales-castillo is like an all-nighter with the same supermodel that you'll never forget.

i guess it all depends on your mood, but getting the crew together, and 10 minutes later the fight is over, hardly qualifies as "the greatest ever" to me.

a fight like corrales-castillo which had action all the way thru, for 10 rounds, and people STILL argue about the corrales mouthpiece ****, about the castillo low blows, about the referee, about the rematch...that qualifies...

PAROD .... relax, really. Your post showed you don't like the racist ****. What's funny though is that XCADET jumps in and agrees with your post (or part of it anyway) despite his own racial talk in practically every one of his posts. That's ironic and that's all I meant.Fair enough dude!

I dont understand how the so called greatest fight of all time, was just three RD's long, that makes boxing seem alittle sucky, dont ya think? Corrales/Castillo was good, but his fights with Casamayor was better, the three knockdowns at the end made it kinda overrated, all they did was stand in one place and trade, they were hardly boxing. Corrales just wanted to have a Mexican fight, or esle it wouldnt of gone so far as it did.

Even though coralles/castillo match had a lot of knockdowns, the hagler/herns fight is considered to be the best 3 rounds in boxing history. And on top of that. hagler/hearns are considered 2 of the best middleweight in history. The action with in those 3 rounds was worth it.

:boxing: Castillo/Corrales For Sure

Unforgettble FIGHT!!!! :boxing:

:boxing: Castillo/Corrales For Sure

Unforgettble FIGHT!!!! :boxing:
THATS ALSO MY PICK..PEACE

they're both classics...

hagler-hearns is like a quickie with a supermodel that you'll never forget.

corrales-castillo is like an all-nighter with the same supermodel that you'll never forget.
Now that's a good perspective. Except, mentioning Hagler, Hearns, Castillo or Coralles in the same sentence where I'm "doing" the 1990 version of Claudia Schiffer, is kinda' weird.