View Full Version : Marvelous Marvin Hagler, Where do you rate him?


Barnburner
08-10-2010, 05:57 PM
I believe Hagler was an excellent fighter who I would rank anywhere between 30-15 on an all time greatest list.
I don't see why a lot of people on the forum put Sugar Ray Leonard above him on a Pound for Pound list?
Hagler has had more fights, did everything the hard way, never backed down from anyone etc.
I'm new to boxing so if any of my statements are wrong please correct me and notify me why.
Some people are also mentioning Hagler ducked Qawi and Spinks?
Spinks was in a much higher weight class and Hagler was a small Middleweight and Qawi was not as good as the opposition out there to face.
And don't get me started on Mike Mcallum :nono:

D-MiZe
08-10-2010, 05:57 PM
SRL's p4p achievements are better than Hagler's.

sonnyboyx2
08-11-2010, 01:48 AM
I believe Hagler was an excellent fighter who I would rank anywhere between 30-15 on an all time greatest list.
I don't see why a lot of people on the forum put Sugar Ray Leonard above him on a Pound for Pound list?
Hagler has had more fights, did everything the hard way, never backed down from anyone etc.
I'm new to boxing so if any of my statements are wrong please correct me and notify me why.
Some people are also mentioning Hagler ducked Qawi and Spinks?
Spinks was in a much higher weight class and Hagler was a small Middleweight and Qawi was not as good as the opposition out there to face.
And don't get me started on Mike Mcallum :nono:

Qawi was far better than the opposition out there..

Hagler just about makes the Top 10 IMO

Toney616
08-11-2010, 03:37 PM
And don't get me started on Mike Mcallum :nono:
What do you mean?

Barnburner
08-11-2010, 04:25 PM
What do you mean?
Mike Mcallum claims Hagler ducked him.
For one Mccallum only got his first championship belt at junior middleweight in 1984 a year before Hagler retired. When Hagler retired he was at something like 24-0 so he was just a young prospect at that point. At that point Hagler had just fought Mugabe, Leonard and Hearns whom were way tougher than Mccallum at that point in his career.

boxing boy
08-11-2010, 05:09 PM
Behind......

Grebb
Langford
SRR
Ketchel

Tied for 5th with Monzon.

The_Demon
08-11-2010, 05:14 PM
Hes a top 5 MW for me,i have SRL above him in my ATG list though

HaglerSteelChin
08-12-2010, 02:59 AM
What hurt hagler was guys like Rodrigo Valdez and Hugo Corro Wanted no part of him, and what happened in the Antefuermo fight is already known. At first, i thought the draw was the right decision, but if you put the volume down and don't listen to Howard Cossell than you will see what happened in that fight.

If Hagler had his title earlier, he may have broken Mozon's record. The fact still remains that in over 60 professional fights he beat every opponent he ever faced except in that last fight with SRL. A fight he wanted earlier in his career but only got when he slowed down under the conditions of glove size, ring size, and 12 rds instead of 15. BTW, i won't get drawn by a specific troll into that discussion as SRL vs Hagler has been discussed a million times in this board; including myself.

Trenchant
08-12-2010, 06:10 AM
1984 was not 1 year before Hagler retired. He retired in 1987 after the Sugar Ray fight. Also Qawi was a light heavy just like spinks and only went up in weight , he fought Holyfield at 185lbs in 86' and then started fighting in the new cruiserweight division. I'd rank Hagler above Sugar Ray just based on opposition and number of title defenses but I'm biased because Ray did use out of the ring tactics like waiting for Hagler to slow down and waiting for Duran to party and get fat before giving him a rematch. Sugar Ray also didnt have nearly the amount of fights period that Hagler did.

Barnburner
08-12-2010, 06:33 AM
1984 was not 1 year before Hagler retired. He retired in 1987 after the Sugar Ray fight. Also Qawi was a light heavy just like spinks and only went up in weight , he fought Holyfield at 185lbs in 86' and then started fighting in the new cruiserweight division. I'd rank Hagler above Sugar Ray just based on opposition and number of title defenses but I'm biased because Ray did use out of the ring tactics like waiting for Hagler to slow down and waiting for Duran to party and get fat before giving him a rematch. Sugar Ray also didnt have nearly the amount of fights period that Hagler did.
Sorry you're right my mistake.

Shadow boxer 3
08-12-2010, 06:45 AM
top 5 middleweight IMO. and like you said, nothing was handed to him. he did everything the hard way and earned everything he got. one of my fav fighters

r.burgundy
08-12-2010, 06:59 AM
i rank hagler in the 20 - 30 range.he was good but not great fighter.nothing really special.he had a great title reign but he his best wins were against much smaller guys despite having challenges from spinks,and qawi.had he took a chance in moved up he couldve cemented his legacy.but there is no way possible he should be ranked ahead of ray leonard who consistently took tough challenges at different weights

r.burgundy
08-12-2010, 07:01 AM
I believe Hagler was an excellent fighter who I would rank anywhere between 30-15 on an all time greatest list.
I don't see why a lot of people on the forum put Sugar Ray Leonard above him on a Pound for Pound list?
Hagler has had more fights, did everything the hard way, never backed down from anyone etc.
I'm new to boxing so if any of my statements are wrong please correct me and notify me why.
Some people are also mentioning Hagler ducked Qawi and Spinks?
Spinks was in a much higher weight class and Hagler was a small Middleweight and Qawi was not as good as the opposition out there to face.
And don't get me started on Mike Mcallum :nono:

and qawi wouldve been easily the 3rd best fighter on haglers resume and probly his toughest fight

Barnburner
08-12-2010, 09:28 AM
and qawi wouldve been easily the 3rd best fighter on haglers resume and probly his toughest fight

I mean money wise seeing Hagler had only earned 40,000 into his first 40 fights I think there were better money optiosn ie: Sugar Ray, Hearns, Duran.
Plus Qawi was Light Heavyweight.

prinzemanspopa
08-14-2010, 10:01 AM
1984 was not 1 year before Hagler retired. He retired in 1987 after the Sugar Ray fight. Also Qawi was a light heavy just like spinks and only went up in weight , he fought Holyfield at 185lbs in 86' and then started fighting in the new cruiserweight division.



Spinks and Qawi moved up in weight for money.They weren't going to wait around at 175 and wait for Hagler to move up,because it was never going to happen.Hagler was too busy requesting natural welterweights to move up two weight classes and fight him.



There was nothing stopping Hagler from moving up a weight class other than the fear of fighting a man bigger than himself.

turdleburgle
08-15-2010, 04:56 AM
other than robinson what other middleweights are better? Ive seen some monzon and never been impressed.he's too slow for someone like hagler

JAB5239
08-15-2010, 05:00 AM
other than robinson what other middleweights are better? Ive seen some monzon and never been impressed.he's too slow for someone like hagler

Robinson should be below both Monzon and Hagler in my opinion. But saying Monzon was to slow.....he wasn't to slow for Napoles, Griffith or Benvenuti.

turdleburgle
08-15-2010, 08:32 AM
Robinson should be below both Monzon and Hagler in my opinion. But saying Monzon was to slow.....he wasn't to slow for Napoles, Griffith or Benvenuti.




well I havent seen those fights but from what I have seen he looked very slow and his jab didnt look anywhere near as hard and accurate as haglers did.why would you not rate robinson above them?

wmute
08-15-2010, 08:36 AM
3rd best mw, behind Greb and Monzon. Cant evaluate much before Greb, cos that's kind of the limit in time of what i "studied".

Hagler was my fav fighter growing up, and one of my favs these days. I have to say one thing, which I realized with time. He was not a smart fighter. That limits his position in a mythical ATG p4p standing. I would say he is behind Leonard, and definitely behind Duran.

Toney616
08-15-2010, 08:52 AM
He was not a smart fighter.
Why do you say that?

wmute
08-15-2010, 09:04 AM
Why do you say that?

Round 1-4 of the Leonard fight are enough of a reason IMO.

He did not show the ability to adapt during a fightm which the top echelon of ATG usually shows. His stamina was so good and he was so tough that he usually won late rounds regardless.

For someone with that dedication, skills and bag of tricks, he was not very smart.

It is my belief that he could have been actually even better, if there was more IQ from him and from his corner.

Toney616
08-15-2010, 09:12 AM
Round 1-4 of the Leonard fight are enough of a reason IMO.

In fact that was quite the opposite, he was trying to be too smart, which is why he decided to fight orthodox for the first 4 rounds. He should of known that Ray wasnt going to stand and trade with him though and should of tried to get him out of there as soon as possible

wmute
08-15-2010, 10:11 AM
In fact that was quite the opposite, he was trying to be too smart, which is why he decided to fight orthodox for the first 4 rounds. He should of known that Ray wasnt going to stand and trade with him though and should of tried to get him out of there as soon as possible

I don't think there was anything smart in fighting orthodox against Leonard.

Toney616
08-15-2010, 01:26 PM
I don't think there was anything smart in fighting orthodox against Leonard.
He must of assumed that Ray would of been expecting him to fight out of the southpaw stance, so he was fighting orthodox thinking it would confuse him. Ray must of thought it was his birthday or something, because according to what I read he was having fits sparring with his southpaw training partners.

JAB5239
08-15-2010, 03:15 PM
well I havent seen those fights but from what I have seen he looked very slow and his jab didnt look anywhere near as hard and accurate as haglers did.why would you not rate robinson above them?


To inconsistent at 160. He was still great, but past his best and with to many losses to fighters neither Hagler nor Monzon would have lost to. Ray probably wouldn't have either at his best, but we can only go by what actually happened.

wmute
08-15-2010, 06:23 PM
He must of assumed that Ray would of been expecting him to fight out of the southpaw stance, so he was fighting orthodox thinking it would confuse him. Ray must of thought it was his birthday or something, because according to what I read he was having fits sparring with his southpaw training partners.

That's a possibility (and it would not have been a smart plan), but if Marvin (and his corner) were smarter, they would have changed plan in less than 4 rounds.

Having the wrong gameplan is not smart.

Taking 4 rounds to make a very simple change (going back to what you do best) is also not smart.

I love Hagler, and note I am not saying that he is a dumb come forward kind of fighter. All I am saying is that when I compare him with those I consider at the top, I see shortcomings in strategy and ability to adapt.

blaze778
08-15-2010, 06:50 PM
I put Hagler in the top 20. He would be top 15 if he would have beaten Leonard. Before Leonard, he was champ for 7 years, took on all comers, avenged both losses and both draws.

He let his ****iness get the best of him in the first four rounds against Sugar Ray. If he would just boxed and took Leonard seriously in the beginning, he would have won on the scorecards.

HaglerSteelChin
08-15-2010, 07:11 PM
People assume that Hagler loss the first four rounds, but Round 3 was close, and could have gone either way, i always scored it even to be fair to both fighters. Round 9 another round that could have gone either way, Hagler landed the heavier blows but SRL captured the drama by getting out of the ropes with flurries.