Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How is Marvin Hagler not the best MW of all time?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How is Marvin Hagler not the best MW of all time?

    somebody explain this one to me
    30
    yes
    20.00%
    6
    no
    56.67%
    17
    not sure
    16.67%
    5
    are you ****ing kidding me???
    6.67%
    2

  • #2
    he is isnt he?

    Comment


    • #3
      i shall add a poll

      Comment


      • #4
        Because SRR is.

        Comment


        • #5
          Not the best. I'd rank either Greb or Robinson as the best. But he's a top 5.

          Comment


          • #6
            MW has had too many great champions. He was a great, but the way SRR dominated it he is the greatest MW of all time.

            I don't think that Marvin Hagler is a better MW than Carlos Monzon, Jake Lamotta, Mickey Walker, or Bernard Hopkins.

            Don't forget Harry Greb's accomplishments. I don't talk too much about him tho as I've only seen short sparring videos.

            Comment


            • #7
              It's Carlos Monzon. Due to the fact Hagler lost his title to a former Welterweight, who had, had one fight in the last 6 years, and was suffering from eyesight problems.

              Monzon was Middleweight Champ for 7 years and made 14 defences of his title and reitired champion, something which Hagler didn't do.

              Thats why...............

              Comment


              • #8
                I agree Monzon was a better MW than Hagler, by your logic that would make Hopkins the greatest with 20 defenses.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by CarlosG815 View Post
                  I agree Monzon was a better MW than Hagler, by your logic that would make Hopkins the greatest with 20 defenses.
                  Most of them defences were of the IBF title do, virtually all of Monzon's were of the undisputed.

                  And unlike Monzon, Hopkins lost his title to Jermain Taylor. Who in reality lived of them Hopkins wins, and never achieved much since.

                  Monzon would of never lost his title, to someone of Taylor's caliber.

                  Thats why Monzon>Hopkins at 160lb.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Joey Giardello View Post
                    Most of them defences were of the IBF title do, virtually all of Monzon's were of the undisputed.

                    And unlike Monzon, Hopkins lost his title to Jermain Taylor. Who in reality lived of them Hopkins wins, and never achieved much since.

                    Monzon would of never lost his title, to someone of Taylor's caliber.

                    Thats why Monzon>Hopkins at 160lb.
                    Hopkins beat more world champions than Monzon did and reigned as champion for a longer period of time.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP