Marvin Hagler Overrated Legacy?

[BigMacFoster]

Big Mac you have been made a complete fool of, from me to the Great A. Now go away and make another ALT. I have forgot more about Boxing History than you will ever know. FACT

You've got some ****ing nerve you coward,Mr copy and paster "I wrote that **** before it was wrote"

You never made one legitimate point against me and I exposed you for your copying and pasting on reviews of fights and you then preceeded to resort to claiming such articles were written by you

Many people on this board hate me yet they never bothered to defend you when you made a fool of yourself because they know what a clown you made out of yourself

here you go everybody,Read this.

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...=301783&page=3

Murray Sutherland is yet ANOTHER never was who never beat an opponent of note. He also had 9 losses on his record (ie. every time he stepped up in class.....) when Kinchen fought him. No-names beating no-names doesn't impress me.

Murray Sutherland who was actually a top ten ranked middleweight at the time.It doesn't matter what the **** you think

Mugabi,Obelmejias,Scypion,Caveman Lee don't impress me either yet their on Haglers resume of title defenses

Kinchen fought Minton, Drayton, Hearns, Barkley, and Hill between 1985 and 1989 AND THOSE WHERE HIS ONLY NAME OPPONENTS OVER THAT 5 YEAR STRETCH. Before 1985 he fought exactly NO ONE of note.

Do you even know who Frank Minton is? He was a ****ing bum,How the hell you came to the conclusion that he was a name at any point in his career is laughable just like yourself

Shuler beat himself? Off, I suppose I presume you meant Shuler beat Kinchen: See the above about no-names beating no-names

Poet

Good going,****head.You just laughed at my error of a mistyped word and yet in the very next sentence pointed out the very same little mistake I made thus making the joke on yourself

When you have to point out such an error to get a laugh you know your a fat creepy pedo lving in his moms basement

Yeah I know, thats why my opinion is respected by the majority of posters on these boards if not always agreed with. Do you really think its a coincidence that no one agrees with you and you keep getting banned? You and your opinion are a joke to the knowledgeable posters on these boards. Cry all you want, but learn to live with it.

If looking for respect on an internet forum is your goal in life then I suggest you get out more.Like I have already stated you couldn't make a decent argument if your life depended on it,You use constantly flawed logic,disregard sources and specific time frames and usually cop out of arguments in the end because your not getting your own way

You are anything but knowledgeable which is why you constantly hide behind the likes of TheGreatA to support your pathetic arguments

I've been banned once and it wasn't anything related to the boxing history section

I've got to admit that this is the first time I've ever heard anyone accuse Hagler of ducking James Kinchen and James Shuler. The Herol Graham argument I've heard before, mainly from British boxing fans.

I also don't see how wins over Kinchen, Shuler and Graham would have added to his legacy.

That argument can apply to many of Haglers mediocre opponents who he defended his title against.I never claimed these were some of the greatest middleweights you will ever see,I merely pointed out that Schuler and Kinchen were ranked pretty damn high for a long time and never recieved a title shot

Herol Graham was Hagler's mandatory in 1986 for the WBA middlweight championship,So this argument hasn't just come from nowhere

Hagler had more than enough time with the thirteen month layoff he got to defend his title against Graham,Afterall he defended it against Hamsho and Obelmejias the second time around

Brilliant! Just ****ing BRILLIANT!!

Mr original needs to keep up with the times and notice pedopoet alreayd pointed out the blatant mistype

[JAB5239]

If looking for respect on an internet forum is your goal in life then I suggest you get out more.

If you aren't looking for any kind of respect or validation why even post? Is just to see your own words? whats the reason.

Like I have already stated you couldn't make a decent argument if your life depended on it,You use constantly flawed logic,disregard sources and specific time frames and usually cop out of arguments in the end because your not getting your own way

I know, thats why I destroyed your whole Joe Frazier ducking Foster and Lyle argument, right?

You are anything but knowledgeable which is why you constantly hide behind the likes of TheGreatA to support your pathetic arguments

TheGreatA is a fantastic poster, I see no need to keep repeating the things he's already pointed out though. You are familiar with the the old saying about beating a dead horse, right?

I've been banned once and it wasn't anything related to the boxing history section

If no one agrees with you, no one likes you, and you get banned from a public forum, what does that tell you? You're a loser.

Mr original needs to keep up with the times and notice pedopoet alreayd pointed out the blatant mistype

It is true that Poet did already point that out. But sometimes its fun to keep laughing at the terminally ******.

[TheGreatA]

That argument can apply to many of Haglers mediocre opponents who he defended his title against.I never claimed these were some of the greatest middleweights you will ever see,I merely pointed out that Schuler and Kinchen were ranked pretty damn high for a long time and never recieved a title shot

Herol Graham was Hagler's mandatory in 1986 for the WBA middlweight championship,So this argument hasn't just come from nowhere

Hagler had more than enough time with the thirteen month layoff he got to defend his title against Graham,Afterall he defended it against Hamsho and Obelmejias the second time around

However your question was whether Hagler's legacy was overrated. I don't see how beating Shuler, Kinchen and Graham would have added much to it. Kinchen and Shuler weren't really that highly regarded and Graham at the time was quite an unknown.

I think it's very obvious that after the Hearns fight, Hagler was only looking to make big paydays, his days of establishing himself as a name beating everyone who was around were over by then. He took on the outstanding number 1 contender at the time John Mugabi and then had the superfight with Ray Leonard, after which he retired.

If I were to criticize him, I'd point out to how he never took on the next generation of middleweight contenders but instead chose to retire. Many of the greats, for example Roberto Duran, hung around for decades and fought the best while themselves being past their prime. Then again you could also say that he was smart to call it quits while he was slipping so he wouldn't embarrass himself losing to an up and coming fighter he could have beaten in his prime.

[BigMacFoster]

If you aren't looking for any kind of respect or validation why even post? Is just to see your own words? whats the reason.

Why would I seek respect from people I don't know idiot? You are the perfect case example of someody who takes themselves way too seriously

the history section is filled with idiots like you who know very little about boxing and it's history and you are continually allowed to get away with such ignorance because nobody else either has the guts or knowledge to actually correct morons like you

I know, thats why I destroyed your whole Joe Frazier ducking Foster and Lyle argument, right?

And yet you didn't,unless you are being sarcastic.I'll tell you what you did do

-You responded to my posts with baseless irrelevant questions of your own that lead to asolutely nothing,Completely missing the point

-You failed to respond to any legitimate sources that I provided to offer to the topic,Especially concerning such qoutes from Fraziers own manager and trainer Yank Durham

-You failed to respond to my points despite the fact that I responded to every single one of your posts and in the end you tucked your tail between your legs and hurried on out of that thread and put me on ignore like a coward

TheGreatA is a fantastic poster, I see no need to keep repeating the things he's already pointed out though. You are familiar with the the old saying about beating a dead horse, right??

And now you are kissing his arse,Grow up.You qouted something he post despite the fact that I already posted my response to him,Idiot.

If no one agrees with you, no one likes you, and you get banned from a public forum, what does that tell you? You're a loser

It means that I actually have an opinion of my own and that I am more than capable of expressing it.Look in the mirror mate,Your the sad git looking for respect over an internet forum for christ sake

But sometimes its fun to keep laughing at the terminally ******.

In that case I suggest you review your past posts,You'll have a whale of a time looking at them

[JAB5239]

Why would I seek respect from people I don't know idiot? You are the perfect case example of someody who takes themselves way too seriously

the history section is filled with idiots like you who know very little about boxing and it's history and you are continually allowed to get away with such ignorance because nobody else either has the guts or knowledge to actually correct morons like you



And yet you didn't,unless you are being sarcastic.I'll tell you what you did do

-You responded to my posts with baseless irrelevant questions of your own that lead to asolutely nothing,Completely missing the point

-You failed to respond to any legitimate sources that I provided to offer to the topic,Especially concerning such qoutes from Fraziers own manager and trainer Yank Durham

-You failed to respond to my points despite the fact that I responded to every single one of your posts and in the end you tucked your tail between your legs and hurried on out of that thread and put me on ignore like a coward




And now you are kissing his arse,Grow up.You qouted something he post despite the fact that I already posted my response to him,Idiot.




It means that I actually have an opinion of my own and that I am more than capable of expressing it.Look in the mirror mate,Your the sad git looking for respect over an internet forum for christ sake




In that case I suggest you review your past posts,You'll have a whale of a time looking at them

Go change your diapers Piss******. You're a mark on these boards. Just another dog to kick around. You get owned in every thread you post in. Run along now, this little flame war is over because I said so.

[BigMacFoster]

Go change your diapers Piss******. You're a mark on these boards. Just another dog to kick around. You get owned in every thread you post in. Run along now, this little flame war is over because I said so.

You see this everyone?

This is how JAB5239 routinely OWNS the trolls,Providing facts to counter ****** biased arguments and executing such posts with a grand wit that would make John Wilkes chuckle over his Parchment

As for kicking dogs around,I suggest you seek help

[GJC]

No,Your responses blow as usual as you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about

My point was that Hagler had no problem given rematches to two unworthy challengers in Hamsho and Obelmejias,who had already been soundly defeated yet he gave no oppurtunity of such to the likes of James Kinchen,James Schuler and Herol Graham

Technically Schuler and Kinchen were higher ranked than Hamsho was at the time of his rematch and Graham was his mandatory challenger throughout most of 1986

And yes I'd rate those three fighters above John Mugabi

I would hope that you would agree that we can take Obelmejias out of this discussion as Hagler gave him his rematch in 1982 which would have been too early to consider Kinchen, Schuler or Graham a legitimate contender at that time?

[JAB5239]

I would hope that you would agree that we can take Obelmejias out of this discussion as Hagler gave him his rematch in 1982 which would have been too early to consider Kinchen, Schuler or Graham a legitimate contender at that time?

Forget about it GJC, he has no idea how a time line works and doesn't the fact that none of them brought anything to the table before 1985. In 86 Hagler took on 1 fight against the number one contender by all 3 organizations. In 87 he finally got the Leonard fight than promptly retired. There was no ducking or avoiding of Shuler, Kinchen or Graham just like there w3as no ducking of Lyle or Mac Foster by Joe Frazier. All Piss******s theories have been soundly debunked.

[GJC]

Forget about it GJC, he has no idea how a time line works and doesn't the fact that none of them brought anything to the table before 1985. In 86 Hagler took on 1 fight against the number one contender by all 3 organizations. In 87 he finally got the Leonard fight than promptly retired. There was no ducking or avoiding of Shuler, Kinchen or Graham just like there w3as no ducking of Lyle or Mac Foster by Joe Frazier. All Piss******s theories have been soundly debunked.

I agree re the timeline which includes McCallum too, I guess if Hagler was a busier champion he could have given these guys a shot in during the *** end of his reign but can't blame the man for chasing the money.
My earlier post pretty much backs up the concensus I think

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/sh...7&postcount=46

[BigMacFoster]

I would hope that you would agree that we can take Obelmejias out of this discussion as Hagler gave him his rematch in 1982 which would have been too early to consider Kinchen, Schuler or Graham a legitimate contender at that time?

I set no specific time frame for that point,Which is why I mentioned both Obelmejias and Hamsho,Who recieved their title shot rematches two years apart from one another

TheGreatA pointed out that they were both mandatory contenders of which I then pointed out so was Herol Graham in 1986

All Piss******s theories have been soundly debunked.

I wish you had actually debunked them in the frazier thread and this one and then what you claim may have some legitimacy to it but you've already proven yourself a delusional fanboy who couldn't make a decent argument to save his life