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

[CarlosG815]

Other points aside, that is really some deceptive wording. If Napoles was even on points at that moment, he was getting beaten so viciously the last round or two that he would have ended up in a coma. So to point out the points and that he retired in his corner really is the ultimate in saving face for Napoles, he was getting massacred when his corner pulled the plug.

Agreed. However, I don't see how anybody could have that fight scored evenly.

[them_apples]

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.

Taylor at that time was a good fighter. Taylor to this day is good, but his stamina and heart is lacking. Hopkins was in his 40's when he lost it, by narrow SD's.

Had Monzon been 41 years old he most certainly could have lost it to someone of Taylor caliber.

I rank Hagler above Monzon and I'd pick Hagler by Ud over Monzon. Possiblity of late KO.

[them_apples]

Glenn Johnson would go on to become a pretty decent boxer.

Yes, he was undefeated when Hopkins beat him.

But can anyone tell me who Glenn had fought before Hopkins that had any resemblance to some sort of contender?

It might as well have been Johnson's pro debut the sort of riff raff he'd been facing.

Hopkins had one great win at MW to me, that was Trinidad. Above MW, the Tarver win was very good and the Pavlik win was impressive. Though the Wright and Pavlik wins are somewhat diminished by dragging those guys so far up in weight.

The fact that Hopkins was a 6 to 1 underdog against Tito, who was relatively new to MW, tells you something about Bernard's run at MW up to that point.

Yea it does, most of his ATG status is from the 20 defenses and such a long reign. Keep in mind, you can pick anyones resume apart. Haglers best wins were over WW's as well.

[Thread Stealer]

Because MW is a division rich with history and has had many great fighters, making the title of best/greatest MW ever a debate.

[sonnyboyx2]

somebody explain this one to me

he barely makes the top 10

[Royalty]

he barely makes the top 10

I hope you're joking.

[C.Y.]

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.

most people believe hopkins won the first fight against taylor, and had it a draw in the second fight..

also i dont recall monzon fighting well into his 40's

bhop>>>monzon

[Toney616]

most people believe hopkins won the first fight against taylor, and had it a draw in the second fight..

also i dont recall monzon fighting well into his 40's

bhop>>>monzon

A lot of people like myself had Taylor winning both fights by clear Ud, Hopkins simoply wasnt active enough for the first 8 rounds of either fight.

What Hopkins does at lhw doesnt add to his mw resume

Hopkins is still fighting because he is cherrypicking his opponents like a shot Roy

[them_apples]

most people believe hopkins won the first fight against taylor, and had it a draw in the second fight..

also i dont recall monzon fighting well into his 40's

bhop>>>monzon

I'd definetly pick B-Hop over Monzon, I'd pick Hagler over both however.

[TheGreatA]

Hopkins himself thinks he would have lost to Monzon though.