Marvin Hagler vs Stanley Ketchel at MW.

[QueensburyRules]

yes that's true enough.. Hagler was a great fighter and a joy to watch yet do you think he could have floored Jack Johnson or lasted 12rds with Johnson, do you think he could have fought 32rds and KOd his opponent?

- - Them some questions worth considering.

However, JJohnson was allegedly carrying Ketchel in what may have been a farcical agreement that Ketchel discarded with the surprise KD.

[them_apples]

the footage is so bad of Ketchel. It needs massive restoration. As we have seen, even footage from the 30's drastically changes once enhanced.

[GhostofDempsey]

Never understood the hype around Ketchel. Crude brawler who was a strong MW with a big punch but not much else. Caught O’Brien at the end of his career. Doesn’t look good on film either. Hagler picks him apart rather easily.

[Slugfester]

Nobody spits Hagler out!

[Ivich]

yes that's true enough.. Hagler was a great fighter and a joy to watch yet do you think he could have floored Jack Johnson or lasted 12rds with Johnson, do you think he could have fought 32rds and KOd his opponent?

I question the bona fides of that KD and Johnson carried Ketchel to make the movies of the fight profitable.

[historical boxing society]

Stanley Ketchel was largely undeveloped as a fighter. He could of got much better. But he was on a decline when he died. Not due to talent but a severe drug addiction & a complete lack of focus training. It's actually one of the key contributors to his death. He is one of the pioneers with a very low championship round's fought & most of that was against a single opponent (papke). Assuming he is far ahead of other middleweight's that came before him is a pretty drastic leap in logic. Papke wasn't one of the all time greats. Ketchel even had a hard time separating himself from the ordinary Twin Sullivan. Given he was still developing but still, it's a red flag.

While Ketchel certainly could of had a very high untapped potential aspect to him, he should in no way be considered an all time great, he just doesn't have the resume. As far as raw talent goes he would rank very high and he may of had an outstanding resume if he stayed alive. But serenading as an all time great seem's a rather injustice to people who accomplished so much more than him. I'm a huge Ketchel fan and read every book on him, but I don't play favorite's to boxer's resume's.

[Slugfester]

I agree with HBS. Personally, I don't believe Ketchel would even be a good breakfast for Hag. He has never seen anything like Hagler before. But to Hagler Ketchel is a hobo with a big punch. He is insulted the fight was even called out for, but likes the money anyway. No reason for me to believe Marv could not deal with Ketchel's power the way he dealt with every monster puncher he fought, dispatching them to Hades.

It may be that Many good contenders these days, in their own gear, could embarrass Ketchel. Might be a different story if the fight took place in Stan's day, under its customs and regulations, and using its gear. In that case, our guys don't know immediately how to fight him either, and may never figure it out before it's lights out. Like Ketchel in the modern arena, a great many of our best contenders will flounder around, repeatedly attempting what has always worked for them. Hmmm... why isn't my peekaboo working?...

IMO Hagler the Great is not even the worst middleweight matchup for Ketchel. At least Hagler is there to be hit, he will be in front of you, ****ing away. Stan should be an easy night for R. Leonard, for instance. I don't think we have to worry about Robinson, either. Michael Nunn, Giardello, Archer, and others.... any fleet one who does no get caught with a haymaker has a good chance to win in either arena. Jab, move and counter, do not engage, stay off the ropes. Good whiskers are always required. Follow the game plan.

[QueensburyRules]

I question the bona fides of that KD and Johnson carried Ketchel to make the movies of the fight profitable.

- - Ketchel caught JJohnson with a sucker punch. It happens like you happen...

[Willie Pep 229]

I agree with HBS. Personally, I don't believe Ketchel would even be a good breakfast for Hag. He has never seen anything like Hagler before. But to Hagler Ketchel is a hobo with a big punch. He is insulted the fight was even called out for, but likes the money anyway. No reason for me to believe Marv could not deal with Ketchel's power the way he dealt with every monster puncher he fought, dispatching them to Hades.

It may be that Many good contenders these days, in their own gear, could embarrass Ketchel. Might be a different story if the fight took place in Stan's day, under its customs and regulations, and using its gear. In that case, our guys don't know immediately how to fight him either, and may never figure it out before it's lights out. Like Ketchel in the modern arena, a great many of our best contenders will flounder around, repeatedly attempting what has always worked for them. Hmmm... why isn't my peekaboo working?...

IMO Hagler the Great is not even the worst middleweight matchup for Ketchel. At least Hagler is there to be hit, he will be in front of you, ****ing away. Stan should be an easy night for R. Leonard, for instance. I don't think we have to worry about Robinson, either. Michael Nunn, Giardello, Archer, and others.... any fleet one who does no get caught with a haymaker has a good chance to win in either arena. Jab, move and counter, do not engage, stay off the ropes. Good whiskers are always required. Follow the game plan.

RE BOLD: That's the problem with every fantasy match-up that crosses eras; you have to add a disclaimer to every argument one makes.

Fantasy fights that cross eras belong on the Fantasy Fight forum, not here in history.

You want to match-up Ali-Foreman in a 1975 rematch, then that's a 'what if' history and one can flesh it out with a reasonable argument, one way or the other.

But there is no point in matching Benny Leonard with Roberto Duran. If you do, you have no choice, (if one wishes to ne honest, as you did) and include such a disclaimer.

That isn't historical interpretation it's just fantasy jerking off.

How about Monzon-Hagler fight? Now that's a fantasy fight one can discuss without it sounding silly.

[QueensburyRules]

RE BOLD: That's the problem with every fantasy match-up that crosses eras; you have to add a disclaimer to every argument one makes.

Fantasy fights that cross eras belong on the Fantasy Fight forum, not here in history.

You want to match-up Ali-Foreman in a 1975 rematch, then that's a 'what if' history and one can flesh it out with a reasonable argument, one way or the other.

But there is no point in matching Benny Leonard with Roberto Duran. If you do, you have no choice, (if one wishes to ne honest, as you did) and include such a disclaimer.

That isn't historical interpretation it's just fantasy jerking off.

How about Monzon-Hagler fight? Now that's a fantasy fight one can discuss without it sounding silly.

- - We know Monzon and Hagler have a several yr overlap in their careers, so its not a stretch to think Marv could never beat Carlos since Marv was never in the queue then.

Not a stretch to think Ketchel was a bigger, stronger version of Mugabi who moved up to middle for Hagler and gave him his biggest beating. Marv at the end of his career though and still KOed Mugabi.

Sonny asked if Marv could put down JJohnson hard like Ketchel did, and no would be that answer. Ketchel would be the biggest, strongest fighter in Marv's career, so he have to box carefully to win while moving in reverse, but Marv being a lefty may well use that advantage on Ketchel who wasn't used to lefties who usually had to convert righty to have a career.

So, there it is in a nutshell...only in boxing, folks...