Why do people think that hagler is overrated?

[StarshipTrooper]

No, it's the second best "name" not the win. His first win against Hamsho is probably better than the Duran win in all fairness.

It's obvious you go onto boxrec just looking for "names" after that statement.

And if you think it was close you're a ****** of have a sight deficiency.

That's the problem: People look at names and don't factor in the career stage of the name. It DOES matter if the name is past-it when you fight them.

PS. I doubt the ignorant **** even knows who Hamsho is outside of a reference on BoxRec.

Poet

[GJC]

People have made good cases for Hagler being the ATG #1 middleweight. (Although I feel Greb cannot be denied as king and that Monzon barely squeeks past him). He fought great comp and was the most wellrounded fighter ever in my opinion. To have a good jab, straight, hook, overhand, uppercut and whatnot from BOTH righty and lefty stances, gives him a bigger toolbelt than anyone. Who could counterpunch, box or brawl equally well. Good attack to the body and upstairs. An ATG chin and 15 round stamina. Not to mention a desire, not only to win, but to hurt and maim his opponents. He has a great chance against any middleweight.

The only way to ovverate him is like "He easily beats Foster at LHW and Ali at HW". But Hagler fans aren't generally that shortsided.

Good post. Personally if you call Hagler the no.1 all time MW then I think you are over rating him a touch but anyone who doesn't have him at least top 5 doesn't know boxing

[The_Demon]

To answer the OP question: Because some people are idiots.

This.

Hagler was one of the most well rounded fighters and didnt have any real weaknesses,a truly great fighter and like somebody already mentioned,greatness mattered too him,he had the true mentality of a warrior

[fitefanSHO]

This.

Hagler was one of the most well rounded fighters and didnt have any real weaknesses,a truly great fighter and like somebody already mentioned,greatness mattered too him,he had the true mentality of a warrior

That was me too.

[McGoorty]

People have made good cases for Hagler being the ATG #1 middleweight. (Although I feel Greb cannot be denied as king and that Monzon barely squeeks past him). He fought great comp and was the most wellrounded fighter ever in my opinion. To have a good jab, straight, hook, overhand, uppercut and whatnot from BOTH righty and lefty stances, gives him a bigger toolbelt than anyone. Who could counterpunch, box or brawl equally well. Good attack to the body and upstairs. An ATG chin and 15 round stamina. Not to mention a desire, not only to win, but to hurt and maim his opponents. He has a great chance against any middleweight.

The only way to ovverate him is like "He easily beats Foster at LHW and Ali at HW". But Hagler fans aren't generally that shortsided.

I don't really know exactly where Hagler is on my list, there is a case for many to be top 3. Personally I think a position in the Top 10 is a great honour to any fighter, he's always been one name that has always been there. BUT, I don't believe he'd ever beat Robinson, whatever happened in the Leonard fight, I think Leonard wouldn't make it to round 5 against Robinson. I hate to make SRR number one as MW, because he IS the greatest WW and I don't like to see discussion about boxing coming down to the same 12 or so that everybody like to discuss. Hagler is an ATG,..... surely anyone can be satisfied with that,..... does it matter that some have him 1, 2, or 8th ????,... no not really. I have two musical tributes involving Marvin on the Soundtracks thread,.... check them out,..... great Rock $ Roll.

[McGoorty]

Hagler's 2nd best win is a close decision against a well past prime blown up lightweight

This is my response,...... THE SCtrojansbaby ANTHEM,... for losing at debates (I've already got it on another thread, but here it is again,..... AC/DC ---- SHOT DOWN IN FLAMES

[jabsRstiff]

McGoorty....

Hagler was abetter middleweight than Robinson.

If you're gonna claim SRR was better because of Hagler's questionable loss to Leonard...I give you SRR's losses at that weight to Turpin, Fullmer, Basilio, and Pender.

Ray Robinson wouldn't KO any version of Ray leonard. He'd EDGE him, but he ain't KOing him.

[fitefanSHO]

IMO, Hagler's only real peer at 160 was Carlos Monzon.

And prime vs prime, I think Hagler would have been too much for him.

Or maybe they would split a pair of fights, Hagler losing the first fight close but winning the second time, by TKO.

Hagler is the greatest pure Middleweight Champion of all time.

[McGoorty]

McGoorty....

Hagler was abetter middleweight than Robinson.

If you're gonna claim SRR was better because of Hagler's questionable loss to Leonard...I give you SRR's losses at that weight to Turpin, Fullmer, Basilio, and Pender.

Ray Robinson wouldn't KO any version of Ray leonard. He'd EDGE him, but he ain't KOing him.

I just think Robbo was better, and a far tougher proposition for Hagler than Leonard,. SRL couldn't hurt Hagler, but SRR was a far harder puncher and Robinson would hit Hagler easier than Leonard,.and many that you mentioned above would have beaten Leonard at MW........ I just hope you liked the song at least,.... and the two Hagler tributes I posted.

[D-MiZe]

I think it's the opponents he fought and because he didn't travel weights. Hagler was the king of that division for a long time and fought top fighters who were proven.

It makes me sick when I see people saying Hopkins is the better middleweight.