M. Spinks called out Hagler

[Barn]

I don't think Hagler had a low boxing IQ, but there was evidence he could over-think things going into a big fight-

He should have handled Antufermo (1st fight), Duran, and Leonard easier than he did.

I guess I'm in a minority with my wide scores then.

147-140 Hagler for the Duran fight and 146-140 for the Antufermo fight.

I agree he can be criticized for Leonard. Although not as heavily as he does in my opinion.

[jabsRstiff]

I guess I'm in a minority with my wide scores then.

147-140 Hagler for the Duran fight and 146-140 for the Antufermo fight.

I agree he can be criticized for Leonard. Although not as heavily as he does in my opinion.

There's no doubt he beat Vito and that he beat Duran by a wider margin than the scores indicated. But, he should have had an easier time with both in there- his game was off a bit in both and that's because something got in his head at fight time.

[wmute]

That's what I'm saying essentially, Leonard pulled off the upset spectacularly and wow'd the judges spectacularly. Credit needs to be given to him for that and I feel not enough is. It was to do with the psychological nature. Hagler wanted to beat the orthodox boxer by boxing orthodox to prove he was the better man. He also tried to counter the fact Leonard would be preparing for a southpaw. It wasn't a ****** move, more an egotistical one which you may render ****** if you want but, I wouldn't considering the circumstances. Hagler had to come in and win - or so he and everyone though. When fighting greats though things don't always work out.
Also about the negotiation thing Hagler wanted Leonard in the ring from his interviews. He just wanted to make sure the match would go through. He felt he'd lived in Leonards shadow for years and wanted to crush him. He didn't want to let the match slip due to glove size or something.

Credit to SRL for the mind games of course!
But point is some fighters go an entire career without making those mistakes Hagler made. To me those fighters have a higher IQ then Hagler showed.

I've seen you post that Hagler was not a low IQ fighter quite a lot, and I feel it's an adjective he does not deserve.

to me he definitely had a ring IQ not matching the rest of his game. you know what I am saying?

Well that's fair enough but it doesn't appear that way sometimes.

probably cos I am still bitter at him for losing to Leonard, and I might sound that way.

I'm not going to dwell on it but, I can't see how it could be scored close. Every punch Hagler landed was hard and landed with venom. That couldn't be said of Vito which was the main difference maker in the fight.

I think I had it 9-6 but I am going on memory now. you had it like 10-5? 11-4 a bit too much no? Question is though... why did he slow down? stamina problem? Hagler? I would be very surprised

If you're subtly referencing Hagler Hearns was it Hearns choosing to box or Hagler making him. (A smart move by Hagler.) Everyone is guily of getting dragged into their opponents fight though/

That's the thing... Not everyone! see above.

Yeah Spinks was good.

yup

I'm not saying Hagler would beat Spinks. I rate Spinks highly H2H he was very good.

I know you aren't :-) you know your stuff way too much to do that.

Out of intrest where does Greb go roughly?

among those honorable mentions. I think I have him #1 at 160 Greb might make it in the top 5, but I would have to take Foster

Not sure Hearns is Top 10 WW. It's arguable IMO.

I think you are right. In terms of achievement he certainly isn't, but in H2H matchup he is IMO. Depends on what you prefer.

I like all three fighters. I'm never said I don't like Spinks.

I did not have in mind you or sugarj, and in fact most regular BH posters don't fall for that, but you have to admit there is a million ppl out there who do so.

[Barn]

Credit to SRL for the mind games of course!
But point is some fighters go an entire career without making those mistakes Hagler made. To me those fighters have a higher IQ then Hagler showed.



to me he definitely had a ring IQ not matching the rest of his game. you know what I am saying?



probably cos I am still bitter at him for losing to Leonard, and I might sound that way.



I think I had it 9-6 but I am going on memory now. you had it like 10-5? 11-4 a bit too much no? Question is though... why did he slow down? stamina problem? Hagler? I would be very surprised



That's the thing... Not everyone! see above.


yup



I know you aren't :-) you know your stuff way too much to do that.



among those honorable mentions. I think I have him #1 at 160 Greb might make it in the top 5, but I would have to take Foster



I think you are right. In terms of achievement he certainly isn't, but in H2H matchup he is IMO. Depends on what you prefer.



I did not have in mind you or sugarj, and in fact most regular BH posters don't fall for that, but you have to admit there is a million ppl out there who do so.

Fair play all round.

[wmute]

Fair play all round.

where do you have Greb at 160 and 175?

I forgot to say that sometimes I switch his top spot with Monzon, but then I tend to put him back. Needless to say I used Hagler as number 1 at 160, now I have him at 3.

[wmute]

I don't think Hagler had a low boxing IQ, but there was evidence he could over-think things going into a big fight-

He should have handled Antufermo (1st fight), Duran, and Leonard easier than he did.

I like this definition