Hagler was Absolutely the WEAKEST of the Big 4.

[The plunger man]

Yes and it was a far more respectable list than yours. You didn't see Paquiao-Margarito on it. Yours was just stupid.


Again, I don't expect much from you. You want to tell us again how Whitaker never won a junior middlweight title but Pacquiao did?

U have been owned and found wanting....who mentioned anything about Whitaker so what on earth are you waffling on about...go get some knowledge son

[billeau2]

He was the natural middleweight, giving him the size advantage. Duran made him look foolish and frustrated and basically laid out the blueprint to inspire Leonard to fight him. He was cut badly against Hearns and had the "Hitman" not broken his right hand in the first round, I think he would have been stopped on the cut in the seventh or eighth if Hearns could stay on his feet long enough. And Leonard baffled him and totally got inside his head. Duran, Leonard and Hearns all had better names on their ledgers IMO.

Another thing to consider is if the other three were natural middleweights. Now that would have resulted in Hagler going 0-3 in my IMO. Duran was nearly too slick for him as a natural lightweight and past his prime. Hearns being the natural welterweight, would have knocked him out as a natural middleweight. Leonard baffled him at middleweight and would have hurt him a lot more if he'd been the natural middleweight as well.

Hagler's got a good legacy but not a great one IMO. Does he belong in the IBHOF? I'd say so, but the other three should be more highly regarded. These were smaller guys who took huge chances on fighting him and he never looked good against any of them really. The Hearns KO was sweet for him, but he could have easily lost that one. I agree all the way. For me, the best overall pound for pound would be Duran, Hearns, Leonard and then Hagler.

If If If... When you start with the "ifs" it becomes a slippery slope and inevitably the real accomplishments go by the wayside. For example, People love to say Dawson was a mere shell of himself against Ward yet I doubt one person saying so could understand how Ward beat Dawson...which had nothing to do with a war of attrition.

Duran was a great fighter, beating him at any weight within reason would make someone who is a pressure fighter look foolish... You come foward and bang with Duran you will get, countered and hit often even when you get the better of the exchanges.

Was it Hagler's fault Hearn's broke his hand? Leonard got in a lot of people's heads. That second paragraph really brings home how ridiculous your logic is in this case. First off you haven't a clue as to what would have happened if the other's were natural middle weights...nobody does.

Hagler was a physical fighter yes, but having more size would not necessarily help guarantee a win. Duran did not lose that fight because he was bullied around, he lost it on activity,and perhaps on speed. how would more weight help him in that case? Marvin had a great chin, your assuming Duran would have been able to dent his chin with a few more pounds...that is highly speculative. Sure at a lower weight Duran would be a lot stronger, but thats because Duran's speed and work rate would be better imo.

Again your logic is suspect at best....Hearn's best weapon was his reach and punching power...how does extra weight help him? It MIGHT give him more power it also MIGHT slow him down. With Sugar Ray again, speed is the thing that made his punching so powerful, not weight.

A good example would be when Jones fought Ruiz. Most people with sense realized that the way Jones would win that fight was such that it made no difference whether he was 250 or 150 (yes I am exxagerating). Jones had no intention of getting into a brawl with Jawney, and the speed of his punches was going to make the prospect of Ruiz doing anything to counter him highly unlikely. You seem to think weight gain is what all fighters need as an equalizer with no regard for the particular fighter involved.

[joseph5620]

U have been owned and found wanting....who mentioned anything about Whitaker so what on earth are you waffling on about...go get some knowledge son

You did in another thread. Unfortunately for you I remembered it.

Just another one of your multiple fabrications.

[Ray Corso]

The so-called "big four" was originally Duran, Benitez, Hearns & Leonard.
They had the potential to meet at welter (147lbs).
When Benitez became less attractive Hagler became involved mainly for the Hearns vs Hagler bout. Hagler remaining at his premium weight is the constant where the others moved from welter (Benitez jr. welter shortly) up through lt.

My ratings; with their best weights;

Duran-135-147
Hagler-160
Leonard-147-154
Hearns-147-154
Benitez-140-147

all outstanding men and top tier talents in any boxing era!
Ray

[The plunger man]

You did in another thread. Unfortunately for you I remembered it.

Just another one of your multiple fabrications.

Please explain where I mentioned anything about 4 titles with Whitaker and why I never thought he won those 4...I have never said no such thing bingo.....again your all waffle and you have been found lacking....I owned u with Leonard over hagler.....then because you were beaten you then diverted to another subject about pacquaio and margarito and now ur bringing up Pernell Whitaker which was the subject of best southpaw ever and I rated Whitaker 3rd behind pacquaio and hagler......u mind is all over the place and u haven't a clue what your talking about ....

[The plunger man]

Yes and it was a far more respectable list than yours. You didn't see Paquiao-Margarito on it. Yours was just stupid.


Again, I don't expect much from you. You want to tell us again how Whitaker never won a junior middlweight title but Pacquiao did?

Show me where I said Whitaker didn't win 4 world titles....everybody has noted and passed green karma to me about putting you in your place and owning u .....end of subject silly boy

[Tony Trick-Pony]

If If If... When you start with the "ifs" it becomes a slippery slope and inevitably the real accomplishments go by the wayside. For example, People love to say Dawson was a mere shell of himself against Ward yet I doubt one person saying so could understand how Ward beat Dawson...which had nothing to do with a war of attrition.

Duran was a great fighter, beating him at any weight within reason would make someone who is a pressure fighter look foolish... You come foward and bang with Duran you will get, countered and hit often even when you get the better of the exchanges.

Was it Hagler's fault Hearn's broke his hand? Leonard got in a lot of people's heads. That second paragraph really brings home how ridiculous your logic is in this case. First off you haven't a clue as to what would have happened if the other's were natural middle weights...nobody does.

Hagler was a physical fighter yes, but having more size would not necessarily help guarantee a win. Duran did not lose that fight because he was bullied around, he lost it on activity,and perhaps on speed. how would more weight help him in that case? Marvin had a great chin, your assuming Duran would have been able to dent his chin with a few more pounds...that is highly speculative. Sure at a lower weight Duran would be a lot stronger, but thats because Duran's speed and work rate would be better imo.

Again your logic is suspect at best....Hearn's best weapon was his reach and punching power...how does extra weight help him? It MIGHT give him more power it also MIGHT slow him down. With Sugar Ray again, speed is the thing that made his punching so powerful, not weight.

A good example would be when Jones fought Ruiz. Most people with sense realized that the way Jones would win that fight was such that it made no difference whether he was 250 or 150 (yes I am exxagerating). Jones had no intention of getting into a brawl with Jawney, and the speed of his punches was going to make the prospect of Ruiz doing anything to counter him highly unlikely. You seem to think weight gain is what all fighters need as an equalizer with no regard for the particular fighter involved.

It's not about weight. They all weighed 160 pounds at fight time.

It's about natural size. A naturally bigger man always does have the advantage. That's no guarantee of a win of course. A natural middleweight Duran would have chewed him up and spit him out. Look at what he did to lightweights. Very few went the distance with him and while Hagler might make it thanks to a great chin, I'm not so sure. With the added pressure and activity Duran would have which you pointed out, he would have landed more and busted Hagler up a lot. Just because Hagler never got knocked out doesn't mean in was impossible. Every man is vulnerable, except for maybe LaMotta. He was just a freak. And yes, I know Robinson stopped him, but he still didn't knock him down, as Jake told him.

Hagler as a natural middleweight would have been knocking out everybody at that weight. Hagler got hurt and cut in the first round by a natural welterweight Hagler. He would be brutalized and there is no doubt about it. Again, take the weight out. It's about natural size. Hagler would probably be a 6'3" middleweight which is unreal, but so is a 6'1" welterweight. Everybody in the division at that time would have been easy prey for the "Hitman." Hagler would have hung with him but I see him getting stopped.

Leonard as a natural middleweight would have more power and definitely be as quick as he was by the time 1987 rolled around. He would have made Hagler respect him even more and still been inside his head. What was a split decision in their fight would be a unanimous decision if Leonard started as a middleweight.

Duran, Leonard and Hearns also would have all moved up and won more titles as high as cruiser and maybe heavyweight. When compared to the other three, Hagler didn't ever move up. No fighter has to and I respect guys who clean out divisions(as Duran did at lightweight), but the fact remains that these guys took the gamble and moved up. Hagler never did.

And beyond all of this, the NBC premiere of PBC showed Hearns, Leonard and Duran all hanging out. Who wasn't there? I guarantee you, it wasn't because he wasn't invited either. He never got over the Leonard defeat and let's face it. He was a chump the whole way, in how he gave Leonard every concession he wanted. Then he loses and won't let it go. Hell, get it over it already.

[joseph5620]

Show me where I said Whitaker didn't win 4 world titles....everybody has noted and passed green karma to me about putting you in your place and owning u .....end of subject silly boy

You must enjoy embarrassing yourself:

He should be banned from this site.......I don't think I have ever seen a quote from him that is not racially driven.....and it's not like I never had hagler 2nd and Whitaker 3rd so I give credit.....but he's a bad person and full of resentment.......I will always give a fighter credit no matter what race as I was a fighter first and a white man second......but I think he's going on ignore in future because I cannot be dealing with people with seperate agendas......I do not know how you can downplay what manny pacquaio has done over all those weight classes and still remained at the top....pacquaio started his career at 106lbs and Whitaker started his 134.....and managed to win a jnr middlweight title which Whitaker didn't but he still started as a lightweight and a 28lb head start .....ridiculous to down play what the great manny pacquaio has achieved

Clearly you claimed Whitaker didn't win a title at 154 but Pacquiao did under more difficult circumstances according to you. As usual you were wrong about that too.

The question wasn't whether Whitaker "won four titles" or not. Nice try but your attempt at spinning is very elementary. You should stay in NSB and stop embarrassing yourself "silly boy."

[joseph5620]

It's not about weight. They all weighed 160 pounds at fight time.

It's about natural size. A naturally bigger man always does have the advantage. That's no guarantee of a win of course. A natural middleweight Duran would have chewed him up and spit him out. Look at what he did to lightweights. Very few went the distance with him and while Hagler might make it thanks to a great chin, I'm not so sure. With the added pressure and activity Duran would have which you pointed out, he would have landed more and busted Hagler up a lot. Just because Hagler never got knocked out doesn't mean in was impossible. Every man is vulnerable, except for maybe LaMotta. He was just a freak. And yes, I know Robinson stopped him, but he still didn't knock him down, as Jake told him.

Hagler as a natural middleweight would have been knocking out everybody at that weight. Hagler got hurt and cut in the first round by a natural welterweight Hagler. He would be brutalized and there is no doubt about it. Again, take the weight out. It's about natural size. Hagler would probably be a 6'3" middleweight which is unreal, but so is a 6'1" welterweight. Everybody in the division at that time would have been easy prey for the "Hitman." Hagler would have hung with him but I see him getting stopped.

Leonard as a natural middleweight would have more power and definitely be as quick as he was by the time 1987 rolled around. He would have made Hagler respect him even more and still been inside his head. What was a split decision in their fight would be a unanimous decision if Leonard started as a middleweight.

Duran, Leonard and Hearns also would have all moved up and won more titles as high as cruiser and maybe heavyweight. When compared to the other three, Hagler didn't ever move up. No fighter has to and I respect guys who clean out divisions(as Duran did at lightweight), but the fact remains that these guys took the gamble and moved up. Hagler never did.

And beyond all of this, the NBC premiere of PBC showed Hearns, Leonard and Duran all hanging out. Who wasn't there? I guarantee you, it wasn't because he wasn't invited either. He never got over the Leonard defeat and let's face it. He was a chump the whole way, in how he gave Leonard every concession he wanted. Then he loses and won't let it go. Hell, get it over it already.

Thomas Hearns is 6-2 and fought all the way up to the cruiserweight division. It's time to let the "natural welterweight" tag go as it's clear as day that he was not a natural welterweight. He left 147 at only 22 years of age and Hearns is clearly bigger than Hagler. That's not even debatable.


Hearns also had no problems knocking middleweights out cold. He belonged in the division and actually weighed in at a higher weight than Hagler. I don't see where Hagler had any kind of physical advantages. He was much shorter and even lighter than Hearns.

[The plunger man]

Thomas Hearns is 6-2 and fought all the way up to the cruiserweight division. It's time to let the "natural welterweight" tag go as it's clear as day that he was not a natural welterweight. He left 147 at only 22 years of age and Hearns is clearly bigger than Hagler. That's not even debatable.


Hearns also had no problems knocking middleweights out cold. He belonged in the division and actually weighed in at a higher weight than Hagler. I don't see where Hagler had any kind of physical advantages. He was much shorter and even lighter than Hearns.

Anybody can scrutinise over people's comments and try and find fault.....on my part that was an error on my judgement and I was wrong......but it's time to start looking at yours......and I've completely shut you down over Leonard and you trying to make yourself look better.....pacquaio was a flyweight champion at 106lb and Whitaker won his qt 134lbs...so where is your logic that winning from flyweight to jnr middlweight is the same as winning lightweight to Jnr middleweight..... You Don't know what your talking ..