Hagler was Absolutely the WEAKEST of the Big 4.

[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.

Hearns was officially 23 when he moved up to fight Ernie singletary so 22 is wrong...secondly he was not 6ft 2 and was more like 6ft1.....hearns was not a natural middleweight ...he went up in the weights but u just said yourself that he never knocked people out at middlweight .....so if he was a puncher at jnr middlweight and welterweight but not at middlweight...how on earth can he be natural at the weight.....secondly hearns almost got knocked by juan roldan and was knocked uncontious by Iran Barkley at middlweight....hearns carried on through his weights but beating a crude slugger like Dennis Andries who by the way was considered a joke over here. Terrible skill ungainly......hearns best years were at welterweight and jnr middlweight .....he lacked strength and the chin to compete at above his optimal weight...so in your logic Maurice blocker because he 6ft 1 and taller than rocky Marciano is bigger ?......hagler was a solid middlweight....solid as a rock and his legs were solid as well....hearns was not a strong inside fighter very explosive but faded in strength if the fight was a battle of attrition...your making things up....how can someone who started his proffessinal career at 147 have the same strength with a guy who started his pro career at 160.... They were both 19 when they had there pro debut...so again you don't know what your talking about....hearns knockouts became less and less as he moved up in weight and he also suffered more knockdowns and knockout losses as he moved up which shows its not his weight class........you veered away from the Leonard debate because you got owned....don't try and compete with me in this era because my left nut knows more about this era than you will ever know....hearns also made a tactical error in going to war with hagler and he broke his hand at the start and he played into haglers hands by going toe to toe.....but Leonard on the other hand used speed and movement to beat the so called marvellous one...which Willie the worm Monroe did as well......hagler picked on smaller fighters to try and build his legacy ...hearns,Duran,Mugabi and Leonard......he defended against the likes of obelmejias, caveman Lee, scypion...took to a draw with a crude Vito antuofermo ...drew with seals..taking all the way by a blown up 135lber and boxed John Mugabi who in his very next fight was stopped in 3 rounds by Duane Thomas and destroyed in 1 by terry Norris.....I've already proven who was the better fighter between Leonard and hagler and that's always been the discussion on this thread

[joseph5620]

Hearns was officially 23 when he moved up to fight Ernie singletary so 22 is wrong...secondly he was not 6ft 2 and was more like 6ft1.....hearns was not a natural middleweight ...he went up in the weights but u just said yourself that he never knocked people out at middlweight .....so if he was a puncher at jnr middlweight and welterweight but not at middlweight...how on earth can he be natural at the weight.....secondly hearns almost got knocked by juan roldan and was knocked uncontious by Iran Barkley at middlweight.......your making yourself look stupid....hearns carried on through his weights but beating a crude slugger like Dennis Andries who by the way was considered a joke over here. Terrible skill ungainly......hearns best years were at welterweight and jnr middlweight .....he lacked strength and the chin to compete at above his optimal weight...so in your logic Maurice blocker because he 6ft 1 and taller than rocky Marciano is bigger ?......hagler was a solid middlweight....solid as a rock and his legs were solid as well....hearns was not a strong inside fighter very explosive but faded in strength if the fight was a battle of attrition...your making things up....how can someone who started his proffesor all career at 147 have the same strength with a guy who started his pro career at 160.... They were both 19 when they had there pro debut...so again you don't know what your talking about....hearns knockout became less and see as he moved up in weight and he also suffered more knockdown as and knockout losses as he moved up which shows its not his weight class........you veered away from the Leonard debate because you got owned....don't try and compete with me in this era because my left nut knows more about this era than you will ever know....hearns also made a tactical error in going to war with hagler and he broke his hand at the start and he played into haglers hands by going toe to toe.....but Leonard on the other hand used speed and movement to beat the so called marvellous one...which Willie the worm Monroe did as well......hagler picked on smaller fighters to try and build his legacy ...hearns,Duran,Mugabi and Leonard......he defended against the likes of obelmejias, caveman Lee, scypion...took to a draw by a crude Vito antuofermo ...drew with seals..taking all the way by a blown up 135lber and boxed John Mugabi who in his very next fight was stopped in 3 rounds by Duane Thomas and destroyed in 1 by terry Norris.....I've already proven who was the better fighter between Leonard and hagler and that's always been the discussion on this thread

Which means his last fight at welterweight was at 22 years of age which is what I said the first time lol. Looks like you're not good at math either. That's what happens when you have to rely on box rec before you respond. Also, anybody who truly watched Hearns fight knows he was taller than 6-1 and his height was listed as 6-2 in the higher weight classes.

Look at Hearns standing next to other fighters listed at 6-1

Watch 5.53 of the video. Anybody, including you, who feels Hearns was an undersized middleweight can't be taken seriously.





But you can continue to to entertain me with your ignorance


I also never said Hearns didn't knock fighters out at middleweight. That's more false information from you. I said the opposite which was that Hearns was able to knock top middleweights out cold. I'm getting bored with pointing out your lies and "errors." They are multiplying fast and it's time for you to come up with some new material.

[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.

Which means his last fight at welterweight was at 22 years of age which is what I said the first time lol. Looks like you're not good at math either. That's what happens when you have to rely on box rec before you respond.


But you can continue to to entertain me with your ignorance

no he was 23 years of age .and I'm a faboulos four era so anytime bright spark... And again your refusing to answer how is lightweight up to jnr middleweight the same achievement as flyweight up to jnr middlweight ...pacquaio achievement was far superior

[joseph5620]

no he was 23 years of age .and I'm a faboulos four era so anytime bright spark... And again your refusing to answer how is lightweight up to jnr middleweight the same achievement as flyweight up to jnr middlweight ...pacquaio achievement was far superior

I already answered your stupid question by telling you that beating Julio Cesar Vasquez at the full 154 is better than beating a washed up Margarito at 150. Especially when Margarito was never factor or legitimate contender at 154 in the first place.


You're obviously not smart enough to process that and you're too much of a pathetic fanboy which is your problem.

[The plunger man]

Which means his last fight at welterweight was at 22 years of age which is what I said the first time lol. Looks like you're not good at math either. That's what happens when you have to rely on box rec before you respond. Also, anybody who truly watched Hearns fight knows he was taller than 6-1 and his height was listed as 6-2 in the higher weight classes.

Look at Hearns standing next to other fighters listed at 6-1

Watch 5.53 of the video. Anybody, including you, who feels Hearns was an undersized middleweight can't be taken seriously.





But you can continue to to entertain me with your ignorance


I also never said Hearns didn't knock fighters out at middleweight. That's more false information from you. I said the opposite which was that Hearns was able to knock top middleweights out cold. I'm getting bored with pointing out your lies and "errors." They are multiplying fast and it's time for you to come up with some new material.

I said to you he was not a natural middlweight and he his best years were at weltwerweight and jnr middlweight..and his biggest wins most impressive wins was at those weights....noting to do with him boxing in those divisions.....he had the height and reach.....but he lacked the same natural strength as a hagler or say a Barkley....so again your squirming your way from the question

[The plunger man]

I already answered your stupid question which by telling you that beating Julio Cesar Vasquez at the full 154 is better than beating a washed up Margarito at 150. Especially when Margarito was never factor or legitimate contender at 154 in the first place.


You're obviously not smart enough to process that and you're too much of a pathetic fanboy which is your problem.

pacquaio was 106lb and Whitaker was 134lbs so how is his better......so going up another 28lbs in weight you don't consider it a better achievement lol...GTFOH u clueless mong lol

[The plunger man]

I already answered your stupid question by telling you that beating Julio Cesar Vasquez at the full 154 is better than beating a washed up Margarito at 150. Especially when Margarito was never factor or legitimate contender at 154 in the first place.


You're obviously not smart enough to process that and you're too much of a pathetic fanboy which is your problem.

Manny pacquaio flyweight champion all the way to light middleweight champion
That's a span of 8 divsions ( never been done by anybody in history ever )

Pernell Whitaker lightweight champion all the way to light middlweight champion
Thats a span of 4 divisions ( which leonard,hearns,duran,de la hoya and mayweather amongst others have accomplished ...and yet even though pacquaio has gone up double the the amount of weight classes you still consider Whitakerr acheivement better......are you taking some sort of medication for your illness because if you ain't get to the doctors mong asap........I'm not a fan boy it's just logic that if you move up twice as many weight classes then it's a better achievement and take away jnr middleweight and it's still a better achievement ....go get some knowledge clueless mong

[The plunger man]

Manny pacquaio flyweight champion all the way to light middleweight champion
That's a span of 8 divsions ( never been done by anybody in history ever )

Pernell Whitaker lightweight champion all the way to light middlweight champion
Thats a span of 4 divisions ( which leonard,hearns,duran,de la hoya and mayweather amongst others have accomplished ...and yet even though pacquaio has gone up double the the amount of weight classes you still consider Whitakerr acheivement better......are you taking some sort of medication for your illness because if you ain't get to the doctors mong asap........I'm not a fan boy it's just logic that if you move up twice as many weight classes then it's a better achievement and take away jnr middleweight and it's still a better achievement ....go get some knowledge clueless mong

I already answered your stupid question by telling you that beating Julio Cesar Vasquez at the full 154 is better than beating a washed up Margarito at 150. Especially when Margarito was never factor or legitimate contender at 154 in the first place.


You're obviously not smart enough to process that and you're too much of a pathetic fanboy which is your problem.

pacquaio was 106lb and Whitaker was 134lbs so how is his better......so going up another 28lbs in weight you don't consider it a better achievement lol...GTFOH u clueless mong lol

.

You seem to be avoiding my question for some reason please elaborate on how you consider its a better achievement winning titles from lightweight to jnr middleweight than it is from flyweight to jnr middlweight ? I am curious to your reasoning lol

[joseph5620]

.

You seem to be avoiding my question for some reason please elaborate on how you consider its a better achievement winning titles from lightweight to jnr middleweight than it is from flyweight to jnr middlweight ? I am curious to your reasoning lol

You didn't even know Whitaker won a title at 154 pounds until I told you so. Your credibility is Zero which means I won't be wasting any more time responding to your stupid questions.


From this point you'll be wasting your time.

[The plunger man]

You didn't even know Whitaker won a title at 154 pounds until I told you so. Your credibility is Zero which means I won't be wasting any more time responding to your stupid questions.


From this point you'll be wasting your time.

because u can't come back with an answer simple

Sure you do that's why again your sidestepping the question which you tried to do the moment I completely shut you down over the Ray leonard topic .."you have a talent for sidestepping ....my credibility over the likes of hearns leonard duran and hagler has shown to be a lot more knowledgeable than you....U stick to scouting over old posts like a tax inspector....l