Hagler was Absolutely the WEAKEST of the Big 4.

[joseph5620]

]Excuse me but what's the excuse for a washed up duran pushing him all the way...this was after duran was beaten by kirland Laing.....a lightweight who was thourghly dominated by benitez and Hearns [/B]who after the leonard no mas fight was considered a lost cause.....the Monroe fight he got totally outboxed ...that's a fact and also the seales fight was a deserved draw.....by the time Leonard was 22 and 23 leonard was beating Durans and benites of this world...hagler was losing and drawing to monroes and seales.....sorry buddy Leonard's resume will always be above hagler and that's just the way it is.....before hagler boxed an all time great in duran he went through The scypions, obelmejias, caveman lees of this world....then when it was duran who was world class he was found to be lacking ...which shows hagler was beatable ....and it was 1983 and hagler was considere to be in his utmost prime...sorry buddy leonard was better and he proved not just at one weight but from multiple.....hagler would have got destroyed by Michael spinks which was the same equivalent from weltwerweight to middleweight

Actually, Duran was coming off a big win over Davey Moore. Past prime but hardly "washed up". You apparently don't know the difference between the the two. Hagler won a clear decision from what I saw.


I also stopped reading after you called Duran a "lightweight" at that stage of his career. If you're stupid enough to believe he was still a lightweight at that point, there is nothing left to discuss.



In Leonard's own words, he waited until he saw Hagler slowing down in the Mugabi fight. But you can continue to fantasize that Leonard had intentions of fighting Hagler at any point during Hagler's prime.

[MRBOOMER]

Duran, Hearns and Leonard all had to jump multiple weight classes to fight this coward. All put on great showings! Why Hagler is even mentioned amongst these multi-division warriors baffles the hell out of me.

Hagler's legacy is camping out at Middleweight waiting for small welters to pounce on.

Because he beat 2/3 of those multi division warriors

[soul_survivor]

Depends whether you count light middle as a weight I reckon he was the man at LMW for a while

At the time, it was more of a stop gap between welter and middle and it wasn't seen as a major division. It's not what it has been post Oscar/Mosley and Vargas. LMW has become a glamour division now but it wasn't back then and even with that, Hearns held only a portion of the LMW crown and the Duran win at the weight only looks good in hindsight.

[billeau2]

I don't see the value of trying to describe the conditions under which Hagler won his fights against Duran and Hearns, and lost against Sugar Ray. The thing about all four fighters...Duran, Sugar Ray, Hearns and Hagler is that they would always be competative against each other and the outcome would depend on conditions... So at any given time any guy could win, for example, If Hagler had fought Hearns at a lighter weight, if Ray had fought Hagler earlier, or if Ray had fought Duran differently, etc etc etc.

In no case was there one of these guys who outclassed the rest. For example, if we take the relatively recent middle weight tournament we had with Ward the winner, this tournament was not close at all. Ward won and the rest of the group was secondary for all practical purposes....if we had such a tournament with the fab four, and lets assume all four in prime condition, we would have a very close tournament...in fact the winner might well have been a victim of circumstances going his way.

So while there are some methods to discuss, on a very technical level, who was the best in this group, it is not easy and one simply must acknowledge how all of the fab four were great fighters.

[The plunger man]

Actually, Duran was coming off a big win over Davey Moore. Past prime but hardly "washed up". You apparently don't know the difference between the the two. Hagler won a clear decision from what I saw.


I also stopped reading after you called Duran a "lightweight" at that stage of his career. If you're stupid enough to believe he was still a lightweight at that point, there is nothing left to discuss.



In Leonard's own words, he waited until he saw Hagler slowing down in the Mugabi fight. But you can continue to fantasize that Leonard had intentions of fighting Hagler at any point during Hagler's prime.

No he didn't he actually saw it after duran took him the full distance...and that's why he made the comeback in 1984 agaisnt Kevin Howard.....it was only because he never boxed up to his expectations that he retired after Howard.....but it was the catalyst that started the whole ball rolling ...that's how it all started my friend...as for duran...he had lost to leonard went into exile...then came back and lost to Kirkland Lang ..struggled with Jimmy batten...lost to benitez.....and yes he beat davey Moore but by no means was that anything to prepare him for hagler....duran was a blown up lightweight who had seen his best days and yet he took hagler the full 15 rounds and if you call losing 9-6 to a naturally bigger champion comfortable then you are clueless and this lightweight never finsihed with a mark on his face...hagler was cut and bleeding and his eye almost closed......and if hagler and lost them last 2 rounds then we would have been looking a draw in my eyes...in the judges eyes he would have won.......duran leaned out the ropes and shouted at leonard you can beat him...that's a fact and that's the reason why leonard made his 1984 comeback.....now as I said before a championthat has been active and dominant facing a boxer who had one fight in 5 years ...who was smaller, rusty, less power and recovering from a serious eye injury still beat this so called marvellous one......a prime leonard would beat him more easy....to quick....to sharp and to intelligent..and if hagler can draw with antuerfermo and seals...lose to Monroe,,,,struggle to overcome a blown up light weight ...then I'm damn sure one of greatest boxers that's ever stepped into a ring could beat him...and he did...so get over it and move on with your life silly boy

[The plunger man]

I don't see the value of trying to describe the conditions under which Hagler won his fights against Duran and Hearns, and lost against Sugar Ray. The thing about all four fighters...Duran, Sugar Ray, Hearns and Hagler is that they would always be competative against each other and the outcome would depend on conditions... So at any given time any guy could win, for example, If Hagler had fought Hearns at a lighter weight, if Ray had fought Hagler earlier, or if Ray had fought Duran differently, etc etc etc.

In no case was there one of these guys who outclassed the rest. For example, if we take the relatively recent middle weight tournament we had with Ward the winner, this tournament was not close at all. Ward won and the rest of the group was secondary for all practical purposes....if we had such a tournament with the fab four, and lets assume all four in prime condition, we would have a very close tournament...in fact the winner might well have been a victim of circumstances going his way.

So while there are some methods to discuss, on a very technical level, who was the best in this group, it is not easy and one simply must acknowledge how all of the fab four were great fighters.

I agree billeau...but what annoys me is that people try and down grade what leonard did and say hagler was old and past it....leonard had 1 fight in 5 years...had never boxed above light middleweight and yet he went up against a bigger more active champion who everybody thought would massacre leonard..and leonard outboxed him....I never said hagler was not great I just said leonard was greater and it's been proven that by each boxers achievements .....what's right is right that's the way it is

[McGoorty]

I admire all four fighters a lot, as much as any of you but for years and years and years and years most of you seem to focus on like maybe a dozen or a bit more than a dozen famous fighters but most seemingly don't give two figs about the all the other great especially when we go a lot deeper in time. Seriously I have said all I am ever going to about any of these guys again, I for one get tired of repeating myself, it's as good a time as any to move on.

[joseph5620]

4]No he didn't he actually saw it after duran took him the full distance...and that's why he made the comeback in 1984 agaisnt Kevin Howard.[/B]....it was only because he never boxed up to his expectations that he retired after Howard.....but it was the catalyst that started the whole ball rolling ...that's how it all started my friend...as for duran...he had lost to leonard went into exile...then came back and lost to Kirkland Lang ..struggled with Jimmy batten...lost to benitez.....and yes he beat davey Moore but by no means was that anything to prepare him for hagler....duran was a blown up lightweight who had seen his best days and yet he took hagler the full 15 rounds and if you call losing 9-6 to a naturally bigger champion comfortable then you are clueless and this lightweight never finsihed with a mark on his face...hagler was cut and bleeding and his eye almost closed......and if hagler and lost them last 2 rounds then we would have been looking a draw in my eyes...in the judges eyes he would have won.......duran leaned out the ropes and shouted at leonard you can beat him...that's a fact and that's the reason why leonard made his 1984 comeback.....now as I said before a championthat has been active and dominant facing a boxer who had one fight in 5 years ...who was smaller, rusty, less power and recovering from a serious eye injury still beat this so called marvellous one......a prime leonard would beat him more easy....to quick....to sharp and to intelligent..and if hagler can draw with antuerfermo and seals...lose to Monroe,,,,struggle to overcome a blown up light weight ...then I'm damn sure one of greatest boxers that's ever stepped into a ring could beat him...and he did...so get over it and move on with your life silly boy

You can try to rewrite history as much as you want. The fact remains that Leonard made no attempt to fight Hagler until after the Mugabi fight. A fight that Leonard openly said he saw weaknesses and signs that Hagler was slowing down.

Leonard retired again immediately after the Howard fight. So your claim that he came back in that fight for Hagler is laughable.

If you can't tell the truth about simple facts like that don't expect me to read or respond to the long bullshi t you posted under it. I see enough lies and rewritten history in here so you're not contributing anything new. On second thought, your claim that Pacquiao-Margarito was one of the best fights of all time was a new one for me. That speaks for itself about who the clueless one is.

[billeau2]

I agree billeau...but what annoys me is that people try and down grade what leonard did and say hagler was old and past it....leonard had 1 fight in 5 years...had never boxed above light middleweight and yet he went up against a bigger more active champion who everybody thought would massacre leonard..and leonard outboxed him....I never said hagler was not great I just said leonard was greater and it's been proven that by each boxers achievements .....what's right is right that's the way it is

If someone "downgrades one" or "upgrades one" at the expense of another one, its all part of the same thing imo...No Leonard should not be downgraded. To me there is a difference between looking at each man and coming to a conclusion that one was a better fighter, as compared to questioning the general framework whereby each guy was part of the fabulous four. Some people think Duran was the greatest light weight ever, including his victory over Leonard, some people think Ray was the complete package bar none... the one thing we can say is that all four guys were on a level where their talents and achievements were comparable to each other (with said caveat) and incomparable to most.

For example, I remember a time in the nineties where Quartey, mosley, De La Hoya, Trinidad, Vargas were all in the mix...and the middle divisions had great comp...not even mentioning guys like Vernon forest and Mayorga, yet even with all these great fighters as history turned out we did not get fouf ATG fighters who were incomparable.

[billeau2]

You can try to rewrite history as much as you want. The fact remains that Leonard made no attempt to fight Hagler until after the Mugabi fight. A fight that Leonard openly said he saw weaknesses and signs that Hagler was slowing down.

Leonard retired again immediately after the Howard fight. So your claim that he came back in that fight for Hagler is laughable.

If you can't tell the truth about simple facts like that don't expect me to read or respond to the long bullshi t you posted under it. I see enough lies and rewritten history in here so you're not contributing anything new. On second thought, your claim that Pacquiao-Margarito was one of the best fights of all time was a new one for me. That speaks for itself about who the clueless one is.

Mugabi could take the piss out of anyone...Kind of like Iran B or Margarito.