Manny Pacquiao Or Marvin Hagler. Who's Greater?

[John Hue]

But, then you can also the Hagler best wins were against guys who were smaller. Guys who were coming up in weight no?

This was not by design.In that era the legends were guys moving up. It just so happened there were no Hearns or Durans type boxers at middle weight but Hagler fought and beat the best middle weights at the time.

[Left Banned Tua]

I understand you are using tit for tat but it was an entirely different era back then where guys with loses weren't considered done by any stretch

also

while you mention the fighter with 38 losses you do realize before he fought that fighter he fought Bennie Briscoe? You know who Bennie Briscoe is?

honest question bro not trying to flame

bennie briscoe was a good movie. didn't like al pacino's role though.

[Red Rebel]

Hagler because he took on and defeated all different styles. And he was never KO'd or even hurt in a fight.

Rafal Jackiewicz was never been KO'd aswell.. can we include him among the greats..?

[Calilloyd]

hearns hurt him in the first round.

Some people say that but I never saw Hagler hurt in that fight. Certainly not enough enough to take a backwards step and stop punching or hold on. That's my definition of truly being "hurt".

[DIB42]

Hagler at this point in time, Manny is on quite a rush though, he could top hagler at some point down the road, but right now I'm sticking with marvelous.

[Left Banned Tua]

hearns hurt him in the first round.

all that did was wake up marvelous.

hearns is hagler's biatch.

[Bennett]

So what do you think of Hagler fighting a guy with 38 losses for his 45th pro fight?

Most people look back on boxing history and get all sloppy about it, but no fighter is perfect. They all have matchmakers, they avoid certain fighters, and sometimes inexcusably fight complete tomato cans.

I imagine if it was Pacquiao who fought a guy with 38 losses for his 45th fight, you wouldn't be talking nice about him like you are about Hagler.

hagler is my era. marvin had big problems getting fights, its like paul williams. nobody wanted to fight him. no way he drew against vito. they did everything they could to keep the belt away from hagler. he didnt even get a real title shot until 46 or so fights. imagine that heppenin 2day?

hagler was heavily avoided. smarten up man. that fight against warren was his 5th fight that year which was 78'. he was fightin every 2-3 months. fighters of today fight 2-3 times a year.

[Calilloyd]

Rafal Jackiewicz was never been KO'd aswell.. can we include him among the greats..?

Was he comparable to Hagler in terms of overall skill? Or are you just being ignorant?

[General Zod]

Big Hagler fan, but id say Pac.

Pac has moved up so many weights and has fought more great fighters.

Hagler stuck at 160 and his best wins are against fighters moving up.



What Pac has done is unique.

I agree with this post

EDIT: In terms of overall boxing ability and intangibles I say Hagler, but in terms of resume I say Pacman

[Bennett]

Some people say that but I never saw Hagler hurt in that fight. Certainly not enough enough to take a backwards step and stop punching or hold on. That's my definition of truly being "hurt".

he was trust me. he was so dam tough its hard to tell, but hearns hurt him. not like on ***** street hurt and remember that right hook h-bomb that stopped duran and duran was a tough muther. hearns could hurt any1.

big hagler fan here so im not ****tin on marvin, but gots to give credit where credits due thats all im sayin.