What makes Hagler greater than De La Hoya??

[Holywarrior]

You are clearly ignorant I see..

Well, stay on your golden boy island. Your loved ones will send you a postcard every once in a while...lol

Good one

[djtmal]

I'd rather lose moving up divisions then lose to a welterweight coming off a 3 year retirement, then crying and moving to Paris

Can someone say, manny pac?...lol

[Holywarrior]

Can someone say, manny pac?...lol

At least Pac moved up and was prime.

Hagler picking on fat lightweights

[Mr.Fantastic]

What makes Marv better than Oscar you ask?

Oscar beat a lot of good fighters...

Marv took a lot of great fighters souls and existence...

Case closed we can all go home....lol

Marv took A LOT of great fighters' souls...ok....NAME THEM...GO! Let's see A LOT!

Fat atg Duran...

Lets not confuse oscar with any atg on duran and haglers level...he's levels below and needs delusionals to make a case for him...haglers place is cemented permanently by everybody

Levels below? Why is it that only 1 ONE UNO person has been able to beat his accomplishment(Pac) in multiple weight divisions? Meaning belts. Hell Mexican/PR boxing greats very rarely get 3 or more.

Before you do the twisting game, it's not saying Oscar is greater just fyi.

Hardly soul stealing though.

Last I checked it was Leonard coming out of retirement, making Hagler cry and quit and move to friggen France.

That is soul stealing.

Too funny.

All I'm seeing in here is GRRRRRR Hagler ATG and DLH not followed by excuses excuses and vague responses.

[Holywarrior]

Too funny.

All I'm seeing in here is GRRRRRR Hagler ATG and DLH not followed by excuses excuses and vague responses.

Yes. Hagler is an ATG but so is Delahoya. Hagler gets an unfair "Fab 4" pass though just because.

Oh, and he beat Mugabi, Hamsho and Roldan

It's amazing that people will take a crap on Oscar's wins for fighting guys coming up in weight. What was Delahoya? A middleweight moving down?

Last I checked he'd also had moved up

[IronDanHamza]

Because you are not understanding me nor am I understanding you. Dude, you usually make me understand where you coming from but in this topic you have failed to do so.

I keep asking because you don't see the logic behind the question. You keep downgrading that fight but yet don't want to see the faults with Hagler's wins.

Whitaker won regardless! You're not going to look pretty in every fight. Hell he was being the aggressor with Hurtado and knocked him the fuck out. That knock out is pretty much in every Whitaker highlight vid. Oh and while we're talking about that contender bullshit, that same Hurtado went on to give Tszyu a good fight(knocked him down twice).
Now let's talk Rivera, dude went on to fight other really good/great boxers and isn't the type to look good against. Guys like you don't give him the credit he deserves.

You're not understanding me because you're saying things I haven't said.

I'm giving the deserved credit for Whitaker. Was it a good win for Oscar? Yeah of course.

Was Whitaker clearly well passed his best? Yes of course. Still a good fighter as he showed in the actual fight with Oscar but let's not pretend that his last 3 fights before that didn't happen. Just because he won doesn't mean he didn't show clear decline. He was lucky to get the win in the fist Riveiera fight and definitely the Hurtado fight.

Riveria and Hurtado are fringe contenders and that's at best. Whitaker never looked as bad as he did in those fights and they're significantly worse than the fighters he fought in his career.

Somewhere in that you somehow see me saying "Oscar gets no credit for that win" or "Whitaker was shot" which I've not said nor implied.

The second part is that you said Whitaker and Chavez are better wins than Hearns. Which isn't true, to which I said isn't true and you somehow turn that into me saying "Haglers win over Hearns is better than anything Oscar did therefore Haglers is greater than Hearns" something else I've never said not implied.

I'm struggling as to why this needs such a through breakdown.

Haglers has a better resume, better dominance, just a better fighter all round. Has better quality, quantity

[The Noose]

A nice civil debate i see. lol

To be fair, i think its a difficult comparison.

On one hand Oscar is a multi-weight champion, who took on everyone he could and suffered a few losses and had a few close calls.

And Hagler only fought at MW, yet was a very destructive champion who fought some true ATG's.

Technique has nothing to do with it.
Who they fought and how they won is important.
Many of Haglers opponents were very good tough boxers who he destroyed. But people now dont know them. In the same way that young boxing fans today might not know Ike Quartey.

I dont think its as black and white as people are making out.

[TOBYLEE1]

Both are great fighters, Haglar was dominant at his weight. P4P if ODLH and Haglar ever fought in even terms IMO Haglar would win.

[Joe Grizzley]

I see a lot of people talking ATG this and ATG that but yet turn around and criticize someone like Oscar for not being great.

Ok, what makes him so much greater than Oscar? Judging from watching a lot of their fights, Oscar had better technique along with having a lot of better opponents(my 2c). So why can't Oscar be in the same boat of ATGs?

Your a moron. If you think Oscar had better technique than Hagler, you really just don't know what your looking at.

[Joe Grizzley]

Marv took A LOT of great fighters' souls...ok....NAME THEM...GO! Let's see A LOT!

Hearns was never the same after. Iran Barkley should have never even laid a glove on Hearns.

Mugabi was never the same either. If you were't alive then, which you probably weren't, Mugabi was smashing his opposition to bits. Marvin fought that cat late in his career and stomped his as.s like a cigar on the street. Ruined.