Marvin Hagler underrated?

[StefanTosic]

he reason does not get mentioned with the others is that he was one-dimensional while the other three clearly were more well-rounded. Besides he got lucky that Hearns broke his hand, fought a bloated Duran and got made a fool out of by Leonard. He is the least talented of the four.

I disagree!!!!! On the contrary he was very versitile and could do really anything in the ring, that way he reminds me of Holyfield. He could box at any distance and he could brawl, plus he could switch his stance and with all that said he was more than one-dimensional. The reason I believe he's not as much praised is that he wasn't a flashy fighter and none of his skills (and nothing from his life story for commercial purpose) that would stand out. Let me explain myself on it right away: I mean all of his skills were on a very high level but most of his skills were on the same level that nothing stood out in particular. Beside his skills, he had the one of the greatest chins, very strong and was a GREAT warrior, really tough and rugged man. Leonard was known as a stand out amateur, with great hand speed, Duran a little man with a hart of a lion, powerfull puncher and also very fast and Hearns, very tall for a welterweight with an incredible punching power. Hagler had most of these things except speed but nothing stood out, plus he wasn't as attractive commercially.

[Supreme75]

Not underrated at all. One of the greatest middleweights EVER.

[_original_]

I don't see how he's underrated, everybody who knows the sport is aware he was a great fighter. Always listed as one of the best MWs and southpaws of all time. I think he's just not in the media as much as Duran, Leonard and Hearns are today so you rarely see pictures or interviews of him.

[joseph5620]

He had one style- straight forward with decent head movement, winging power shots. Hey, it worked for him. One dimensional is not really an insult, but I never saw him do anything differently. Joe Frazier, George Foreman and a young Manny Pacquiao were one dimensional as well, but it worked for them. It's not really an insult. I do say that Pacquiao no longer is however. He developed many other abilities along the way.

Hagler did not need to have more dimensions. What he did worked for him. And he's in the HOF with the other fab four. He had a granite chin and great power. I just don't believe he had the range of Leonard, Hearns or Duran. Take it easy. Geez.

This is a perfect example of a person who only watches one fight of Hagler and it's always the Hearns fight.From that they decide Hagler was just a slugger.

If you speak on things you don't know sh.t about you can expect to get bashed for it. This is just sheer ignorance.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

this is the ******est comment i have ever read marvin hagler was and all time great SRL didn't want **** from him till his was on his way out marvin hagler was the best of the 4 you are ******ed calling him one dimensional you fool!

Thanks for all the insights and the insults too.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

I disagree!!!!! On the contrary he was very versitile and could do really anything in the ring, that way he reminds me of Holyfield. He could box at any distance and he could brawl, plus he could switch his stance and with all that said he was more than one-dimensional. The reason I believe he's not as much praised is that he wasn't a flashy fighter and none of his skills (and nothing from his life story for commercial purpose) that would stand out. Let me explain myself on it right away: I mean all of his skills were on a very high level but most of his skills were on the same level that nothing stood out in particular. Beside his skills, he had the one of the greatest chins, very strong and was a GREAT warrior, really tough and rugged man. Leonard was known as a stand out amateur, with great hand speed, Duran a little man with a hart of a lion, powerfull puncher and also very fast and Hearns, very tall for a welterweight with an incredible punching power. Hagler had most of these things except speed but nothing stood out, plus he wasn't as attractive commercially.

Oh he wasn't as popular, but I don't fault him for that. Of the fights I have seen of him against Leonard, Duran and Hearns, he just did not seem very versatile. Not knocking his chin or his power. Both were great. And I don't think being one dimensional is an insult. Lots of fighters are but they make it work.

[Tony Trick-Pony]

This level of ******ation can't even make me laugh.

Why don't you try watching a Hagler fight besides Hearns? He has a decade of dominance to pick from.

I have seen his fights with Hearns, Leonard, Duran, Mintor, Mugabi, Hamsho. Where was the versatility? He does the same thing every fight. It worked for him. Big deal.

[joseph5620]

I have seen his fights with Hearns, Leonard, Duran, Mintor, Mugabi, Hamsho. Where was the versatility? He does the same thing every fight. It worked for him. Big deal.

So you watched Hagler's last two fights and the Hearns and Duran fight? That explains it.

You obviously didn't watch his first fight with Hamsho when Hagler outboxed him and cut him up. Or his fight with Roldan, Briscoe, Antuofermo, Sibson I can go on and on.

You claim to have watched six fights of Hagler to define his career. You don't know what you're talking about so you should stop trying.



Watch these fights and point out where the come foward one dimensional slugging is.

http://********/R8uNVMC_oMU

Marvin Hagler vs Mustafa Hamsho I: http://********/w9CL4jaRtaE

Marvin Hagler vs Bennie Briscoe: http://********/uR6n4LmFAxs

[Joe Beamish]

I can't think of a better MW historically. At all. Maybe 3-4 on his level. But nobody better.

[_original_]

Oh he wasn't as popular, but I don't fault him for that. Of the fights I have seen of him against Leonard, Duran and Hearns, he just did not seem very versatile. Not knocking his chin or his power. Both were great. And I don't think being one dimensional is an insult. Lots of fighters are but they make it work.

I have seen his fights with Hearns, Leonard, Duran, Mintor, Mugabi, Hamsho. Where was the versatility? He does the same thing every fight. It worked for him. Big deal.