Comments Thread For: Hagler: Marciano's 49-0 is Better Than Mayweather's 50-0

[buge]

You didn't answer my question. Do you think Valuev is greater than Roberto Duran?

Who would win if the two fought? That's who is the better fighter.

[IronDanHamza]

When I read through threads on this site I often forget that's it's a Boxing website.

[Jc8804]

I agree with hagler. Marciano is ranked higher than floyd alltime.

Simply put

Valuev beats duran h2h.

[komandante]

Fans booing is Mayweather's boxing legacy.

[Nay_Sayer]

there is no bigger title than the heavyweight title, that i can say, but to move up 5 divisions, win double digit world titles, beat more champs than others, win more lineal titles than others, and be currently unified in two different weight classes, the degree of difficulty to do those things can be held to what marciano had done as a heavyweight.

Mayweather's resume takes a HUGE dump on Marciano's...

[Tomasio]

I'm a big Hagler fan but I think he's delusional if he really thinks that.. Out of the 45 fighters Marciano faced(he fought 4 of them twice) ONLY 4 are well known, Joe Louis, Archie Moore, Ezzard Charles & Jersey Joe Walcott & out of those 4, 3 were old & way past their prime(Moore, Louis & Walcott)as a matter of fact Moore was old when he won the lightheavyweight title, imagine when he fought Marciano at heavyweight & Louis had came out of retirement cause he had financial problems & out of those 49 fights ONLY 7 were world title fights against 5 fighters(he fought 2 title fights against the same 2 fighters). Compared that to Floyd's who has 25 world title fights & has fought 23 world chanpions or ex world champions in their prime(3 were undefeated) 2 are already in the "Hall of Fame"(De La,Hoya & Gatti) & right now 4 a sure candidates(Pacquiao, Cotto, Mosley & Marquez)..

[Reloaded]

Yes but then you are only the best within that framework. Heavyweights are the best period because they can beat everyone. See the the difference? It's the whole reason p4p was invented, to give credit to lower weight fighters.

I'm not debating with you because you're speaking in abstract terms. Floyd isn't a heavyweight and never will be. Boxing has weight divisions to stop little guys from getting murdered by heavyweights. How does that make little guys better? You must be a manlet as well.

Good point, I think a lot this anti-hw talk is due to people's own insecurity. They identify more with a 5'6 140 pounder.

What your trying to do is say the bigger man is better because he can beat the little man , that is flawed logic when looking who the better fighter is .

Its like racehorses , you have sprinters and middle distance stayers, you can have an ATG great sprinter that gets beaten by inferior stayers the great sprinter is by far the better racehorse , the topic is who is the better fighter and Floyd is the better fighter in every way except size .

[Johnwoo8686]

Funny thing about this thread is that Hagler never says the quote that the OP quoted him with. He said going 49-0 is different when you're a heavyweight. He never said one was better or worse than the other. Yeah, total click bait.

[Y0@NN]

Mayweather's resume takes a HUGE dump on Marciano's...

Will those who usually say Marciano fought Louis when he was way past his prime say the same about Mayweather's win against Pacquiao?

[tangalog2200]

This is gonna get very very interesting.

you're right....

it is very interesting as this is a very wide and complex topic to tackle...

the glorious "0" is subject to scrutiny as to the caliber of opposition, the time when the fights took place, the weights, the limitations, the manipulations...etc, etc...

however, there are boxers who have longer ko or winning streak over 50 but lost the "revered 0".....

so the question that pops up is "how many fights does a fighter needs to take to say he has done enough?"