Could any Middleweight have K.Od Hagler?

blueberrymuffin · Post by **blueberrymuffin** » 26 Aug 2006, 13:47

Okay, you want to talk about the last fight Hagler was in but that's a cheap shot. We can also talk about the nine draws Monzon had on his record. Not exactly a perfect, spotless record.

That would be playing dumb though because I know Monzon had to have improved from those days even as Hagler improved from his contender days and peaked in 82, reaching heights no man has ever reached nor ever will again.

The stars can only shine so bright for so long before starting to dim and that's what happened with Hagler steadily declining in years following that and then snow balling after his fight with Hearns until he was a shell ready to retire.

That's when leonard with his keen senses, picked up on it and finally made his move to challenge-after six years of being decidedly against fighting him.

Talk about a change in attitiude!

Anyways, that's the story Boxbuzz. I'm sorry you got offended but no one including Monzon is going to walk over Hagler. From either the outside or inside, Hagler has the better tools and the sharper, stronger puncher.

cosand · Post by **cosand** » 26 Aug 2006, 13:54

We can also talk about the nine draws Monzon had on his record. Not exactly a perfect, spotless record

To find those draws and the two losses, you have to go back to the early and mid 60s whan monzon was a semi homeless 20 something kid living on the streets boxing so he could eat.
That is the case with a lot of latin American fighters, especially in those days

KOJOE90 · Post by **KOJOE90** » 26 Aug 2006, 15:50

cosand wrote:Had Monzon hit Hagler with half the shots SRL did, call for the EMTs

That's not really a fair gauge though with repect. Firstly in that fight Hagler was very much on the slide and noticably slower than 5/6 years earlier. He also to me looked over trained.

Leonard and Monzon were both great fighters but stylewise were very different as we all know.

Anyway back to the original question. I'm a big Hagler fan but have nothing but the highest respect for Monzons ability as a fighter. They were both great dominant Champions. As for picking a winner, that's a tough one and a topic that comes up every few months on this and other forums.

But for my money if they had both fought each other in their respective primes my money would be on a distance fight.

All things being equel I don't see Monzon or any other Middleweight I have seen fight KO Hagler.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 26 Aug 2006, 16:37

I was of course never offended.....when most people think they are in an arguement with me, I'm thinking we're just starting to really communicate. This has been and always will be one of the great legendary debates of boxing. For the record this forum clearly favors Hagler.....I think it has to do with our average age.

Although my age here probably brings up the average by several decades.

blueberrymuffin · Post by **blueberrymuffin** » 26 Aug 2006, 19:20

cosand wrote:We can also talk about the nine draws Monzon had on his record. Not exactly a perfect, spotless record

To find those draws and the two losses, you have to go back to the early and mid 60s whan monzon was a semi homeless 20 something kid living on the streets boxing so he could eat.
That is the case with a lot of latin American fighters, especially in those days

Cosand, you didn't finish reading what I was saying. I went on to say that Hagler shouldn't be judged by his last fight anymore than Monzon should be judged by his early fights.

I agree that had Monzon hit Hagler with as many shots as Leonard had, he probably would have put him on the canvas or punched him into semi-consciousness. It would have been too much for him but not a young Hagler because it would have been too hard to hit him cleanly even with combinations. Whether the opponent was fast or slow it didn't matter.

By the way, Ray Leonard was a very talented fighter even if he was no middleweight and one of the more established fighters of the early 80's. I was extremely impressed with his performance that night.

It was evident that he had been prepared well for it and despite what anyone says, he was in his prime so I would think that Ray with his elusiveness and outstanding footwork against a dreadfully past his prime Hagler could barely escape with a disputed decision, a prime Hagler should be able to more than hold his own with Monzon.

I'm not saying he's he's the fighter Monzon was, especially at 160 but his elusiveness was close to the same level. However, prime Hagler was one of the elite if not the best I've seen.

And if no one thinks I haven't seen Monzon, I have had a good look at him with the likes of Napoles, Benvenuti, Valdez, Licata, Mundine, and Tonna. I think that's probably enough to know how he fights.

blueberrymuffin · Post by **blueberrymuffin** » 26 Aug 2006, 19:46

BoxBuzz wrote:I was of course never offended.....when most people think they are in an arguement with me, I'm thinking we're just starting to really communicate. This has been and always will be one of the great legendary debates of boxing. For the record this forum clearly favors Hagler.....I think it has to do with our average age.

Although my age here probably brings up the average by several decades.

KO magazine was the first one I believe to start that matchup but Hagler wasn't even that well known at the time. I think he had only something like three or four defenses and was playing second fiddle to the likes of Ray leonard, Larry Holmes, Arguello, and Salvador Sanchez.

Anyways, it was the p4p4 matchup between the champs of 81 vs. the champs of 71. If I remember correctly, it was Joe Frazier getting a unanimous win over Larry.

Bob Foster knocking Spinks out in round nine.

See what I mean? No one except for Leonard was getting the benefit of the doubt.

Then they had Monzon beating Hagler saying he would wear out in the stretch (probably keeping the Antuofuermo fight in mind). Same story as above-the champs from their own time didn't get respect unless it was Leonard or the 1971 champ was a total loser.

Benitez beating some guy named Oscar Alvarado at 154.

Leonard stopping Napoles on cuts (which I didn't agree with).

Niccolino Locche decisioning Aaron Pryor (unlikely)

Alexis Arguello beating Ken Buchanan (points)

Ricardo Arredondo stopping Sammy Serrano

Salvador Sanchez stopping Kuniaki Shibata

Ruben Olivares beating Pintor on points

Masao Ohba knocking out Antonio Avelar

Some choices seemed pretty sound but I think reputations seemed to have a lot to do with their picks. It seemed as though this writer deliberately picked at some imperfection in some fighters that his favorites could exploit to his personal satisfaction.

months earlier, they ran a similar contest between the heavyweights

Some bonehead picks:

George Chuvalo knocking out Trevor Berbick

The 1981 Jimmy Young beating Mac Foster and Leon Spinks knocking out Jose Luis Garcia. This showed they had a blatant disregard for certain fighters.

Jerry Quarry beating Micheal Dokes on points and absolutely refused to pick a winner between George Foreman and Gerry Cooney because of the upcoming Holmes Cooney fight.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 26 Aug 2006, 20:48

Loche would take Pryor to school and send him home in a big yellow bus.

hawaiianpunch · Post by **hawaiianpunch** » 27 Aug 2006, 21:32

blueberrymuffin wrote:
meade95 wrote:Hearns could have KO'd Hagler had Tommy not got caught himself - He shook Hagler up in the 2nd -

J. Jackson had the power to KO Hagler if he landed his shots - But I would suspect Hagler would land his first (he had the better defense and could handle pressure).....but if J. Jackson landed his big shot....Hagler would go.

Additionally Hearns didn't hit as hard (punch for punch) at 160 as he did at 147 and 154.
The Jackson fight would be interesting. hate to dissapoint you but Hagler has been in with harder bangers than Julian. Hart back before Hagler was a contender, Roldan, and Hearns was sharper. Mugabi lumped up Hagler's face for the only time I ever saw but marvin was just about through anyways. No middleweight could have long stood up to prime Hagler.

Can't be because nobody at Middle hit harder than Jackson. Mugabi and Hearns may be close, but when Jackson hit you everything goes and usually you don't get up ready to continue (Just as Herol Graham). I am not saying Jackson would BEAT Hagler, but he would have a "chance" to KO him, if he could hit him.

Jaclem · Post by **Jaclem** » 28 Aug 2006, 01:30

...i'm surprised that no one has added sugar ray robinson to the great middle punchers list. when he was in his prime against middleweights...which was before he won the title from lamotta he hit as hard as anyone mentioned here. he doesn't have the kayo perecentage so many modern fighters have because he fought such top opposition and, as was the case then with so many fighters, he didn't go for the kayo every time out. ..content to box and give the local fellow a chance to make a decent showing against the home folk. dave clarke got cute in one such match and got a tad too aggressive in one round and ray didn't sit down when the bell ended that one, came out the next round and whopped clarke with one that damn near decapitated him. the sugar ray who kayoed steve belloise in his "official' entry into the middle ranks was a devastating finisher.

this is not to say he would have kayoed hagler....just that he would have as good a chance as any names listed here.

dammit..can't help adding that if the prime sugar ray was behind in a tugh battle with hagler and the title on the line and ray was behind....i would be betting on him to kayo the marvelous one.

.

Jaclem · Post by **Jaclem** » 28 Aug 2006, 13:14

EEEEK....DECAGON......it's sugar ray ROBINSON i cite in my post.....the real sugar ray....the one who was an all-time great fighter!!!!

Was this a mistake on your part or were you just needling me, knowing how i feel about the little candy ass? you're one of the smartest guys here, so i suspect the latter....

8)

Jaclem · Post by **Jaclem** » 29 Aug 2006, 13:14

..when my grandma was lonely she drank cheap red wine. worked for her. anyway, glad you're out of the hospital and hope you're on your way to a quick recovery

KOJOE90 · Post by **KOJOE90** » 29 Aug 2006, 13:34

Jaclem wrote:...i'm surprised that no one has added sugar ray robinson to the great middle punchers list.

Paul Pender said around 1970 that Sugar Ray Robinson was the greatest Middleweight puncher ever. He also stated Sugar Ray was NOT the greatest Boxer ever, Pender was adamant that Willie Pep was a far better boxer that Suger Ray.

mattyp151 · Post by **mattyp151** » 29 Aug 2006, 14:01

KOJOE90 wrote:
Jaclem wrote:...i'm surprised that no one has added sugar ray robinson to the great middle punchers list.
Paul Pender said around 1970 that Sugar Ray Robinson was the greatest Middleweight puncher ever. He also stated Sugar Ray was NOT the greatest Boxer ever, Pender was adamant that Willie Pep was a far better boxer that Suger Ray.

What does that say about Sandy Saddler?

mattyp151 · Post by **mattyp151** » 29 Aug 2006, 16:57

Just a view of another poster from maxboxing on his feelings of one particular MW who could KO Hagler:

Hagler feels affronted by Eastman's beard and attitude and charges out as he did against Hearns. Eastman absorbs the big shots - his chin is a gazillion times better than Tommy's. He also brings a strong right hand over Hagler's southpaw stance. Gradually, Hagler begins to run out of steam just as Eastman, who always has good late gas, hits his straps. Eastman wears him down and eventually stops an exhausted Hagler who has essentially been undone by his own eagerness to end the fight early.

Even Eastman fans have to admit he gets anhilated by Hagler.

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 30 Aug 2006, 01:11

That's not really a fair gauge though with repect. Firstly in that fight Hagler was very much on the slide and noticably slower than 5/6 years earlier. He also to me looked over trained.

Is just another Hagler nut hugger delusion.....somehow saying Hagler was at one time fast!!! He was always slow and plodding!!!

dr_devious · Post by **dr_devious** » 30 Aug 2006, 04:24

Laff my ass off at Howard Eastman being able to knock out Marvin Hagler, and Im an Eastman fan. I think Howard may have gone 12 rounds against Hagler at his best, but no way does he win.

mattyp151 · Post by **mattyp151** » 30 Aug 2006, 09:10

dr_devious wrote:Laff my ass off at Howard Eastman being able to knock out Marvin Hagler, and Im an Eastman fan. I think Howard may have gone 12 rounds against Hagler at his best, but no way does he win.

If Eastman couldn't go 12 with Miranda recently, you could take Hagler after the Leonard fight and Eastman wouldn't see 12.

Pantera · Post by **Pantera** » 30 Aug 2006, 09:18

Syntax Error wrote:No way.

His chin must have been made from titanium.

Sounds like what people said about Eastman before Miranda tore apart that titanium!

KOJOE90 · Post by **KOJOE90** » 30 Aug 2006, 12:20

ringsider wrote:
That's not really a fair gauge though with repect. Firstly in that fight Hagler was very much on the slide and noticably slower than 5/6 years earlier. He also to me looked over trained.
Is just another Hagler nut hugger delusion.....somehow saying Hagler was at one time fast!!! He was always slow and plodding!!!

Stop the insults and act like an adult or leave the forum.

Syntax Error · Post by **Syntax Error** » 31 Aug 2006, 08:31

Pantera wrote:
Syntax Error wrote:No way.

His chin must have been made from titanium.
Sounds like what people said about Eastman before Miranda tore apart that titanium!

Fair point, but all chins go, if you stick around long enough.

For some fighters, it's earlier than others.

Marvin got out at the right time.

mattyp151 · Post by **mattyp151** » 31 Aug 2006, 08:49

Syntax Error wrote:
Pantera wrote:
Syntax Error wrote:No way.

His chin must have been made from titanium.
Sounds like what people said about Eastman before Miranda tore apart that titanium!
Fair point, but all chins go, if you stick around long enough.

For some fighters, it's earlier than others.

Marvin got out at the right time.

I would've wanted to see a rematch with Ray with Leonard making similar concessions to Hagler. Hagler did everything he could to make the fight happen, and Ray ran like a girl from a rematch. Piss poor from Sugar.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 31 Aug 2006, 09:10

The man who would beat Hagler.....

http://www.boxrec.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=49053

Syntax Error · Post by **Syntax Error** » 31 Aug 2006, 09:28

Mattyp151 wrote:
Syntax Error wrote:
Pantera wrote: Sounds like what people said about Eastman before Miranda tore apart that titanium!
Fair point, but all chins go, if you stick around long enough.

For some fighters, it's earlier than others.

Marvin got out at the right time.
I would've wanted to see a rematch with Ray with Leonard making similar concessions to Hagler. Hagler did everything he could to make the fight happen, and Ray ran like a girl from a rematch. Piss poor from Sugar.

Sugar wouldn't have agreed to such concessions.

Hagler only agreed to them because he wanted the money. It was by far his biggest payday, as nearly every fighter who fought Ray got.

I don't think Ray ran from Marvin, I think he was the type of guy who didn't forget easily.

Marvin was very childish during their fight by calling him names, disrespecting his parentage & sexuality.

Ray probably thought, sod it, why should I line his pockets again.

mattyp151 · Post by **mattyp151** » 31 Aug 2006, 09:31

Ray probably thought, sod it, why should I line his pockets again.

Because it was the right thing to do.

mattym · Post by **mattym** » 31 Aug 2006, 09:41

put yourself in Ray's shoes though. How would you feel after such a monumental struggle, such a titanic fight, all the training, all the hard work, very few people thinking he could beat Hagler, and coming through to win the fight (and he DID), people say meh thats not good enough Ray we arent convinced do it all over again and we'll believe you can beat him.

Nah i think Ray is TOTALLY justified laughing all the way home!!