Rodrigo Valdez vs Marvin Hagler in 1977

Seamus · Post by **Seamus** » 29 Jun 2006, 23:30

In 1977 Rodrigo Valdez was the Middleweight champion of the World, and Ring Magazine rated Marvin Hagler the number 1 contender. Had they met for Valdez's World title, who would have won ? I think I'm going to be in the minority here, because even though I rate Hagler considerably higher all time, in 1977 I think Valdez was just a little better, and possessed, the chin, the punch, the skill and the experience to beat Hagler. I see Valdez coming out the winner over 15 rounds, by 1-2-2 pts.

tgchungmj · Post by **tgchungmj** » 05 Aug 2007, 03:34

I also think Valdez has a good chance to defeat Hagler. I agree Hagler also has enough odds. It would be a good match.

dr_devious · Post by **dr_devious** » 05 Aug 2007, 15:20

I agree, in 1977 Valdez was much more experienced and could have won a decision over MMH

markl · Post by **markl** » 06 Aug 2007, 13:09

Hagler was just the more versatile fighter. Valdez enormous power wouldn't really matter against a chin like marvin's. He boxed more in his youth and I think his southpaw jab and free flowing movement leads to a 9-6ish decision win for the Marvelous one.

tgchungmj · Post by **tgchungmj** » 07 Aug 2007, 09:27

Hagler doesn't have any problem when he meet whomever with a great punch?

I know Hagler had a great chin, but it doesn't mean he can take all the hard punches of all the middleweight boxers. Hagler didn't meet as strong a fighter as Valdez. Valdez definietely had more power in his hands than Hagler. And Valdez was also a good technician.

I know hagler was a more versatile fighter. Halgler's overall skill was better than Valdez but only in slight degree. Valdez also had all the things needed in boxing.

Valdez had more experience than Hagler in 1975~1977. Remember Hagler lost 2 games in 1976. He recorded a draw with Antuofermo in 1979.

I can accept Hagler has more chances to win. However Valdez was in different level with Mugabi or Antuofermo. Valdez' pressing and trading would not be easily dealt with by Hagler.

I think Hagler's first knock down can take place if he meet Valdez. Valdez kayoed BAD Briscoe.. His punch was really really awesome.. Valdez is one of the middleweights who can have the chance to kayo Hagler. I think it is not probable but still possible for Valdez to knock Hagler out.

Nile4000 · Post by **Nile4000** » 07 Aug 2007, 10:18

Hagler survived Mugabi, who was one of the hardest punchers around, and the right hand of Thomas Hearns.He beats Valdez on a close unanimous verdict.

markl · Post by **markl** » 07 Aug 2007, 13:54

tgchungmj wrote:Hagler doesn't have any problem when he meet whomever with a great punch?

I know Hagler had a great chin, but it doesn't mean he can take all the hard punches of all the middleweight boxers. Hagler didn't meet as strong a fighter as Valdez. Valdez definietely had more power in his hands than Hagler. And Valdez was also a good technician.

I know hagler was a more versatile fighter. Halgler's overall skill was better than Valdez but only in slight degree. Valdez also had all the things needed in boxing.

Valdez had more experience than Hagler in 1975~1977. Remember Hagler lost 2 games in 1976. He recorded a draw with Antuofermo in 1979.

I can accept Hagler has more chances to win. However Valdez was in different level with Mugabi or Antuofermo. Valdez' pressing and trading would not be easily dealt with by Hagler.

I think Hagler's first knock down can take place if he meet Valdez. Valdez kayoed BAD Briscoe.. His punch was really really awesome.. Valdez is one of the middleweights who can have the chance to kayo Hagler. I think it is not probable but still possible for Valdez to knock Hagler out.

No Middleweight in history could ko Hagler imo. Sorry, and hagler won a minimum of 11 rounds in that draw with Vito. I try to keep pis poor judging out of mythical matchups.

The fighters he lost to in 76 were polar opposite of Rodrigo as far as styles go. valdez is an underrated fighter in the grand scheme of things. but I don't see where I was disrespectful towards his talents.

It's easy to say a guy who was never really hurt can be dropped, it's another thing for it to happen. Hagler's movement and stamina get the job done here.

dr_devious · Post by **dr_devious** » 07 Aug 2007, 15:47

I dont see any MW in history stopping Marvin Hagler, Valdez included. Too good a chin, too good a boxer, too much stamina

tgchungmj · Post by **tgchungmj** » 08 Aug 2007, 06:49

Hagler won at least 11 rounds in his first fight with Antuofermo?

Do you think you remember the game precisely enough?

I can't say what rounds Hagler got at that game, but 11 rounds are too much. The decision was made slightly for Antufermo but it was in reasonable degree. MMH didn't dominate the game. Antuofermo did enough to keep his title at that game.

At later rounds Hagler did poorly and he lost impression he had made at earlier rounds.

Hagler has a tendency to be too cautious in some big games(vs Leonard, Duran, Antuofermo 1-first world title match, Seals 1-first game with contender) to show his good talent and skills.

Above is one of the reason why I think Hagler would not have succeeded if he had had a first challenge to world title in 1977 whether the opponent was Monzon or Valdez. Hagler was perfect in his overall physical abiltiy but not so great in his heart and in ring generalship.

dr_devious · Post by **dr_devious** » 08 Aug 2007, 08:23

Hagler's heart wasnt so great? Havent you seen his fights with Hearns and Mugabi? And as for ring generalship, try watching Hagler fight Briscoe, and Sibson to name but two.

tgchungmj · Post by **tgchungmj** » 08 Aug 2007, 11:08

Hagler's heart was very good, but not so great as Duran's, Monzon's....

Hagler has very good ring generalship but he sometimes showed mystery. He has all the skills and techniques to win a game but his play was not so great compared to that abilty.

Don't get me wrong: Some boxers who was not as complete a boxer as he in skills and techniques showed as much as or more than Hagler in the ring.

elmersalsa · Post by **elmersalsa** » 08 Aug 2007, 11:53

tgchungmj wrote:Hagler's heart was very good, but not so great as Duran's, Monzon's....

Hagler has very good ring generalship but he sometimes showed mystery. He has all the skills and techniques to win a game but his play was not so great compared to that abilty.

Don't get me wrong: Some boxers who was not as complete a boxer as he in skills and techniques showed as much as or more than Hagler in the ring.

I respect your opinion, but Marvelous Marvin Hagler was one of the most complete boxers that I have ever seen. In 1977 for a fight with Valdez, I do not know the outcome, but a 1980-85 version of Hagler gots Valdez in trouble...No doubt about that.

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 11 Aug 2007, 01:39

I respect your opinion, but Marvelous Marvin Hagler was one of the most complete boxers that I have ever seen.

You need to watch more fights.......

Elton John · Post by **Elton John** » 13 Aug 2007, 02:21

People don't know this but Clancy, the manager of Valdez, ducked Hagler because they felt Marvin would have been too much for him. I think Hagler had too many tools and Valdez wasn't the kind of fighter who could hold a title for long anyways.

Elton John · Post by **Elton John** » 13 Aug 2007, 02:44

ringsider wrote:
I respect your opinion, but Marvelous Marvin Hagler was one of the most complete boxers that I have ever seen.
You need to watch more fights.......

No, he was right about Hagler and if you don't want what I gave that poor boy Bobby-dee, you best not dissagree with me.

elmersalsa · Post by **elmersalsa** » 13 Aug 2007, 02:44

ringsider wrote:
I respect your opinion, but Marvelous Marvin Hagler was one of the most complete boxers that I have ever seen.
You need to watch more fights.......

I guess you never saw Marvelous fight, then.

markl · Post by **markl** » 22 Aug 2007, 22:12

tgchungmj wrote:Hagler won at least 11 rounds in his first fight with Antuofermo?

Do you think you remember the game precisely enough?

I can't say what rounds Hagler got at that game, but 11 rounds are too much. The decision was made slightly for Antufermo but it was in reasonable degree. MMH didn't dominate the game. Antuofermo did enough to keep his title at that game.

At later rounds Hagler did poorly and he lost impression he had made at earlier rounds.

Hagler has a tendency to be too cautious in some big games(vs Leonard, Duran, Antuofermo 1-first world title match, Seals 1-first game with contender) to show his good talent and skills.

Above is one of the reason why I think Hagler would not have succeeded if he had had a first challenge to world title in 1977 whether the opponent was Monzon or Valdez. Hagler was perfect in his overall physical abiltiy but not so great in his heart and in ring generalship.

Actually, I had it 13-2. Cosell was all over Vito but Marvin controlled the fight throughout. Among the worst decisions in history.

15-0 would be closer to accurate then scoring it for Vito. I dusted off the DVD last month and it was no different. A blind man could have scored that fight for hagler.

tgchungmj · Post by **tgchungmj** » 23 Aug 2007, 10:28

Are you kidding? You really saw the fight?

Hagler won 15 rounds at that fight? Hagler said afterwards that he had no big dissatisfaction about the decision. He had far more dissatisfaction at the decision of the fight with Leonard than the fight with Antuofermo.

Even in the Leonard fight he didn't think he won all of 12 rounds against sugar ray.

An Italian boxer was hugely favored to an American boxer when the fight was held in the USA? Hahaha.. Hagler won all 15 rounds but he was defeated???

JCS · Post by **JCS** » 23 Aug 2007, 10:38

Hey chung. In the western world, we refer to these contests between boxers as matches, bouts, fights, or... maybe even contests. However, you won't seem them referred to as games very often :).

markl · Post by **markl** » 23 Aug 2007, 11:46

tgchungmj wrote:Are you kidding? You really saw the fight?

Hagler won 15 rounds at that fight? Hagler said afterwards that he had no big dissatisfaction about the decision. He had far more dissatisfaction at the decision of the fight with Leonard than the fight with Antuofermo.

Even in the Leonard fight he didn't think he won all of 12 rounds against sugar ray.

An Italian boxer was hugely favored to an American boxer when the fight was held in the USA? Hahaha.. Hagler won all 15 rounds but he was defeated???

Read much? I said it was closer to a shutout then a draw. Hagler was far from content with that decision. He decided not to ever go to a decision again.

I have to question whether you saw the fight. Need me to send you a copy? There were a couple close rounds that could go Vito's way.

I suppose you could even stretch it to 10-5. But it was a brutal robbery anyway you cut it.

Hagler had a long hard road to the title. He was #1 contender for years before he got a shot. The politics of the sport were against him from the get go.

Vito was a New Yorker and he kept coming through the one sided beating. I honestly don't know what to tell you. You seem completely clueless about everything to do with the fight and the circumstances surrounding it.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 23 Aug 2007, 14:52

In 1977 Valdez would win this one. Hagler still misjudged fights at this point as shown by the draw against Antuofermo. Valdez just had that edge. It would be very clsoe though and it's a shame this one never happened.

kick asner · Post by **kick asner** » 23 Aug 2007, 14:58

markl wrote:
tgchungmj wrote:Are you kidding? You really saw the fight?

Hagler won 15 rounds at that fight? Hagler said afterwards that he had no big dissatisfaction about the decision. He had far more dissatisfaction at the decision of the fight with Leonard than the fight with Antuofermo.

Even in the Leonard fight he didn't think he won all of 12 rounds against sugar ray.

An Italian boxer was hugely favored to an American boxer when the fight was held in the USA? Hahaha.. Hagler won all 15 rounds but he was defeated???
Read much? I said it was closer to a shutout then a draw. Hagler was far from content with that decision. He decided not to ever go to a decision again.

I have to question whether you saw the fight. Need me to send you a copy? There were a couple close rounds that could go Vito's way.

I suppose you could even stretch it to 10-5. But it was a brutal robbery anyway you cut it.

Hagler had a long hard road to the title. He was #1 contender for years before he got a shot. The politics of the sport were against him from the get go.

Vito was a New Yorker and he kept coming through the one sided beating. I honestly don't know what to tell you. You seem completely clueless about everything to do with the fight and the circumstances surrounding it.

I had it 12 rounds to 3 in favour of Hagler. Vito was a tough guy and put up a great fight, but I also saw it as not close.

Seamus · Post by **Seamus** » 23 Aug 2007, 20:26

Antuofermo gave Hagler two of the worst rounds in his career, in maybe the 11th and 12th rounds (haven't seen the fight in awhile) but Hagler clearly won alot more rounds, and subsequently deserved the decision.