BoxRec

Ambling Alp II wrote:

golden oldie wrote:"Ambling Alp II"

]He looked as good against Mugabi as he did in several of his prime fights.

You have 2 choices,

( a ) you are deliberately lying

or

( b ) you are a fool

Which is it?

The following are your hero Leonard's own words.

I was ringside", Leonard said. "I'm watching John 'The Beast' Mugabi fight Hagler. Of all people, John 'The Beast' Mugabi." It was then that Leonard decided to come back and fight Hagler. He called Mike Trainer and said, "I can beat Hagler".

I apologise, there is also the 3rd FANBOY option, whereby the fanboys CONVINCE themselves they know better than their own hero's.

You are much like the other fanboy Tony, you will do ANYTHING to avoid the issues ( particularly if they involve Leonard's own claims ) and concentrate on promoting your own ego's through your misguided hero worship.

What won the Mugabi fight was Hagler's granite chin, and superior power. NOTHING else. He looked far from good.

Watch Marvin from the late 70's early 80's when he systematically took guys apart then stopped them. What he did with Mugabi was " gutted it out " no comparison at all.

Always the class act, aren't you?
So Leonard thought he could beat Hagler, and that is the proof that Hagler was washed up? How damning.
Where were all the people that thought Hagler was washed up before the Leonard fight? Are either still alive?
How come expert after expert said Leonard had no chance against Hagler?
Hagler was as impressive against Mugabi as he was against the fading Benny Briscoe, Marcus Geraldo, Vito Antuofermo, and Duran.

I really don't know why golden oldie just can't come out and say, "You know what, I just don't like the guy." He harps on SRL saying he wanted to fight these 3 or 4 guys over X-time frame. But Dempsey was going to fight Wills or Langford. Ali talked about an immediate Foreman rematch. There was talk of Duran-Pryor. Talk of O'Grady-Davis. Any fight fan can do this all day. But only complaining about Leonard? What a weird obsession, and then he projects it onto us.

golden oldie wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:

golden oldie wrote:
Keep taking the pills, you never know one day you might actually have something worthwhile to say. Out of interest do you actually know anything about boxing, because as far as I can remember you were the twerp on here with an anti Calzaghe agenda a few years ago, based on nothing more than a list of fighters you claimed he ducked ( unfortunately those guys were merely figments of your over active imagination ) but i remember laughing at your weird attempts to discredit the guy.

Your memory is rubbish, I've got an absolutely massive mancrush on Calzaghe, i have watched the Lacy fight about 15 times, making small sex noises the whole way through.

You sonny boy are a liar. Check back through your own posts, you were completely guilty of slagging off Calzaghe because in your insignificant opinion he coulda, shoulda, woulda, blah,blah,blah fought this that or the other fighter in his " prime "

No, I wont check my posts, it would be pointless. I dare you to find a post from me that is critical of my idol super-Joe. I'm not a liar, and your memory is that of a drooling senile old man.

Ps: "haaaaaaRRRRRRRUMPH!"

Tony1244 wrote:Leonard and Hagler were two Great fighters who were both passed their prime when they met.

When 2 Greats fight with great chins, the winner often goes to the fighter with better hand and foot speed. That's what happened here.

It should be also mentioned Hagler lost good part of the fight outside the ring. Leonard wanted bigger ring - no problem. Bigger gloves? Agreed. The same with 12 rounds instead of default 15. All those changes were favouring Leonard for obvious reasons (well, that is why he asked for them).

gregor wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:Leonard and Hagler were two Great fighters who were both passed their prime when they met.

When 2 Greats fight with great chins, the winner often goes to the fighter with better hand and foot speed. That's what happened here.

It should be also mentioned Hagler lost good part of the fight outside the ring. Leonard wanted bigger ring - no problem. Bigger gloves? Agreed. The same with 12 rounds instead of default 15. All those changes were favouring Leonard for obvious reasons (well, that is why he asked for them).

Leonard admitted this. It annoys some people and impresses others. I try to see both sides of it. As a person, I like Hagler better. Both great fighters; SRL top 5 all time welterweight, Hagler top 5 all time middleweight IMO.

For me...Calzaghe never fought a good prime fighter... He postponed the Glen Johnson fight 3 times and then killed it... Johnson had dominated and iced Roy Jones and JC wanted no part of him.. JC plainly ducked Froch and Dawson.. Chad was going good before his Ward fight, and I think making the weight killed him.. I don't agree that Calz's fight with Mikkel Kessler matched him with a good prime boxer.. Greenhorned Ward exposed Kessler as a plodder with no skills.. I certainly don't see Calzaghe beating a prime Roy Jones or Bernard Hopkins.. Ward would shut him out 120-108, and I believe Kovalev would have smashed him out in an early round.

golden oldie wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:

golden oldie wrote:
Again, as opposed to offering up your half baked WORTHLESS OPINIONS, give an example of Calzaghe claiming he would fight 4 or even 5 HIGHLY ranked fighters in their primes ( or very close to it ) then hiding in " retirement " instead.

Stuck are you?

What part of Leonard announced to the world ( in Dec 83 ) he would fight McCrory, Curry, Duran, Hearns, then Hagler BUT DIDN'T is too difficult for your little brain to understand? We are not talking interviews with hack's from second rate magazine's here. Rather we are talking about HUGE stage managed press announcements, that were reneged on.

Then again, perhaps he fought McCrory, and Curry behind closed doors with only fanboy types exclusively invited.

As previously stated, from 77 until 81 ( apart from a couple of dubious wins, and one hiccup ) his career was brilliant, but after that it is similar to the half witted Trump.

" Because I keep telling you I am wonderful, you must believe it "

Idiots do.

Do you mean the Curry who was knocked out 4 times in his prime?! The McCrory who lost 3-4 times in his prime including losing to a Lupe Aquino?! One of them was beaten by Kalamby. I realize you're trolling or just completely out of it but its fun anyway. SRL beat Duran 2 times, fought Hearns again, and beat Hagler, On behalf of SRL, counter puncher, and Ambling Alp, we all profusely apologize to you for Leonard not fighting these guys EXACTLY when you wanted the fights.

The problem of course with you insignificant FAN BOYS is your hero worship interferes with you comprehension ability. McCrory wasn't beaten until December 85, by the same Curry who himself wasn't beaten until September 86, which has less than F^^k ALL to do with Leonard MOUTHING OFF about fighting the pair of them as early as 83.

Please try harder to defend your hero's next time, comical though your attempts might be.

Congratulations for being the only person on the planet who wishes SRL had fought McCrory or Curry, other than people who would have financially benefited of course. If I was such a fan of Leonard who'd think I would have wanted to talk to him when I was 10 feet away from him or own something with his name on it.

golden oldie wrote:When exactly do you believe Calzaghe should have fought Froch? When Froch was fighting BBofC title fights, instead of facing Lacy perhaps? Or how about when he was 36 compared to Froch's 31 and having his last fight for big bucks against Jones Jr?

There are plenty of reasons to believe he ducked Johnson, but Glenn beating the crap out of Jones isn't one of them. Particularly seeing as that fight was at 175 in 2004, a weight Calzaghe didn't NEED or CHOOSE to go up to until 4 years later.

Ward was still fighting club fighters when Calzaghe retired so I don't see what he has to do with anything?

Listen, Froch was calling Calzaghe out for years... Ever since he was 15-0 because he was convinced he would flatten Joe... Calzaghe fought unknown challengers who were 14-1 and 18-1, and who weren't a fraction as good as Froch... When Froch was 20-0 and calling Calzaghe out, JC rubbed it in his face by fighting the massively overmatched Peter Manfredo... JC could have fought Froch instead of Manfredo for 10 times the money.

Calzaghe wanted to keep his "O" ... Calzaghe-Froch would have been even bigger than Froch-Groves, which packed 87,000 Brits into Wembley Stadium... Remember, George Groves only had 19 fights but Froch-Groves was a dream matchup, so an aging Froch risked it... Calzaghe should have risked fighting the youthful and murderous punching Froch -- but his "O" was more important... It was a fight everybody wanted.

And Glen Johnson agreed to go down in weight to meet Calzaghe... just like Glen did when he fought Froch... so that argument doesn't work either.

The thing Ward has to do with anything??? AW only had 20 fights when he made a fool out of inept Kessler... Who Calzaghe struggled with and got hit real good.