BoxRec

In Toney's best performance at middleweight he was slightly better than an aging past prime McCallum.

You need a bit more than that to beat a prime Hagler.

ringsider wrote:Yeh right!!! Poor old blind Sugar Ray Seales is who you use as a measuring stick of Hagler's footwork ability. Laughable!!! You Hagler guys are a good laugh.

The only laugh here is you... have you even seen any Hagler fights except for the Leonard bout... to believe Hagler is a plodder you either havent seen him fight or just don't know a thing about boxing...

I think Hagler would beat Toney comfortably on points... he was better all round than Toney and had a higher workrate and better mentality...

ringsider wrote:Yeh right!!! Poor old blind Sugar Ray Seales is who you use as a measuring stick of Hagler's footwork ability. Laughable!!! You Hagler guys are a good laugh.

Why is it the only time you post in this forum it is to discredit Hagler? And it usually is the same critisism in all of your post, slow, plodding, foot in the bucket, stuggles against flyweights..........

James Toney would compare somewhat to Eddie Mustapha Muhamed. Good overall skill. Pretty solid in all categorys, could punch hard, but would fall short against a guy with the determination of a Marvin Hagler. I can't see Hagler losing this if he is on his game at all.

one point worth raising. it is always hard to compare fighters of different eras. though they were only a generation apart. let's not forget toney is a man who fought in the era of day before weigh ins. could toney have made middle in the 1980s? doubtful. toney only fought for IBF titles at 160 as then the IBF - I think - were the only sanctioning body who supported the day before weigh in. someone correct me if i'm wrong.

Why is it the only time you post in this forum it is to discredit Hagler? And it usually is the same critisism in all of your post, slow, plodding, foot in the bucket, stuggles against flyweights..........

says kick asner.

Well you know kick, the truth doesn't change, it remains the same. Hagler was all of the above, except he never fought any flyweights. He did get beat(was made to look silly) by a fat welterweight who was past his prime, if I remember right.

ringsider wrote:

Why is it the only time you post in this forum it is to discredit Hagler? And it usually is the same critisism in all of your post, slow, plodding, foot in the bucket, stuggles against flyweights..........

says kick asner.

Well you know kick, the truth doesn't change, it remains the same. Hagler was all of the above, except he never fought any flyweights. He did get beat(was made to look silly) by a fat welterweight who was past his prime, if I remember right.

Isnt that your mom telling you its time for dinner timmy!...

What is the matter silkov? Can't you handle the truth about your lefty plodding hero? What is the discription for it around here? Oh yeh....... a nut hugger, a Hagler nut hugger.

ringsider wrote:What is the matter silkov? Can't you handle the truth about your lefty plodding hero? What is the discription for it around here? Oh yeh....... a nut hugger, a Hagler nut hugger.

If you were to read other post on this board you would have seen that Silkov had Hagler losing to Carlos Monzon in a head to head matchup. So that would shoot holes in you're argument.

ringsider wrote:What is the matter silkov? Can't you handle the truth about your lefty plodding hero? What is the discription for it around here? Oh yeh....... a nut hugger, a Hagler nut hugger.

Let me guess, you are either a 13 yearold home from school or a 70 year old retard living with his mother and sister in one of those backwater hillbilly places where everybody looks like their dogs... either way its understandable why you dont know anything about boxing!...

If you were to read other post on this board you would have seen that Silkov had Hagler losing to Carlos Monzon in a head to head matchup. So that would shoot holes in you're argument.

says kick asner.

Because he picked Monzon only means Silkov has at least one functioning brain cell left alive, and that kick asner still doesn't change that fact that silkov is, what he is....a HAGLER NUT HUGGER.

Hagler wins a clear but competive UD IMO.

on the leonard - hagler fight...i have watched this fight many times and each time i scored it for leonard, the most recent time i scored the fight it was 115-113 for sugar. hagler just dosent do enough to win

I think people underrate Toney. We're taliking peak here. I know he was inconsistent, But Hagler had his off days too. So Toney at his best had a lot going for him like his chin, speed, defense and very decent punch and punchrate. Hagler at his peak of course had the chin and conditioning and workrate, but Toney's cuteness and amazing defense I think will cause Marvin trouble big time. Great fantasy fight all the same with Toney edging a close 12 rd decision. Over 15 Hagler I think could get the nod. But no KO here

Nice breakdown of the two fighters and their styles Terence. I say you could sub for Teddy Atlas on Friday Night Fights.

No you are not a Marvin Hagler nut hugger Terance.....they are resting on your chin.

.....After seven title defences in which he accommodated a variety of styles without once being seriously threatened or even taken the distance......

from the BS article on Hagler on this site.

That is right there were no decent MW in the 80's. Hagler made a career of fighting blown up welterweights in his big name fights. One of these welterweights beat him....... SRL.

I can remember my old boxing coach in 1982 saying Leonard would beat Hagler. He was right.

Hagler stunk. Foot in the bucket plodding southpaw.

I think it is fair of you Ringsider to make an argument against Hagler or any other fighter that you choose. Although you're views seem a bit extreme. What I don't understand is you're disdain of anyone who differs from you're views.

ringsider wrote:You guys blow smoke about Hagler being a HOF fighter, greatest MW of all time, and all the BS....but when they throw in James Toney....a lot of you pick JT over Hagler. I think it would be a decent fight. Toney would counter punch the crap out of Marvin. I don't think Hagler could hit Toney decently. I pick Toney by UD, in their primes. Hagler was a plodder and could not hit ANYONE unless they stood right in front of him. Toney would not be in front of him, even though Toney fought flat footed many times, he can move his head and upper body. Hagler could not move anything. His only attrubute was a good chin, and he came in shape.

Go watch Hagler chase Tommy Hearns down for 8 minutes after taking a picture perfect punch on the nose about 3 seconds into the fight. He blitzed Hearns in the 3rd, and that's an all time great. Hagler commanded the Middleweight division for 7 years, and would've had a longer reign had he not been dicked around in the earlier part of his career. Hagler was on his way out and still managed to tag a slick Sugar Ray enough to make the fight a very controversial one.

Your bias against southpaws is garbage and that's why you say TOney. Toney's best wins at 160 were vs Michael Nunn who was kicking the shit out of James until he got caught, and Mike McCallum. Toney got put down and snuck by Reggie Johnson, a tough southpaw who was nowhere the level of Hagler.