round 1 of thunders MW tourney...

DoubleM · Post by **DoubleM** » 19 Jul 2006, 07:10

There's nothing wrong with picking Tiger over Hagler (I think Hagler UD15 would be the most likely outcome, but Tiger could pull it off), it's just the way the guy tried to bring Hagler's career down, it was the typical stuff 'haters' use - haters being misinformed and unreasonable posters who don't care about getting their facts straight.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 19 Jul 2006, 07:40

DoubleM wrote:There's nothing wrong with picking Tiger over Hagler (I think Hagler UD15 would be the most likely outcome, but Tiger could pull it off), it's just the way the guy tried to bring Hagler's career down, it was the typical stuff 'haters' use - haters being misinformed and unreasonable posters who don't care about getting their facts straight.

Anybody who predicts a KO against Hagler is way off (unless they're matching him up with Sonny Liston)...

sockdolager · Post by **sockdolager** » 19 Jul 2006, 08:16

Sugar Ray Robinson V Carl Olsen~~~~~Robinson KO 4 Olson
Marvin Hagler V Dick Tiger ~~~~~~~~~Hagler TKO 13 Tiger
Bernard Hopkins V Jake LaMotta~~~~~~Hopkins SD LaMotta
Les Darcy V Carlos Monzon~~~~~~~~~Monzon KO 12 Darcy

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 19 Jul 2006, 08:24

granberry wrote:Oprah Winfrey coined the word "hater" on her women's show.

That is a typical feminine "epithet" since she started using the term on her show.

That would explain why I’m not familiar with the term. So we have a lot of Oprah fans on here?

Jaclem · Post by **Jaclem** » 19 Jul 2006, 15:28

.....i'm a bit puzzled at some here who have olson doing so well against robinson....when the record is there....especially as the sugarman was past his prime in his comeback fights against olson.

after thir first fight....robinson kayo over olson..12 rounds....robinson did say "than damn olson is the fastest middleweight i ever fought." when they met again and olson went the distance in a competitve fight, srr said "he's even a little faster than he was the last time."

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 19 Jul 2006, 15:30

Some claim Olson won the 2nd fight.

kick asner · Post by **kick asner** » 19 Jul 2006, 20:18

Ezzard wrote:
kick asner wrote:
granberry wrote:Hagler came along when boxing and middleweights were in a deteriorated stage.

He struggled with old, overweight lightweight Roberto Duran.

That is pathetic for a supposed 160 pound champion.

Dick Tiger won the lightheavyweight title.

Hagler wouldn't dare get in the ring with a 175 pounder.

He had enought trouble with lightweights and welterweights.

Its not uncommon for a fighter to start out at a particular weight when they are younger and move up as they age. Duran was 5'7" which is not that short for a person to weigh 160 lbs. He pretty much had the frame for it. I can think of very few people who have not gained at least some weight as they got older. The bottom line is Hagler and Duran were right at the same size for their fight. Look at someone like Archie Moore who started out as a middleweight and gave Marciano a tough fight. So you could make that same comparison with countless fighters. Dick Tiger himself lost to Emile Griffith who was a former welterweight.
It doesn't matter how much weight someone puts on they will always be at a natural disadvantage. Yes guys do put on a few pounds as they get older but it's not the same as being natural at the weight. Remember that the guys doing it now have a lot of roids and nutritional info to go on.

Duran was never particularly chiseled again after Leonard I.

Duran did so well against Hagler because he worked his style out and boxed very very well. Years later he would do it again and get himself an alpha belt.

Hagler won. He didn't look devestating but he won.

I would have to ask the question how do you think some of the old time heavyweights who were smaller like Marciano, Joe Louis, Ezzard Charles or Billy Conn would fare against todays larger heavyweights who would have a signifigent size advantage. Do you think I am comparing apples to apples here or is it a different ball game altogether when talking about the heavyweights.

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 19 Jul 2006, 23:23

kick asner wrote: I would have to ask the question how do you think some of the old time heavyweights who were smaller like Marciano, Joe Louis, Ezzard Charles or Billy Conn would fare against todays larger heavyweights who would have a signifigent size advantage.

Joe Louis' first important fight was against Primo Carnera.

Joe Louis fought Abe Simon twice.

Joe Louis fought Buddy Baer twice.

Before they fought Joe Louis, all these guys were midgets in the circus.

generic screen name · Post by **generic screen name** » 20 Jul 2006, 00:28

Sugar Ray Robinson UD Bobo Olsen
Marvin Hagler KO9 Dick Tiger
Bernard Hopkins UD Jake LaMotta
Carlos Monzon UD Les Darcy

Wheres my personal favorite, Carmen Basilio?? Although you can consider him more of a welterweight......

couple of more middleweight notables:
Gene Fullmer
Tony Zale (a bit on the overrated side IMO)
Rocky Graziano (same as Zale)
Harry Greb (don't know much about him, but he seems like a BoxRec forum favorite)

thunderfromdownunder · Post by **thunderfromdownunder** » 20 Jul 2006, 00:32

thanks for voting, round 1 is now closed.
i will post the results and round 2 soon...

Jaclem · Post by **Jaclem** » 20 Jul 2006, 01:45

..granberry...as best as i can recall of reports at the time..olson was holding srr even and was maybe a little ahead in that one...but the sugar man put on his usual big finish when he was pushed and the decision was close but considered fair.

BrocktonBlockbuster49 · Post by **BrocktonBlockbuster49** » 20 Jul 2006, 02:10

kick,

i believe marciano and louis would easily wipe out the large heavyweight today. easy. i believe charles would dominate the big boys of today but not so much as marciano and louis.

kick asner · Post by **kick asner** » 20 Jul 2006, 07:20

Thats pretty much the point I was trying to make, most people who follow the older heaveyweights would say that the top heavyweights of years ago although giving up thirty, forty, fifty pounds or more would still beat the heavyweights of today. But then every once in a while someone comes along and tries to discredit Hagler for beating someone who was approxamatly his size but just because the guy was a little smaller a few years ago somehow this is not a real victory.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 20 Jul 2006, 08:46

BrocktonBlockbuster49 wrote:kick,

i believe marciano and louis would easily wipe out the large heavyweight today. easy. i believe charles would dominate the big boys of today but not so much as marciano and louis.

We don't really know just how big these biys really are... What I mean is that so many HWs train to build up muscle mass whereas Rocky, Louis, Dempsey, etc... trained to go 15 rounds and didn't want to beef up because it cut their stamina and mobility.

Take away some of their nutritional advantage (if it is an advantage in the way it' used) and maybe sopme of these 240 plus guys would be 220.

kick asner · Post by **kick asner** » 20 Jul 2006, 10:54

My argument here was with Granberry saying Haglers victory against Duran was meaningless because Duran weighed less at one time. I just wanted to get your guys opinion on how the smaller heavyweights would fare against the larger ones to show that if a guy can beat someone who outweighs him by 40lbs. that two men who both weigh 160lbs. would be an even match.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 20 Jul 2006, 11:05

kick asner wrote:My argument here was with Granberry saying Haglers victory against Duran was meaningless because Duran weighed less at one time. I just wanted to get your guys opinion on how the smaller heavyweights would fare against the larger ones to show that if a guy can beat someone who outweighs him by 40lbs. that two men who both weigh 160lbs. would be an even match.

Kick

When Hagler fought Duran, hagler had a considerable natural weight advantage. They were both greats. IMO the weight difference won Hagler the fight.

If Joe Louis fought Valuev, Rahman, Bowe, Peter, Klitchsko then they have a big weight advantage but Joe was in a total different class to these fellows. He's simply a much better fighter and the weight advantage could be doubled or tripled but it would never bridge the gap.

If 2 greats (or fighters at a similar level) go up against one another then weight/size becomes a salient issue, although not necessarily the clincher by any means.

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 20 Jul 2006, 12:47

kick asner wrote:My argument here was with Granberry saying Haglers victory against Duran was meaningless

Asner,

SHOW ME where I said Hagler's victory against Duran was meaningless.

.

kick asner · Post by **kick asner** » 20 Jul 2006, 13:25

I was going more on what you implied rather than anything you said verbaitum.