Page 3 of 3
Re: marvin hagler
Posted: 04 Feb 2016, 22:05
by elmersalsa
Ambling Alp II wrote:I was just showing how ridiculous he was being. He actually said Leonard was no match for Hearns and Hagler, Leonard's chin was not as good as Luigi Minchillo, Hearns was frailish at 147 but a monster at 154, Leonard would be destroyed by Julian Jackson etc.
Thought it would be fun to put a little sarcasm into it. Sometimes it helps show how silly something is. We can all disagree on things and it would be boring if everyone agreed on everything. However, if someone is going to constantly say ridiculous things, they leave themselves open to sarcasm.
The great Sugar Ray Leonard could never lose a fight in this guy's eyes. Sugar Ray cannot do any wrong. Not only with him, but with a lot of people. Hey, what do you expect of someone that is delusional ranking Leonard at #2 at welterweight and #5 ATG pound per pound?
THAT IS SILLY!
Re: marvin hagler
Posted: 05 Feb 2016, 00:23
by BoxBuzz
elmersalsa wrote:Ambling Alp II wrote:I was just showing how ridiculous he was being. He actually said Leonard was no match for Hearns and Hagler, Leonard's chin was not as good as Luigi Minchillo, Hearns was frailish at 147 but a monster at 154, Leonard would be destroyed by Julian Jackson etc.
Thought it would be fun to put a little sarcasm into it. Sometimes it helps show how silly something is. We can all disagree on things and it would be boring if everyone agreed on everything. However, if someone is going to constantly say ridiculous things, they leave themselves open to sarcasm.
The great Sugar Ray Leonard could never lose a fight in this guy's eyes. Sugar Ray cannot do any wrong. Not only with him, but with a lot of people. Hey, what do you expect of someone that is delusional ranking Leonard at #2 at welterweight and #5 ATG pound per pound?
THAT IS SILLY!
Cmon....it's not silly it's just a differing opinion.
I believe diverse opinions abound in these halls.
I've seen you walking around with one or two of your own as I recall.
Re: marvin hagler
Posted: 05 Feb 2016, 00:27
by SaadOffTheDeck
They're both silly. Hagler is still underrated by many. Consummate boxer/puncher.
Re: marvin hagler
Posted: 05 Feb 2016, 08:15
by Syntax Error
elmersalsa wrote:Ambling Alp II wrote:I was just showing how ridiculous he was being. He actually said Leonard was no match for Hearns and Hagler, Leonard's chin was not as good as Luigi Minchillo, Hearns was frailish at 147 but a monster at 154, Leonard would be destroyed by Julian Jackson etc.
Thought it would be fun to put a little sarcasm into it. Sometimes it helps show how silly something is. We can all disagree on things and it would be boring if everyone agreed on everything. However, if someone is going to constantly say ridiculous things, they leave themselves open to sarcasm.
The great Sugar Ray Leonard could never lose a fight in this guy's eyes. Sugar Ray cannot do any wrong. Not only with him, but with a lot of people. Hey, what do you expect of someone that is delusional ranking Leonard at #2 at welterweight and #5 ATG pound per pound?
THAT IS SILLY!
It's not silly to have a different opinion over something hypothetical.
You've previously said Thomas Hearns would destroy SRL in a couple of rounds at 154 & while nobody can say for sure whether that would have happened, it's extremely unlikely IMO seeing how SRL's career panned out & fights between the two of them went.
We can all be prone to hyperbole, especially when surmising about fighters we like, but you should never denigrate someone for having a different opinion over something that cannot be proved.
Re: marvin hagler
Posted: 05 Feb 2016, 19:25
by elmersalsa
Can we go back to 1984, Syntax Error? Can you recall The Hitman in that year?
Can you recall Marvelous in the late 70s, early 80s?
Can you recall how magnificent The Body Snatcher was in the mid-80s?
And how devastating of a puncher Julian Jackson was?