Marvin Hagler KO3 Roy Jones

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 21 Mar 2007, 13:41

granberry wrote:Neither Chiavrini nor Love was a championship fighter, which Briscoe was for over a decade. Love, of course added up to more than Chiavrini.

I agree that Love was more accomplished than Chiavirini, but neither was a “nobody”, and someone who seems to be rather knowledgeable of the sport should not disparage either of them in the manner that you have. We all have great respect for Briscoe, and have admitted that he was not close to his best when he fought Hagler, but that is no reason to denigrate two guys who had some notable accomplishments. If I recall correctly, Chiavirini beat one of my favorites Vinnie Curto, who was a pretty slick fighter.

granberry wrote:Chiavirini showed he was not a top level fighter when he was stopped by non puncher Benitez.

No, he wasn’t an A class fighter, but he certainly was more than a nobody. And losing to Benitez is certainly nothing to be faulted for. He also beat Duran as well.

And who was it exactly that beat Briscoe a few months before his fight with Monzon? Anyone can lose on any given day to a decent fighter, and one or two losses don't completely define a fighter.

granberry wrote:The reason I posted on this thread is because a REAL fighter, Benny Briscoe, was falsely described in earlier posts.

I don’t recall those posts, and would certainly never class Briscoe as anything other than a top notch world class fighter. I just don’t see why you need to drag other, decent fighter’s names through the mud in order to support your argument. Whatever that argument may be. It seems to be that you don’t have much respect for Hagler, which is decidedly a minority opinion.

granberry wrote:Hagler was not a physically strong 160 pounder--as compared with the top level 160 pound champions (Ketchel, Mickey Walker, Greb, Zale, etc )

I would rate Hagler behind everyone on your list besides Zale and would add a few others as well. I guess they would be your etc…

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 21 Mar 2007, 14:26

In fact how did the plodding Hagler step-back and pop Vito over in the second fight? That touch-down was all about movement.

Hahahaha...so now Hagler fighting Vito is the measureing stick on how you measure and rate Hagler's footwork and boxing ability!!

Heck even I said that Vito made Hagler look like he was a good boxer. Vito was bad....

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 21 Mar 2007, 14:28

ringsider wrote:
In fact how did the plodding Hagler step-back and pop Vito over in the second fight? That touch-down was all about movement.
Hahahaha...so now Hagler fighting Vito is the measureing stick on how you measure and rate Hagler's footwork and boxing ability!! Heck even I said that Vito made Hagler look like he was a good boxer. Vito was bad....

yes, but boxing is a stamina sport

as Hagler found out in the last five rounds oof his first fight with Antofermo.

KOJOE90 · Post by **KOJOE90** » 21 Mar 2007, 14:29

granberry wrote:Briscoe was losing to nobodies by that time.

Hagler fought only at safe long range in that fight, where the slowed down Briscoe could be outpointed at that late stage of his career..

Regardless of your opinions on Hagler, of which I am well aware from reading your posts, surely this was just good tactics from Hagler that night? Why stay in close against the teak tough Briscoe and allow the old warhorse a chance to work inside where Briscoe was so effective and brutal?

Ih fact I would say it was good tactics for ANY Middleweight of the 'modern' era to box Briscoe from long range, with maybe the exception of Dick Tiger who may have had the right combination of strength, power and durability to beat Briscoe at his own game.

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 21 Mar 2007, 14:36

KOJOE90 wrote:
granberry wrote:Briscoe was losing to nobodies by that time.

Hagler fought only at safe long range in that fight, where the slowed down Briscoe could be outpointed at that late stage of his career..
Regardless of your opinions on Hagler, of which I am well aware from reading your posts, surely this was just good tactics from Hagler that night? Why stay in close against the teak tough Briscoe and allow the old warhorse a chance to work inside where Briscoe was so effective and brutal?

Ih fact I would say it was good tactics for ANY Middleweight of the 'modern' era to box Briscoe from long range, with maybe the exception of Dick Tiger who may have had the right combination of strength, power and durability to beat Briscoe at his own game.

Hagler certainly found out that was true,

to the great amusement of all the fighters sitting around me

as Hagler realized the error of his ways and quickly retuned to his run and peck tactics.

KOJOE90 · Post by **KOJOE90** » 21 Mar 2007, 14:42

granberry wrote:
KOJOE90 wrote:
granberry wrote:Briscoe was losing to nobodies by that time.

Hagler fought only at safe long range in that fight, where the slowed down Briscoe could be outpointed at that late stage of his career..
Regardless of your opinions on Hagler, of which I am well aware from reading your posts, surely this was just good tactics from Hagler that night? Why stay in close against the teak tough Briscoe and allow the old warhorse a chance to work inside where Briscoe was so effective and brutal?

Ih fact I would say it was good tactics for ANY Middleweight of the 'modern' era to box Briscoe from long range, with maybe the exception of Dick Tiger who may have had the right combination of strength, power and durability to beat Briscoe at his own game.
Hagler certainly found out that was true,

to the great amusement of all the fighters sitting around me

as Hagler realized the error of his ways and quickly retuned to his run and peck tactics.

So are you saying Hagler (or any other fighter) should have fought Briscoe in close? Therefore giving Briscoe the advantage 90% of the time?

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 21 Mar 2007, 14:59

KOJOE90 wrote:
granberry wrote:Briscoe was losing to nobodies by that time.

Hagler fought only at safe long range in that fight, where the slowed down Briscoe could be outpointed at that late stage of his career..
Regardless of your opinions on Hagler, of which I am well aware from reading your posts, surely this was just good tactics from Hagler that night? Why stay in close against the teak tough Briscoe and allow the old warhorse a chance to work inside where Briscoe was so effective and brutal?

Ih fact I would say it was good tactics for ANY Middleweight of the 'modern' era to box Briscoe from long range, with maybe the exception of Dick Tiger who may have had the right combination of strength, power and durability to beat Briscoe at his own game.

Hagler couldn't have avoided fighting in close against Zale, Papke, Greb, Mickey Walker, Fullmer, La Motta, etc.

Poor Marvin.

Marvin had all he could handle fighting overweight 135-pounder Roberto Duran in close.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 21 Mar 2007, 19:28

granberry wrote:
KOJOE90 wrote:
granberry wrote:Briscoe was losing to nobodies by that time.

Hagler fought only at safe long range in that fight, where the slowed down Briscoe could be outpointed at that late stage of his career..
Regardless of your opinions on Hagler, of which I am well aware from reading your posts, surely this was just good tactics from Hagler that night? Why stay in close against the teak tough Briscoe and allow the old warhorse a chance to work inside where Briscoe was so effective and brutal?

Ih fact I would say it was good tactics for ANY Middleweight of the 'modern' era to box Briscoe from long range, with maybe the exception of Dick Tiger who may have had the right combination of strength, power and durability to beat Briscoe at his own game.
Hagler couldn't have avoided fighting in close against Zale, Papke, Greb, Mickey Walker, Fullmer, La Motta, etc.

Poor Marvin.

Marvin had all he could handle fighting overweight 135-pounder Roberto Duran in close.

Ok someone putting some water on the "Hagler is invinceable theory" can't be all bad.

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 22 Mar 2007, 13:41

Hagler was way over rated....and there are many who actually know and understand boxing who saw this.......the average dope who thinks boxing is just some smucks banging at each other think a "plodding off balance southpaw" is what defines a great fighter. Well luckily for us "in the know", Sugar Ray Leonard could not stand the BS either....and came out of retirement to make Hagler look like the amatuer he was.

Thank you Sugar Ray Leonard

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 23 Mar 2007, 00:13

ringsider wrote:Hagler was way over rated....and there are many who actually know and understand boxing who saw this.......the average dope who thinks boxing is just some smucks banging at each other think a "plodding off balance southpaw" is what defines a great fighter. Well luckily for us "in the know", Sugar Ray Leonard could not stand the BS either....and came out of retirement to make Hagler look like the amatuer he was.

Thank you Sugar Ray Leonard

Yes thank you Sugar Ray Leonard,

for the use of TEN-ounce gloves in "championship" fights

for 12-round "championship" fights

for winning Hagler's title by running for his life and holding so that he was given over 30 warnings by name by stooge "referee" Richard Steal

for punching after the bell in 5 out of the 12 rounds with out a single warning from Richard Steal, including 6-7 punches after bell ending the 11th round

Yes, thank you Sugar Ray Leonard, for turning boxing into GARBAGE.

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 23 Mar 2007, 01:09

Yes thank you Sugar Ray Leonard,

for the use of TEN-ounce gloves in "championship" fights

for 12-round "championship" fights

for winning Hagler's title by running for his life and holding so that he was given over 30 warnings by name by stooge "referee" Richard Steal

for punching after the bell in 5 out of the 12 rounds with out a single warning from Richard Steal, including 6-7 punches after bell ending the 11th round

Yes, thank you Sugar Ray Leonard, for turning boxing into GARBAGE.

SRL was not responsible for 12 rounds title fights,that as the result of Ray "Boom Boom" Mancini/Duk Ko Kim bout. Hagler was champ and could have had the fight with SRL for 15 rounds as the WBA was still having 15 rounders. Hagler's management team, the Petronelli Brothers being the dim wits they were, agreed to the 12 rounds. Their first mistake.

SRL was also not responsible for 10 oz. gloves in title fights, Hagler's team agreed to it. Their 2nd mistake.

SRL didn't run for his life, he boxed. Hagler being the plodder he was and supposed champion could not even cut the ring off on him, all he could do was follow SRL around like a small lost child looking for its parents. Hagler was tripping over his own feet.

For punching after the bell in 5 of 12 rounds.......not in the fight I saw.

SRL didn't turn boxing to garbage, he showed many what boxing was, especially the dumbos who thought Hagler was some sort of champion.

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 23 Mar 2007, 08:05

ringsider wrote:
Yes thank you Sugar Ray Leonard,

for the use of TEN-ounce gloves in "championship" fights

for 12-round "championship" fights

for winning Hagler's title by running for his life and holding so that he was given over 30 warnings by name by stooge "referee" Richard Steal

for punching after the bell in 5 out of the 12 rounds with out a single warning from Richard Steal, including 6-7 punches after bell ending the 11th round

Yes, thank you Sugar Ray Leonard, for turning boxing into GARBAGE.
SRL was not responsible for 12 rounds title fights,that as the result of Ray "Boom Boom" Mancini/Duk Ko Kim bout. Hagler was champ and could have had the fight with SRL for 15 rounds as the WBA was still having 15 rounders. Hagler's management team, the Petronelli Brothers being the dim wits they were, agreed to the 12 rounds. Their first mistake.

SRL was also not responsible for 10 oz. gloves in title fights, Hagler's team agreed to it. Their 2nd mistake.

SRL didn't run for his life, he boxed. Hagler being the plodder he was and supposed champion could not even cut the ring off on him, all he could do was follow SRL around like a small lost child looking for its parents. Hagler was tripping over his own feet.

For punching after the bell in 5 of 12 rounds.......not in the fight I saw.

SRL didn't turn boxing to garbage, he showed many what boxing was, especially the dumbos who thought Hagler was some sort of champion.

Leonard refused to fight Hagler unless their "championship" fight was limited to 12 rounds instead of the usual 15.

Leonard insisted on 10 ounces gloves for that "championship" fight.

Comments on that fight:

GENE FULLMER: "How can you take a title by running away?"

HAROLD JOHNSON: "I don"t give Leonard any credit for running away."

Of course they don't know as much about boxing as you do.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 23 Mar 2007, 08:14

granberry wrote:Leonard refused to fight Hagler unless their "championship" fight was limited to 12 rounds instead of the usual 15.

Leonard insisted on 10 ounces gloves for that "championship" fight.

Hagler was the champion and he and his people allowed Leonard to dictate those terms. He should have shown more balls and dictated terms to SRL.

I was more upset with the post fight antics of Leonard when he used to say that he would fight Hagler again only if Marvin admitted that SRL kicked his ass. While I can see how many scored the fight for SRL (I didn’t), NO ONE could say that SRL kicked Hagler’s ass. At least not with a straight face…

dr_devious · Post by **dr_devious** » 23 Mar 2007, 09:07

granberry wrote:
ringsider wrote:Hagler was way over rated....and there are many who actually know and understand boxing who saw this.......the average dope who thinks boxing is just some smucks banging at each other think a "plodding off balance southpaw" is what defines a great fighter. Well luckily for us "in the know", Sugar Ray Leonard could not stand the BS either....and came out of retirement to make Hagler look like the amatuer he was.

Thank you Sugar Ray Leonard
Yes thank you Sugar Ray Leonard,

for the use of TEN-ounce gloves in "championship" fights

for 12-round "championship" fights

for winning Hagler's title by running for his life and holding so that he was given over 30 warnings by name by stooge "referee" Richard Steal

for punching after the bell in 5 out of the 12 rounds with out a single warning from Richard Steal, including 6-7 punches after bell ending the 11th round

Yes, thank you Sugar Ray Leonard, for turning boxing into GARBAGE.

Gran, first you say that Hagler is slow and crap, then you say that Leonard stole Hagler's title. Which is it to be?
I suppose Hagler could be crap AND Leonard stole his title, this therefore makes them both crap

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 23 Mar 2007, 09:31

I think granberry is really just a dingle berry.

Eric the Viking · Post by **Eric the Viking** » 23 Mar 2007, 13:04

Fill in the blank:

"Granberry is to Hagler as ex-poster _____ is to Ali"

But - we all have our little tics, you know, those things that just get our dander up, and make reason go swooshing out the door. For me it's the 24/7 Anna Nicole Smith death-cult "news coverage."

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 23 Mar 2007, 13:10

ringsider wrote:I think granberry is really just a dingle berry.

That is the best your mentality can offer?

Pathetic.

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 23 Mar 2007, 13:12

dr_devious wrote:
granberry wrote:
ringsider wrote:Hagler was way over rated....and there are many who actually know and understand boxing who saw this.......the average dope who thinks boxing is just some smucks banging at each other think a "plodding off balance southpaw" is what defines a great fighter. Well luckily for us "in the know", Sugar Ray Leonard could not stand the BS either....and came out of retirement to make Hagler look like the amatuer he was.

Thank you Sugar Ray Leonard
Yes thank you Sugar Ray Leonard,

for the use of TEN-ounce gloves in "championship" fights

for 12-round "championship" fights

for winning Hagler's title by running for his life and holding so that he was given over 30 warnings by name by stooge "referee" Richard Steal

for punching after the bell in 5 out of the 12 rounds with out a single warning from Richard Steal, including 6-7 punches after bell ending the 11th round

Yes, thank you Sugar Ray Leonard, for turning boxing into GARBAGE.
Gran, first you say that Hagler is slow and crap, then you say that Leonard stole Hagler's title. Which is it to be?
I suppose Hagler could be crap AND Leonard stole his title, this therefore makes them both crap

Comments on that fight:

GENE FULLMER: "How can you take a title by running away?"

HAROLD JOHNSON: "I don"t give Leonard any credit for running away."

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 23 Mar 2007, 13:14

dr_devious wrote:
Gran, first you say that Hagler is slow and crap, then you say that Leonard stole Hagler's title. Which is it to be?
I suppose Hagler could be crap AND Leonard stole his title, this therefore makes them both crap

Show me where I said Hagler was slow.

You can't.

I say he was NOT a championship 160 pound fighter.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 23 Mar 2007, 13:48

granberry wrote:I say he was NOT a championship 160 pound fighter.

Well I checked a few sources, and he fought at 160 lbs and he was the 160 lb champion for a number of years, so I think you’ve got your facts mixed up.

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 23 Mar 2007, 14:18

The Great John L wrote:
granberry wrote:I say he was NOT a championship 160 pound fighter.
Well I checked a few sources, and he fought at 160 lbs and he was the 160 lb champion for a number of years, so I think you’ve got your facts mixed up.

I suggest you study hard and learn what the word fact means.

Hagler was a middleweight "champion" at a time when the 160 pound division was at a very low level as compared with past standards.

Can you imagine Stanley Ketchel, Billy Papke, Mickey Walker, Harry Greb, Tony Zale, struggling to a win over fat, old, lightweight Roberto Duran?

Ketchel knocked out 175-lb champion Philadelphia Jack O'Brien.

Walker fought a draw with Jack Sharkey, beat a number of other heavyweights, scored a 1 round KO over Mike McTigue, won a decision over Paul Berlenbach.

Greb beat Tommy Gibbons and Gene Tunney.

Zale's body punches caused Billy Conn to fight at long range in his fight with Zale, according to Conn, who had just fought Joe Louis for the heavyweight title.

Can you imagine fat old Duran trying to stand in front of any of these guys for 15 rounds

as he did with "champion" Hagler.

LOL

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 23 Mar 2007, 14:34

granberry wrote:
The Great John L wrote:
granberry wrote:I say he was NOT a championship 160 pound fighter.
Well I checked a few sources, and he fought at 160 lbs and he was the 160 lb champion for a number of years, so I think you’ve got your facts mixed up.
I suggest you study hard and learn what the word fact means.

Hagler was a middleweight "champion" at a time when the 160 pound division was at a very low level as compared with past standards.

Can you imagine Stanley Ketchel, Billy Papke, Mickey Walker, Harry Greb, Tony Zale, struggling to a win over fat, old, lightweight Roberto Duran?

Ketchel knocked out 175-lb champion Philadelphia Jack O'Brien.

Walker fought a draw with Jack Sharkey, beat a number of other heavyweights, scored a 1 round KO over Mike McTigue, won a decision over Paul Berlenbach.

Greb beat Tommy Gibbons and Gene Tunney.

Zale's body punches caused Billy Conn to fight at long range in his fight with Zale, according to Conn, who had just fought Joe Louis for the heavyweight title.

Can you imagine fat old Duran trying to stand in front of any of these guys for 15 rounds

as he did with "champion" Hagler.

LOL

Here you go:

Fact: “an event known to have happened or something known to have existed.”

It doesn’t mention anything about your opinion of who “deserves” to be called champion.

I checked a few more references, and it’s definitely a fact that Hagler was the only recognized 160 lb world champion for a number of years so I guess you’re wrong chief.

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 23 Mar 2007, 14:41

The Great John L wrote:
granberry wrote:
The Great John L wrote: Well I checked a few sources, and he fought at 160 lbs and he was the 160 lb champion for a number of years, so I think you’ve got your facts mixed up.
I suggest you study hard and learn what the word fact means.

Hagler was a middleweight "champion" at a time when the 160 pound division was at a very low level as compared with past standards.

Can you imagine Stanley Ketchel, Billy Papke, Mickey Walker, Harry Greb, Tony Zale, struggling to a win over fat, old, lightweight Roberto Duran?

Ketchel knocked out 175-lb champion Philadelphia Jack O'Brien.

Walker fought a draw with Jack Sharkey, beat a number of other heavyweights, scored a 1 round KO over Mike McTigue, won a decision over Paul Berlenbach.

Greb beat Tommy Gibbons and Gene Tunney.

Zale's body punches caused Billy Conn to fight at long range in his fight with Zale, according to Conn, who had just fought Joe Louis for the heavyweight title.

Can you imagine fat old Duran trying to stand in front of any of these guys for 15 rounds

as he did with "champion" Hagler.

LOL
Here you go:

Fact: “an event known to have happened or something known to have existed.”

It doesn’t mention anything about your opinion of who “deserves” to be called champion.

I checked a few more references, and it’s definitely a fact that Hagler was the only recognized 160 lb world champion for a number of years so I guess you’re wrong chief.

FACT:

Hagler was a far inferior fighter to the best fighters who held the 160 pound title over the years.

By earlier well established standards in the sport he was not a championship level fighter.

Championship middleweights do not struggle with lighweights.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 23 Mar 2007, 14:52

granberry wrote: FACT:

Hagler was a far inferior fighter to the best fighters who held the 160 pound title over the years.

By earlier well established standards in the sport he was not a championship level fighter.

Championship middleweights do not struggle with lighweights.

Sorry, but this still looks more like your opinion than fact. I suggest you study hard and learn what the word fact means.

granberry · Post by **granberry** » 23 Mar 2007, 15:02

The Great John L wrote:
granberry wrote: FACT:

Hagler was a far inferior fighter to the best fighters who held the 160 pound title over the years.

By earlier well established standards in the sport he was not a championship level fighter.

Championship middleweights do not struggle with lighweights.
Sorry, but this still looks more like your opinion than fact. I suggest you study hard and learn what the word fact means.

Are you saying that Ketchel, Walker, Greb, Zale, DID NOT beat fighters bigger than they were?

You are admitting that you are unfamiliar with Ketchel, Greb, Walker, Zale, etc.

In other words, you are unfamiliar with the history of the middleweight division.

That puts you on a par with the Ali salesman who regurgitate the Ali industry talking points without any familiarity with the past history of the heavyweight division.