BoxRec

Terry D wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:You could see the panic in Hearns' eyes when he cracked Marvin with that punch and followed up with a brutal assault, every punch of which landed flush, and Marvin just shook it off.

Psychologically that must be terrible, when you're a puncher of Hearns' calibre and you hit someone and they barely register it.

You forget that Hearns only lost because of a leg massage James!

Of course, how remiss of me. God manny is full of crap sometimes.

Didn't they try some similar excuse when Wlad panicked and got battered by Lamon Brewster.

Terry D wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Terry D wrote: You forget that Hearns only lost because of a leg massage James!

Of course, how remiss of me. God manny is full of crap sometimes.

Didn't they try some similar excuse when Wlad panicked and got battered by Lamon Brewster.

Wlad's excuse that time was the someone may have drugged him, he is not saying they did, but they could have, after all it was very strange to see the fragile Wlad blow a gasket and get stopped.

If Hearns had said he lost because some stripper massaged his balls pre-fight, well you would have a little more sympathy. Unless you were Harry Grebb.

Yes, then there was the bizzare 'vaseline on the legs theory' wherby it blocked his pores causing him to overheat.

Manny Steward just couldn't handle that his most complete fighter, the one he produced from scratch and guided through his entire career, got mangled in fights with Leonard and Hagler.

I think Hearns was probably weight drained for his fight with Leonard, didn't he come in UNDER the 147 limit by a couple of pounds? Maybe overtrained.

Graham was an outstanding talent, who boxed pretty even with the great McCallum ad the very good Kalambay. But he seemed to have something lacking slihgtly, a winning mentality. There was something negative about him, things in his private life that apprently got on top of him - indeed there is something fragile about a lot of Yorkshire fighters or Ingle trained fighters, which I think is why they do anything they can to avoid contact by using such elusive styles.

Terry D wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Terry D wrote: Wlad's excuse that time was the someone may have drugged him, he is not saying they did, but they could have, after all it was very strange to see the fragile Wlad blow a gasket and get stopped.

If Hearns had said he lost because some stripper massaged his balls pre-fight, well you would have a little more sympathy. Unless you were Harry Grebb.

Yes, then there was the bizzare 'vaseline on the legs theory' wherby it blocked his pores causing him to overheat.

Manny Steward just couldn't handle that his most complete fighter, the one he produced from scratch and guided through his entire career, got mangled in fights with Leonard and Hagler.

I think Hearns was probably weight drained for his fight with Leonard, didn't he come in UNDER the 147 limit by a couple of pounds? Maybe overtrained.

Pity, Hearns had the tools to be the most outstanding fighter of all time. He was just fragile in certain fights. Hagler and Leonard plus almost Roldan showed it.

I think he was overtrained for the Ray fight. Overall I actually think he was the better boxer but was left waiting for too long for the return.

On my version of the return Hagler is on the mic and it is just pure bias and bile from Marvin. He gives Tommy everything and talks about Ray's 'dirty tricks'. Go on Marvin lad. Always room for a bit of bitterness in boxing.

When asked a while back on TV about who he thought was the best of the current middleweight champions or some such, Hagler replied "I am, I'm still the undisputed champion, Ray never took that title from me, so as far as I am concerned I'm STILL the champion."

The interviewer laughed it off, but Marvin or Marvellous as I should call him, was deadly serious, and the interviewers face tightended.

Don't know about Hearns being better than Ray, the only guy I would say was possibly better overall was Duran who had he managed to reign in his spending and drunken womanising, he could have told Ray to go poke it, or trained properly for the rematch instead of coming down from 200 lbs plus to get into fighting shape. However, you have to say that part of being a great fighter is being able to discipline yourself in between fights. Mayweather and Hatton gives us the perfect modern day exemplum.

Leonard certainly didn't want to fight Hearns again. But even in the rematch Leonard had Hearns going at least 3 times. Had Ray not insisted on a 12-rounder (please correct me if I'm wrong here), he would have knocked Hearns out again. Hearns was spent at the end, though Imo he should have just nicked it on PTS.

I remember staying up to watch that fight, and falling asleep before the main event. I remember it had the longest preamble I've ever seen to a big fight. Jesus, they wheeled out Tommy Hearns' grandmother, his auntie, his infant school teacher, someone who once caught his eye at a busy intersection whilst driving, a woman who accidentally sprayed perfume on him, and a man who had a fly land on his shoulder, who had crapped on Tommy's burger whilst he was having lunch one day.

I waded through hours of this shit, I think the programme started at like 10.00 pm, and the main event was about 6.00 in the morning, but I had no idea. What a frigging dissapointment that was.

How good was Herol Graham, Marvin Hagler vacated his WBA title rather than defend against Herol Graham who was his long time no1 contender.

Herol's career is a ton of 'what ifs' what if he wasn't so cavalier against Sumbu Kalambay in the last round of his EBU title fight, he would have surely beaten Iran Barkley for the vacant WBA title.

What if he kept out of the way with his hands held high and just jabbed at
Julian Jacksons swollen eye to win the WBC title? What if he didn't fracrure his ankle against Charles Brewer for the IBF title?

Glenn Catley was a world champion though he didn't reign in a blaze of glory in getting knocked out by fat super featherweight Dingaan Thobela and then accused the smaller man of lacing his gloves though nothing was proven! So if Herol wasn't a world champion in the eyes of the alphabet bodies he was probably one of the finest fighters to ever come out of this country and thus was an uncrowned 'champion' (if not recongized by anyone as such)

Carlos-Wigan wrote:So if Herol wasn't a world champion in the eyes of the alphabet bodies he was probably one of the finest fighters to ever come out of this country and thus was an uncrowned 'champion' (if not recongized by anyone as such)

Cant really call him an uncrowned champ - that sort of accolade belongs to the likes of a Charley Burley or a Sam Langford who were denighed their rightful shots at the world crown.

Herol had his chances and came up short. The fact that less skillful or less well regarded fighters such as Catley took their one and only chance should not come into it.

Graham was very good but just lacked that final ingredient that makes a great fighter.

TerribleTerry wrote:

Carlos-Wigan wrote:So if Herol wasn't a world champion in the eyes of the alphabet bodies he was probably one of the finest fighters to ever come out of this country and thus was an uncrowned 'champion' (if not recongized by anyone as such)

Cant really call him an uncrowned champ - that sort of accolade belongs to the likes of a Charley Burley or a Sam Langford who were denighed their rightful shots at the world crown.

Herol had his chances and came up short. The fact that less skillful or less well regarded fighters such as Catley took their one and only chance should not come into it.

Graham was very good but just lacked that final ingredient that makes a great fighter.

I disagree, all personal opinion of course but why was Catley 'champion'? Because there are 5 world governing bodies and holding 1/5 of a belt does not make anyone a 'champion' Catley is at best a 'world title claimant' (and not a paticulary good one either)

For me, for a certain period of time, Herol Graham was the finest middleweight in the world.

The fact Catley can brag about being a 'champion' whilst Graham can't is more power to Graham rahter than the other way round.

Terry D wrote:Hagler could jettison belts to face 'name' fighters. Hagler earned his spurs in contention and a tough first title fight. Herol threw his chances away with a lax defence. He had his own destiny in his hands and blew it.

Hagler had to fight and fight for his opportunity.

No-one is saying that Hagler was a fraud, one of the finest middleweight champions of the sport, but he vacated the WBA title than face Graham and thats a fact.

Styles make fights, the type of fighter that made Hagler frustrated was the elusive type such as Willie Monroe, Ray Leonard, even Roberto Duran made Hagler look flat footed at times in their fight.

Herol Graham was a live threat to Hagler in 1986-87, it may not be the done thing to say it these days but thats the truth.

Hagler may of contended that Leonard and Graham were of equal risk but decided to take the bigger purse facing Leonard, who knows, he has never really stated why he vacated his WBA title than face Graham.

Did Graham blow his chances? Yes and I have already said that.

Hagler didn't even know who Herol was, Mr Bean could have been his WBA mandatory and he'd still have dropped the belt, if it meant him missing big paydays with the likes of Duran Hearns & co.

Carlos-Wigan wrote:

TerribleTerry wrote:

Carlos-Wigan wrote:So if Herol wasn't a world champion in the eyes of the alphabet bodies he was probably one of the finest fighters to ever come out of this country and thus was an uncrowned 'champion' (if not recongized by anyone as such)

Cant really call him an uncrowned champ - that sort of accolade belongs to the likes of a Charley Burley or a Sam Langford who were denighed their rightful shots at the world crown.

Herol had his chances and came up short. The fact that less skillful or less well regarded fighters such as Catley took their one and only chance should not come into it.

Graham was very good but just lacked that final ingredient that makes a great fighter.

I disagree, all personal opinion of course but why was Catley 'champion'? Because there are 5 world governing bodies and holding 1/5 of a belt does not make anyone a 'champion' Catley is at best a 'world title claimant' (and not a paticulary good one either)

For me, for a certain period of time, Herol Graham was the finest middleweight in the world.

The fact Catley can brag about being a 'champion' whilst Graham can't is more power to Graham rahter than the other way round.

Graham HAD his chances to claim a world title strap and came up short.

Their is no mystery about it.

He was a fine, fine fighter but lets not pretend he is something he wasnt; some sort of 'uncrowned champ' denighed his rightful position by the evil boxing heirachy.

As for Catley, he was a belt holder and good luck to him. He may not have been a better fighter then Graham on the balance of things but when the opportunity presented itself to grab one of the big 3 belts he took his shot - in Germany as well. Kudos.

Lets also not forget he was very, very unlucky to loose out to Ritchie Woodhall in a previous title bid (remember the cover of BN that week?)

I dont think running down the achievements of someone like Catley does anything to bolster Herol's case to be totally honest.

Graham HAD his chances to claim a world title strap and came up short.

Their is no mystery about it.

I think I have said the same thing myself now twice, though more down to foolhardiness, bad luck or bad tactics rather than lack of skill.

He was a fine, fine fighter but lets not pretend he is something he wasnt; some sort of 'uncrowned champ' denighed his rightful position by the evil boxing heirachy.

Well to me he is something of an 'uncrowned champion' if he isn't to you then fair enough, I would argue my case that Herol Graham is not only one of the finest middleweights of the 1980s but the finest middleweight this country has ever produced. People may not see it that way and they are entitled to think that way.

As for Catley, he was a belt holder and good luck to him. He may not have been a better fighter then Graham on the balance of things but when the opportunity presented itself to grab one of the big 3 belts he took his shot - in Germany as well. Kudos.

And he lost it in South Africa to an obese super featherweight. Its not running Catley down, it is a fact. Do you think Herol Graham would have lost to a 12 stone Dingaan Thobela? The fact Glenn Catley can call himself a 'former world champion' is down to the ridiculous state boxing is in nowadays and it makes me sad.

Lets also not forget he was very, very unlucky to loose out to Ritchie Woodhall in a previous title bid (remember the cover of BN that week?)

Not a big fan of Catley's to be honest, all I remember about Catley was that he was a dirty fighter who had a ton of alibis when he lost. Again a personal opinion, he was an average fighter and a poor standard of world champion, do you not agree?

I dont think running down the achievements of someone like Catley does anything to bolster Herol's case to be totally honest.

I think the suggestion that anyone has to use Catley as a prop in regards Herol Grahams legacy is a bit ridiculous to be honest!

Carlos,

Catley wasnt a long standing or particularly brilliant belt holder but he did what he had to to win aginst Beyer in Germany. No easy task I am sure you would agree. As for your personal dislike of the Bristolian, what can I say? He seemed ok to me!

Herol was no 'uncrowned champ' but he was a very fine, highly skilled fighter. I cant say fairer than that.

Talent wise, Graham was up there, no question... But at the start of this discussion, the originator of this thread listed proven, established, world class champions.... And Graham will come up short against them in a mythical match up scenario for reasons previously discussed (ie he fell short at world title level 3 times over etc)... Yes, some fighters have taken their chances and won prestigious titles without half the skill Graham might of had, but history doesn't tend to remember the also ran's as favourably as the winners... That's just the way it is.... In a similar way I spose, it's like Linford Christe being Olympic champion in 1992 for winning in a time of 9.96... Frankie Fredericks was second in 10.02.. Four years later Frankie Fredericks got silver in 9.89.... Who out of the two is the Olympic champion in the record books?? The one who did it when it counted...

Precisely. Talent is half the story, it's producing your big performance when it matters. No good having your best performance on a domestic card three years earlier.

Terry D wrote:

Carlos-Wigan wrote:

Terry D wrote:Hagler could jettison belts to face 'name' fighters. Hagler earned his spurs in contention and a tough first title fight. Herol threw his chances away with a lax defence. He had his own destiny in his hands and blew it.

Hagler had to fight and fight for his opportunity.

No-one is saying that Hagler was a fraud, one of the finest middleweight champions of the sport, but he vacated the WBA title than face Graham and thats a fact.

Styles make fights, the type of fighter that made Hagler frustrated was the elusive type such as Willie Monroe, Ray Leonard, even Roberto Duran made Hagler look flat footed at times in their fight.

Herol Graham was a live threat to Hagler in 1986-87, it may not be the done thing to say it these days but thats the truth.

Hagler may of contended that Leonard and Graham were of equal risk but decided to take the bigger purse facing Leonard, who knows, he has never really stated why he vacated his WBA title than face Graham.

Did Graham blow his chances? Yes and I have already said that.

Hagler dealt with Monroe well in a return and the first fight was pretty close. By Duran Hagler himself had lost a lot of his movement.

Hagler not fighting Herol to take on the likes of Mugabi and Leonard is no black mark or a sign he was worried about Herol. Graham got his chance against lesser fighters than Hagler and failed to take them. I don't think he ever showed enough to make Hagler seriously ditch his title purely out of fear of losing to Herol.

Taking a fight with Leonard over Herol also is not strictly a purse thing. I'm sure that even with his animosity towards Leonard Hagler felt a win over him would be better legacy-wise than a win over Graham. I'd agree with Marvin on that one.

Both Graham, and Laing for that matter, get given huge leeway because they had talent. Consistency is also a virtue of a top fighter and should not be overlooked just because a couple of guys had flashy nights.

Yes, the WBA used to strip champions left right and centre to suit their own ends.Graham was just unlucky to become the top contender at a time when Marvin was setting up a superfight and near the end of his career.He had already paid his dues against contender after contender

Kalambay was also stripped for not fighting Graham despite the fact he had already defeated him and was opting to unify against Nunn.

There was certainly no avoiding involved.As was previously mentioned i doubt Hagler even knew who Graham was in any real detail.Even had Leonard not come out of retirement, Hagler was probably going to fight someone like Hearns or Curry before an unknown like Herol.

I will say this in Graham's favour though.He took the right route to a title by going after Hagler, unlike McCallum who despite being clearly a legit middleweight in size, opted to go for the easy belt against the inept Mannion at the vastly less prestigious 154-only moving up once Hagler had retired.

Herol would have found it much easier to pick up a belt at 154 against someone like Buster Drayton or Mannion.

Nonetheless, McCallum's list of 154-pound challengers were very strong: Julian Jackson, Donald Curry, Milton McCrory, David Braxton...and he stopped all of them.

Yes, of course he did some good work there and fought a few good fighters, but initially it was the easy way out to fight against Mannion and pick up a world title rather than campaigning at 160.

McCallum was huge at 154 and had he wanted to could easily have skipped campaigning in the less worthy weightclass altogether.

Minchillo, Skouma,Braxton and of course McCrory and Curry were all smaller men that had builds closer to Welterweight than Middleweight.