Why is SUGAR Ray Leonard but not MARVELOUS Marvin Hagler?

Eric the Viking · Post by **Eric the Viking** » 03 Feb 2004, 14:32

I thought boxer's nicknames were supposed to appear in the "Alias" fields of their fight record. So why isn't Sugar Ray Robinson's record under his birth name (i.e. the real name and alias are switched)? And why does Ray Leonard get to have his nickname not in the Alias field, but Marvin Hagler (who IIRC legally changed his name to "Marvelous Marvin Hagler") doesn't?

I just think there should be a unified policy regarding nicknames, later name changes and birth names of fighters. If a fighter started his career under one name and later switched to another (as was common for black fighters who converted to Islam, although with some, e.g. Mike Tyson, they never fought under their Muslim name), perhaps both names should appear together. But in cases like Leonard, unless he legally changed his name to "Sugar Ray", it should appear simply as "Ray Leonard" on the fight record. And even if RL legally added the "Sugar" later, he should be treated no differently than "Marvelous" Marvin in that regard.

Your thoughts?

trondkris · Post by **trondkris** » 04 Feb 2004, 04:40

Actually I think both Ray and Marvin legally changed their names to include their nicknames...

Matt · Post by **Matt** » 04 Feb 2004, 10:49

Legal name is not as relevant, as what someone was billed as. Of course guys change names, or go under a variation of their nickname (i.e., Baby, KO, Kid). At that point the nickname variation belongs in with the fighters name.

overhand_right · Post by **overhand_right** » 04 Feb 2004, 11:23

i was making the same point about abdul muhaymin and tommy stevenson just the other day. (same fella)

sometimes editors seem to alternames for no apparent reason.

will you guys stop changing his name to mitchell green!! its MITCH (BLOOD) GREEN!! thats the way we all know & love him!

Eric the Viking · Post by **Eric the Viking** » 04 Feb 2004, 12:03

tegenm wrote:Legal name is not as relevant, as what someone was billed as. Of course guys change names, or go under a variation of their nickname (i.e., Baby, KO, Kid). At that point the nickname variation belongs in with the fighters name.

OK, but that still doesn't explain why Leonard gets the "Sugar" whereas Hagler is left looking less than "Marvelous." ;)

Not that I'm actually advocating prepending "Marvelous" to Hagler's name as it appears on the fight records - I think that would look cheesy. I'm just curious as to the apparent double standard.

My preference would be to keep the cheesy (or even non-cheesy) superlatives - even if they part of a later legal name change - out of the individual fight records, e.g. it would just be "Ray Robinson," "Ray Leonard," and "Marvin Hagler." The exception could be when the nick is helpful in differentiating fighters who shared identical or similar birthday names, e.g. "Young" Jack Johnson as being different from just plain ol' Jack Johnson (although there are multiple fighters under both of those names, as well).

wouter · Post by **wouter** » 04 Feb 2004, 12:12

The "Sugar" in Sugar Ray Leonard was not as much a nickname as it was part of his fighting name.

Eric the Viking · Post by **Eric the Viking** » 14 Apr 2004, 20:11

I see the Marvelous One's record has recently been upgraded to fully reflect his marvelousness. ;)

Eric the Viking · Post by **Eric the Viking** » 03 May 2004, 12:28

Eric the Viking wrote:I see the Marvelous One's record has recently been upgraded to fully reflect his marvelousness. ;)

And now he's been demoted back to just plain ol' Marvin.

Looks like the nickname gnomes (close relatives of the better-known sock and underwear gnomes that lurk around laundry facilities) are at it again. ;)

Eric the Viking · Post by **Eric the Viking** » 23 May 2007, 13:20

The double standard persists! Your honor, on this, his Marvelousness' birthday, I most strenuously protest this blatant favoritism shown to the small-nosed pretty boy who refuses to give rematches!!