How Great was The Marvellous Marvin Hagler..

How Great was was Marvin Hagler, I feel he was no more than a good champ for the time ...not exceptional....... :badass:

But I look at his history and some of his biggest wins are against blown up light weights, welters and so on...eg DURAN, HEARNS, MUGABI, LEONARD.... :badass:

Leonard in particular....for Hagler fans out there you must understand that you can forget the decision in the Leonard fight....Ray won regardless, because a middle weight fighting a blown up welter who had I believe only had one fight in five years, and coming in off a detached retina, should not be a competition even....
:badass:
Ray won the hearts, and showed the way by being smart, DURAN another one going the distance with venom, MUGABI AND HEARNS Also causing him plenty of pain and trouble while they lasted...

A good champ for his time....but great...not for me...

Can anyone convince me different?? I'm open minded and love to learn... :beerchug:

Well for me he was great. People often get wrapped up in the bad man image and the intimidation tactics. Now i cannot possibly be viewed as a Hagler expert as i was born in the late 80's but i am a huge fan and i have investigated him in depth.
Hagler actually talked himself up to be a much more fearsome ko artist than he actually was, for example before the hearns fight he was almost demanded to deliver to live up to executioner image. And he did. As he almost always did deliver in his BIG fights. a prime example would be against mugabi. (Short comings can be seen against Leonard and Duran.)
However it is not the aggresive attacking element of Haglers game which makes him great, as duran did hagler had subtle yet great skills which were overshadowed by the come ferociously aggresive style. See the Mugabi fight and one has to admire the defensive bobbing which totally unsettles mugabi and sets him up for some sour medicine.

My apologies that i cant post u a video but i am a fucktard when it comes to posting videos from you tube etc.

Well you could say the same thing about Hopkins. His biggest wins were against blown up WWs and JrMW in Trinidad, Oscar and Wright. Then comes this green up and comer with hardly 20 fights and beats him twice. Still he is considered a top 5 MW all time.

You have to take many things into consideration. His long reign is very significant and some people down play or disregard the greatness of a champion who can consistantly defend his title.

Nice intelligent reply tho hitmandonny and cheers for not presuming me an Hagler hater, as I am far from it...

I'm looking for opinions about the guy and myself fully agree with your points, but negative to that was they was both from lower weight divisions themselves ..

And I recall Hagler saying he would never move weight division, which he stuck to, so if any of the super fights occurred with some one from another weight division it happened on Middle weight terms only....

I ain't saying that he is wrong or right in that, because you can argue a case for either...

Cheers for the reply bud.... :badass:

And I also agree with you too The Rookie Fan , and good points made...

Look at Joe Calzaghe and length of his reign..still gets dissed don't he...

But was Haggler a true all time great or even modern day great... or just a good champion for his time...

How does he hold up.. :badass:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan

Well you could say the same thing about Hopkins. His biggest wins were against blown up WWs and JrMW in Trinidad, Oscar and Wright. Then comes this green up and comer with hardly 20 fights and beats him twice. Still he is considered a top 5 MW all time.

You have to take many things into consideration. His long reign is very significant and some people down play or disregard the greatness of a champion who can consistantly defend his title.

---

People keep repeating that,but its simply not true about Hopkins
Joppy had a title,
Holmes had a title
Eastman was a good fighter
Remember Tarver and Glen Johnson,the guys that beat Roy Jones Jr
Well Hopkins beat all of them
As far as Hagler,while alot of people dont remember alot of the names on his record now,they were very good fighters at the time

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trainer Monkey

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan

Well you could say the same thing about Hopkins. His biggest wins were against blown up WWs and JrMW in Trinidad, Oscar and Wright. Then comes this green up and comer with hardly 20 fights and beats him twice. Still he is considered a top 5 MW all time.

You have to take many things into consideration. His long reign is very significant and some people down play or disregard the greatness of a champion who can consistantly defend his title.

---

People keep repeating that,but its simply not true about Hopkins
Joppy had a title,
Holmes had a title
Eastman was a good fighter
Remember Tarver and Glen Johnson,the guys that beat Roy Jones Jr
Well Hopkins beat all of them
As far as Hagler,while alot of people dont remember alot of the names on his record now,they were very good fighters at the time

---

Just to be clear, my intention was not to diss Hopkins. I think he was a great champion like Hagler. The fact remains that he only started to be considered P4P great after he beat Trinidad and De la Hoya. This was more a public perception than reality. Very similar to Hagler in that he became more publicly recognized as great after beating Hearns and Duran. I put a lot of stock on long reigns as a champion and a record for defenses as a MW puts Hopkins right up there at the top of all time great MWs.

Hagler is the same for me. Long reigning MW champion with wins over very tough opposition

To me, Hagler is the greatest middleweight that ever lived.

He came up the hard way, never got any breaks on the way up (as Joe Frazier told him, "Son, you got three strikes against you.. you're a southpaw, you're black and you're good"). The ultimate blue collar professional in an era where the media first began to hype people up.

Hager came from a tough background and paid his dues in the notorious gym wars of Philadephia, he got in the ring with world class man like Bobby Watts etc while he was still learning his trade. He had a chin like iron and was only 'dropped' once in his entire career (a very debatable slip/knockdown against the brawling Mustapha Hamsho). That is some feat when you consider he fought everyone who mattered in the 80's - Duran, Hearns, Mugabi, Leonard etc.

The thing with Mrvin was that if you wanted to box, he could outbox you. If you wanted to brawl, he would outbrawl you. He could do everything and had every punch, plus was ALWAYS in weight, well conditioned and well prepared. As a mark of the man, did you know that he never had a contract with his managers or trainers, he shook hands with them when he was a teenager and stuck with them all the way through his career. Similarly, he never moved from middleweight (and i think many fighters move weight divisions because they lose discipline) and was one short of breaking Carlos Monzon's then record for title defences.

Ray Robinson won the middleweight title five times, but that meant he lost it four times.

Hagler was the ultimate technician, a proud and hard professional and (for me) one of the greatest fighters to ever grace that high-profile division.

Well tahnk you bambamdaddio and i feel ur points are valid in their own respect and i have to agree as ur 100% correct.

When Hagler was recognised He was past his best, good post x cc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bambamdaddio

How Great was was Marvin Hagler, I feel he was no more than a good champ for the time ...not exceptional....... :badass:

---

Well you have to look at the whole picture...obvioulsly skill wise....he had great chin power ect....his heart was huge he never stopped fighting....

Resume is important...look at5 the names he fought not guys with padded records to make him look good he fought guys like...

Leonard, Hearns, Duran, Minter, Antufermo....all HOF fighters all of whom but Leonard he beat soundly..

He beat tough guys like...Mugabi who at the time....was 25-0 and knocking everyone out....Man that guy was a killer in his prime

Hagler fought in one of boxings greatest era's for middle and welterweights...plus most of his defenses were the 15 rd not 12 ( all but 3) not that hey all went that far but point is

Since winning the title his opponents record combined were an outstanding 687-55...that was only during his championship reign...that is more then impressive...especially with the names on that list....

Marvin was more then a good champion and more then just one of the best of his era...He was the greatest MW of all time hands down

Take a look at these and maybe you can see why my opinion is so high of him...

[youtube=425,350]TZHIo5ylQA8[/youtube]

[youtube=425,350]ZYHSHd1xfpY[/youtube]

this was perhaps one of the top 10 most exciting fights of all time

Hope this changes your mind a bit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bambamdaddio

How Great was was Marvin Hagler, I feel he was no more than a good champ for the time ...not exceptional....... :badass:

But I look at his history and some of his biggest wins are against blown up light weights, welters and so on...eg DURAN, HEARNS, MUGABI, LEONARD.... :badass:

Leonard in particular....for Hagler fans out there you must understand that you can forget the decision in the Leonard fight....Ray won regardless, because a middle weight fighting a blown up welter who had I believe only had one fight in five years, and coming in off a detached retina, should not be a competition even....
:badass:
Ray won the hearts, and showed the way by being smart, DURAN another one going the distance with venom, MUGABI AND HEARNS Also causing him plenty of pain and trouble while they lasted...

A good champ for his time....but great...not for me...

Can anyone convince me different?? I'm open minded and love to learn... :beerchug:

---

sadclick for the dumbest post in this board's history. Questioning a warrior like Marvin Hagler's greatness shows nothing but your ignorance for the sweet science.

For me, Hagler was a top 3 MW of all time. Heart, power, stamina, a great chin, work ethic, he had all the traits you'd want in a champion.

Its unfair to classify opposition like Hearns and Leonard as just "blown up welterweights", as they did grow into legit middleweights, although I agree that Duran shouldn't have fought at Middleweight.

One of the greatest, def. P4P and HofF.

Below Monzon above Hopkins.

I just loved Marvin for the fact that he got hit with monster power shots by Hearns that would have sparked most guys, and marvelous just wobbled slightly then kept coming forward!

There is no doubt about the Hagler legacy, the Hearns fight alone proves what a great champ he was.
It's a shame we never saw him fight Monzon, he had 36 fights up by the time Monzon retired so it could have happened, what a fight that would have been!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by THE THIRD MAN

There is no doubt about the Hagler legacy, the Hearns fight alone proves what a great champ he was.
It's a shame we never saw him fight Monzon, he had 36 fights up by the time Monzon retired so it could have happened, what a fight that would have been!

---

I was actually thinking of writing the same thing myself. cc

Hagler has to be considered one of the all-time greats. He was never KO'd, and arguably never hit the canvas (he had a slip that was called a knockdown once) so he may have had the greatest chins in boxing history. One could even argue he was never beaten. Though I believe Leonard out-boxed him, I concede an argument can be made for him winning that fight. Either way, in boxing, more than any other sport, its not if you win or lose, but how you play the game. Thus, its safe to say he was never thoroughly defeated.

Concerning Duran, Leonard, Hearns, and Mugabi...only Duran was truly "blown up." Leonard and Hearns looked more natural as middleweights than welters (where they looked very skinny, especially Hearns) so I don't think Hagler had a natural size advantage. Hearns was even taller thatn Hagler and by age 30 Leonard was a natural middleweight. Mugabi was his best at Jr. Middle, so not much of a difference.

Great power, arguably greatest chin ever, great technician, never KO'd, knockdown, or thoroughly defeated, fought all comers...i put him right up there with Leonard, Hearns and Duran...who all belong together.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by X

To me, Hagler is the greatest middleweight that ever lived.

He came up the hard way, never got any breaks on the way up (as Joe Frazier told him, "Son, you got three strikes against you.. you're a southpaw, you're black and you're good"). The ultimate blue collar professional in an era where the media first began to hype people up.

Hager came from a tough background and paid his dues in the notorious gym wars of Philadephia, he got in the ring with world class man like Bobby Watts etc while he was still learning his trade. He had a chin like iron and was only 'dropped' once in his entire career (a very debatable slip/knockdown against the brawling Mustapha Hamsho). That is some feat when you consider he fought everyone who mattered in the 80's - Duran, Hearns, Mugabi, Leonard etc.

The thing with Mrvin was that if you wanted to box, he could outbox you. If you wanted to brawl, he would outbrawl you. He could do everything and had every punch, plus was ALWAYS in weight, well conditioned and well prepared. As a mark of the man, did you know that he never had a contract with his managers or trainers, he shook hands with them when he was a teenager and stuck with them all the way through his career. Similarly, he never moved from middleweight (and i think many fighters move weight divisions because they lose discipline) and was one short of breaking Carlos Monzon's then record for title defences.

Ray Robinson won the middleweight title five times, but that meant he lost it four times.

Hagler was the ultimate technician, a proud and hard professional and (for me) one of the greatest fighters to ever grace that high-profile division.

---

Actually, the knockdown was in his match with Roldan and not Hamsho

Yes, I think you might be right, now that you make me think about it ...... apologies for getting it wrong, but I think my point still stands about his chin being like concrete?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eagle

I just loved Marvin for the fact that he got hit with monster power shots by Hearns that would have sparked most guys, and marvelous just wobbled slightly then kept coming forward!

---

The shots he recieved from Hearns were nothing compared to the monster shots he ate from Mugabi and walked through them during the early rounds

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaxxKahn

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eagle

I just loved Marvin for the fact that he got hit with monster power shots by Hearns that would have sparked most guys, and marvelous just wobbled slightly then kept coming forward!

---

The shots he recieved from Hearns were nothing compared to the monster shots he ate from Mugabi and walked through them during the early rounds

---

Mugabi vs Hagler was brutal Mugabi could of gotten up in the 11th but he knew he couldn't win so he just stayed down and took the 10 count that fight ruined Mugabi it took so much out of him.

But in Mugabi we still have a guy coming up from light middle weight to fight Hagler...as I remember...could be wrong tho...

And to take another scenario I remember Nigel Benn saying when being asked about Mc Clellands power, He said before the fight something on the lines of Ive been hit by middle weights and Ive been hit by super middle weights, and let me tell you super mids hit back harder and stand up longer...and so it proved to be...

So would or could that not also be the case here with Mugabi and Hagler...I dont dislike Hagler so dont sad click me on those grounds Im just bringing a debate to the table boys no more no less....He was a fine warrior of that Im in no doubt at all.. :badass:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DaxxKahn

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eagle

I just loved Marvin for the fact that he got hit with monster power shots by Hearns that would have sparked most guys, and marvelous just wobbled slightly then kept coming forward!

---

The shots he recieved from Hearns were nothing compared to the monster shots he ate from Mugabi and walked through them during the early rounds

---

Mugabi vs Hagler was brutal Mugabi could of gotten up in the 11th but he knew he couldn't win so he just stayed down and took the 10 count that fight ruined Mugabi it took so much out of him.

---

Agreed...The first part of that fight Mugabi unloaded shots that would KO some top notch HWts of Today....First few rds I thought Hagler was in trouble that night....Mugabi started to wear down around the 6th and Marving just gave him a beating......Your right Mugabi was never the same again....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bambamdaddio

But in Mugabi we still have a guy coming up from light middle weight to fight Hagler...as I remember...could be wrong tho...

And to take another scenario I remember Nigel Benn saying when being asked about Mc Clellands power, He said before the fight something on the lines of Ive been hit by middle weights and Ive been hit by super middle weights, and let me tell you super mids hit back harder and stand up longer...and so it proved to be...

So would or could that not also be the case here with Mugabi and Hagler...I dont dislike Hagler so dont sad click me on those grounds Im just bringing a debate to the table boys no more no less....He was a fine warrior of that Im in no doubt at all.. :badass:

---

I think you are confused on some things there mate...I am not sure what your version of blown up or how well you know the scientifics of the sport.....Just because a guy starts at WW lets say...that does not mean that is his natrual weight....You have to remember at ages 21-25 your body is still growing not so much in height but in mass....you do not settle down until you are about 25 or so...a guy who is at WW in the beginning of his career and moves up to lets say 154 after 10 or 15 fights and stays at 154 his natrual weight is 154....the only difference is he is not sucking the weight he usually is...also many guys will punish themselves to make a lower weight class for the advantage....

Look at Marvins comp and look at what they accomplished after moving up in weight...weight you would consider not their natrual weight....

Ray Leonard--wins robbery against Hagler...Moves all the way up to LHW and wins a title...

Tommy Hearns--Loses to Hagler but goes on to win SMW,,LHW,,and some minor cruiserweight titles....First man to beat future HOF bound Virgil Hill at LHW,,Beats Olajide at SMW...has wars with Barkley,,,beats nate miller at CW...Blows out James Shuler at MW right after Hagler fight....Hearns is 6'1" to Hagler's 5'9 1/2"'s

John Mugabi fought as high as SMW before fighting Hagler and averaged about 155-160 most of his productive career...

Minter,,Antuofermo and most the others all middleweight for 98%of their productive careers...I say productive because the first few fights are not counted as anything because it is not until something is accomplished that the career really starts IMO....

The only blown up guy was Duran...who even though was a small guy went on to have some tough fights against much younger guys all the way until the late 90's...guys who he would have beaten 10 years prior even at 160....

If these guys like Hearns, and them came up from 147 or 154 for just that fight and were blown out never to return to the division or not have any success later on I can understand what you are saying but thats not the case...


BTW I don't think anyone will give an SC over the debate good topic got everyone in on it....

I think Marvin had everything. Recently watched a few of his older fights and he was alot quicker than I had originally thought. Definately one of the Greats.

Daxx i have to disagree with you i do not think hagler was robbed i thought Leonard beat him fair in square

Yeah me too there, I just thought he felt he would catch up with Ray and did nothing in the early rounds knowing that he would pin him in a corner eventually and then work him over, which of course did'nt happen....

but to me the result didn't matter because morally Ray had won by going the distance and win or lose, he had gone close enough for the argument, which in itself was a great deed done..

as I said in opening this debate, should Hagler have been caused so much trouble by a guy he totally dis regarded, and as well as having only the one fight in five years which saw him,Leonard that is floored by Kevin Howard I think it was) not to mention coming up in weight and off a detached retina injury...So back to the point......Was Hagler that great then?????

Don't kill me for asking just finding out the consensus of opinion as I respect the forum and most writers opinions on here...which is why Im asking you guys about the man while also putting across my own points of view, I do not dislike Hagler...just wondererd where you guys have him in the big picture of all time greats.. :badass:

PS...forgive the spellings, checker aint working for me at mo :army: :beerchug:

Bam great posts, you know Boxing cc

An open reply to DaxxKahn,

My understanding is probably as broad as your own having boxed myself and loved the sport since eight years old, I also competed at national level as a Judoka (judo player) and went on to teach the sport,I know about growth and changing weight divisions from experience, and further to that I work and have worked in the fitness industry in a training capacity for 22 years now...

That dont mean I know everything far from it ... but rather than question me, I feel you need look closer to home if your saying Haggler was robbed...never in a million years was he robbed, I will grant you however that the fight was close enough to argue..

Indeed just recently boxing news re opened that very case with the winner still coming out as Leonard...none of the so called experts there as I re call even hinted at robbery...mugged by Leonard yes quite possibly so, but robbed, no way....sorry but thats how I see it. :badass:

Scrap,
Your a gent, thanx for the support and for taking note of what Im writing purely as a curious fan and not as a Hagler Hater ...anything but, just asking questions of the man , but they dont seem too popular...but hey thats life Hagler was a fine champion who used what he had to the best of his ability...

And here goes again to all, I am still to be convinced by the Haggler argument, but as I say, Haggler was a fine champion, this I do not dispute at all :badass:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bambamdaddio

An open reply to DaxxKahn,

My understanding is probably as broad as your own having boxed myself and loved the sport since eight years old, I also competed at national level as a Judoka (judo player) and went on to teach the sport,I know about growth and changing weight divisions from experience, and further to that I work and have worked in the fitness industry in a training capacity for 22 years now...

That dont mean I know everything far from it ... but rather than question me, I feel you need look closer to home if your saying Haggler was robbed...never in a million years was he robbed, I will grant you however that the fight was close enough to argue..

Indeed just recently boxing news re opened that very case with the winner still coming out as Leonard...none of the so called experts there as I re call even hinted at robbery...mugged by Leonard yes quite possibly so, but robbed, no way....sorry but thats how I see it. :badass:

---

Take no offense in what I said mate...was not to be as though you were an idiot.....And believe it or not there are top paid trainers out there who fail to compensate for such things like size or weight ect...or they would not allow their fighters to go in fights dehydrated and such just for a win and have it turn out the opposite way...was just making a statement is all......

And HAGLER WAS ROBBED NOT MUGGED NOT PURSE SNATCHED ROBBED.... ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr140

Daxx i have to disagree with you i do not think hagler was robbed i thought Leonard beat him fair in square

---

I guess it all has to do with who you were a bigger follower of I guess....IMO they did Hagler wrong....

Guess it is kind of like depending on who you ask won the DLH/Trinidad fight.....

Trinidad followers will say Tito won soundly others say DLH was done an injustice

This entire thread is ridiculous.

well i give you that daxx cc for standing by your guy and staying strong to what you think happen

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr140

well i give you that daxx cc for standing by your guy and staying strong to what you think happen

---

CC back mate not going to change my opinion that I have had for years I have seen the fight 100 times....Like I said everyone is entitled to their opinion...not saying mine is right or wrong just mine

As a rule I’m not big on watching southpaws , I find that the southpaw stance makes for un easy watch .. Whitaker and Hagler were an exception to that rule . Haglar came to fight, had the mindset to do battle at all cost,, he delivered. A terrific fighter.

DaxxKahn, Fair play to you bud I too admire you for standing by your guy, and also give you big respect with regard to your opinion, thats one of the things that makes this sport great...

And thats why I asked the question of how great was Hagler...I thought it might provoke a few opinions...like yourself though re Leonard v Hagler, I too stand by my own opinion re robbery...and have also seen it too many times to count...

Seriously tho bud your input is much appreciated, and it would be a sad day if we could not respect each others views, I am and will always remain open minded where people voice opinions, more so when its me asking the question...

Your opinions, like my own, are neither right or wrong,good or bad there your views on a fighter...views which I myself genuinely give you thanks and full respect for... :beerchug:

I would cc you myself for fighting your corner, that I admire, but I ain't got my 100 in as yet :badass:

In reply to the original question, Hagler is an all time great, no doubt. Top 4 middle's of all time (with, Robinson,Monzon and Hopkins, not sure which order since I haven't seen enough of Monzon). Daxx and X has already given the best arguments so there's not much more to add.

All I'll say is that you can criticise the record of pretty much any great fighter in history if you look closely enough. Hagler is one of the toughest Bastards to ever enter the ring, he'd take you to the trenches and was never close to beaten up in the ring during a long career, much longer than it should have been due to being dodged and overlooked for so long. Avenged his first two defeats emphatically, and lost his last fight to another all time great who had no interest in engaging him in a fight who's result is debated to this day.