Hagler vs McCallum

[jdonaher1]

While I agree that Haglar over all is the better fight you have to remember by this time Haglar was past his prime. Since the Hearns fight he was only fighting once a year (Hamsho in 84, Hearns in 85, Mugabi in 86 and then Leonard in 87). Remember Sugar was sitting ringside at the Mugabi fight and decided that Marvin had slipped just enough that he wanted to fight him. Mugabi gave Marvin a very tuff scrap and Leonard outworked him to get the decision. If they fight in 87/88 I could see the Body Snatcher pulling the upset.

[ICB]

While I agree that Haglar over all is the better fight you have to remember by this time Haglar was past his prime. Since the Hearns fight he was only fighting once a year (Hamsho in 84, Hearns in 85, Mugabi in 86 and then Leonard in 87). Remember Sugar was sitting ringside at the Mugabi fight and decided that Marvin had slipped just enough that he wanted to fight him. Mugabi gave Marvin a very tuff scrap and Leonard outworked him to get the decision. If they fight in 87/88 I could see the Body Snatcher pulling the upset.

I agree that Mike McCallum may of beaten the 1987 version of Marvin Hagler, but i thought he meant prime for prime. But whatever i agree with your comment.

[RozzySean]

While I agree that Haglar over all is the better fight you have to remember by this time Haglar was past his prime. Since the Hearns fight he was only fighting once a year (Hamsho in 84, Hearns in 85, Mugabi in 86 and then Leonard in 87). Remember Sugar was sitting ringside at the Mugabi fight and decided that Marvin had slipped just enough that he wanted to fight him. Mugabi gave Marvin a very tuff scrap and Leonard outworked him to get the decision. If they fight in 87/88 I could see the Body Snatcher pulling the upset.

Yeah, that's what I was talking about. Prime for Prime, I'd take Hagler, but by 87, he had fallen off. A prime Marvin Hagler would have made short work of John Mugabi, and on top of that, the Mugabi fight took a lot out of Hagler. Hagler might have had enough left in the talk, but McCallum would be have been a very live underdog.