I'm late, but I disagree. I think Haugen was too tough, too crafty, and too good a counterpuncher to lose to O'Grady. I see Greg nailing Sean with sneaky counters all night, and possibly stopping him late. Haugen remains an underrated fighter.
He was impressive in their rematch, but he wasn't able to replicate that performance in their other 2 fights, which he lost partly because of his reluctance to take chances and let his hands go.
The point is, Haugen has several quality performances. I'm not sure how long O'Grady's rep can last on one night where he was quality.
True, but there's not much comparison. Rose put on a masterclass against an ATG. Hilmer Kenty - solid lightweight - but faaarrrrrr from a great .
I thought that Haugen won the first two fights with Pazienza and that the second fight was a brilliant performance. Of particular interest to me is that Haugen is the last fighter with a (pretty) direct link to the legendary Jack Hurley, an idol of mine. Not long after Hurley relocated to Seattle he took a man named George Chemeres under his wing. Chemeres was instrumental in the education of Greg Haugen and was in his corner for the second Paz fight. Haugen was a very solid professional fighter, as was O'Grady and it would have been a very fan friendly fight. I think that Haugen would win.
I wouldn't say O'Grady just had one quality night - he was flagrantly screwed against Jim Watt in Scotland and would've probably been a stoppage winner if the fight had been held anywhere else. My point about Haugen, though, was that he had a history of being overly selective with his output and waiting on opponents, and I think that backfires on him against O'Grady's attack.
