How good Hagler really was?

Hopkins-DLH summed up in one pic:

 

That was a tepid fencing match prior to the bizarre ending

 

A tepid fencing match that ends with Brother Nazim screaming "Body shot! Body shot! Body shot!" and 5 seconds later Oscar is rolling on the ground like a dying seal from an OPEN GLOVE punch to his side. 20 seconds later, Oscar is up and smiling like nothing happened, and two weeks later... the two of them go into business together.

NOTHING at all fishy about that fight. NOTHING.

Of course, Oscar owns the boxing media, so will ever question it?

 

Definitely an odd fight and highly questionable

 

Whether fixed or not , Oscar would have never beaten Hopkins at 160lbs.

 

Oscar would've had his shit pushed in by Briscoe and Hamsho at 160

 

Nope, that was a pretty epic mismatch.

 

Caveman Lee too? ;)

 

The fact that you equate those guys with Caveman Lee says it all really

 

The little wink I place at the end of my post was supposed to convey some tongue in cheek. I'll spell it out for you next time you troublesome Irishman

 

I'm gonna be spelling out "#YOLO" in urine on your TOMBSTONE if you keep mouthin off:flip:

 

None of those guys were better than Minter. Especially Graham, who was basically awkward and decent at world level and nothing whatsoever more.

MTF

 

That's a very fair point and oft forgotten. Most ATG fighters have only a handful of wins against other 'great' fighters. When a great fighter beats another great fighter, it's comparatively quite unusual. Especially nowadays that cherry-picking and belt proliferation is so rife.

MTF

 

An unbelievably corrupt fight. Unbelievably corrupt.

MTF

 

its very rare but guess what, Floyd "have" done it with de la Hoya, Pacquiao, Mosley, cotto, Marquez .

Like I said before , TBE. He have accomplishment , children, bitches cars and money. No blueprint to beat him.

 

Even allowing for the stretching of the word "great" to include some of those names... None of them were "great" when he fought them

 

Yeah, you rather missed the point I'm afraid.

MTF

 

Aye. Pac is certainly a great fighter, Oscar is maybe, arguably a 'great' fighter. Both were miles past their best when Floyd 'fought' them. The others are good, solid champs.

MTF

 

:: at hagler vs duran being a close fight.

11-4

 

Agree... Duran boxed great but he lost clearly and when Hagler quit fucking around and went after him, he was running him over

 

Word

 

Glad to see that the thread went to 4 pages and barely any post were on topic ::

 

Nonsense! Cotto went on to beat Linear middleweight champion Martinez and by dominating KO to boot. Marquez went on to KO a prime Pacquiao. Pacquiao was still at or close to his peak. De la Hoya wasn't as far removed from his peak as people try to say nowadays at the time musE and double l picked him by knockout.

If you're going to say that one could argue that only Hearns in the first fight was great when Leonard beat him. If I were to use your logic that is.

 

Stongly disagree with your fitst statement. I don't think there's any stretching required to include these guys as great. Agree a 100% with your second statement (bar maybe cotto)

 

If Hagler and Duran were still great when Leonard fought them then Pacquiao and de la Hoya were still great when Floyd fought them. Same can be applied to the achievements of a plethora of past champions.

I exist to keep people around here in check

 

:atu:

 

This thread is really strange. Like something from an alternative universe where people deliberately argue things which are obviously wrong not as trolling, but because they actually believe them to be true.

MTF :scared:

 

I mean, 'great' is by definition a subjective concept for boxing fans, but where do you draw the line? How is Miguel Cotto 'great' in the same context that Roberto Duran is 'great', for example?

In fact, how is Miguel Cotto 'great', full stop? I've always liked Miggy but his best performances are an upset victory over a 39-yr old and a close but clear defeat to Floyd.

MTF :dunno:

 

That's when the language kind of breaks down. It would seem to undercut Cotto to merely call him "good". At the same time great is different than an "all time great" which some will interpret it to be.

 

A hobbled 39 year old to boot

cotto isn't even great in his era, much less all time