Ray Leonard vs. Michael Nunn @ MW

Does the Leonard that fought Hagler beat a prime Nunn?

 

Nunn

 

no.

Nunn by decision.

 

Do you think Nunn beats that Hagler?

 

Nunn is greatly overrated here.

 

absolutely.

 

no. That'll be Duran.

 

Nunn is perhaps the most overrated MM fighter ever

THAT Hagler definitely beats him

Loenard, thats a pick-em to me

 

Nunn by UD.

 

No way.

THAT Hagler, who was better a year prior struggled with the smaller John "the BUM" Mugabi. Nunn would have run rings around him.

 

MYTH

he did NOT struggle

he beat the living shit out of him from the beginning to the end

seriously, what round did Mugabi WIN in that fight?

Its one of the most popular boxing myths that the fight was in any way, shape, or form a close fight

 

Hagler was a great fighter...but don't overrate the version of Hagler that fought Mugabi and Leonard. Mugabi was a kentucky fried bum with a punch...and he was a small bum..small for even Jnr Middleweight. Leonard hadn't fougth in 3 years and it was his first fight at Middleweight.

You trying to tell me that the HUGE Nunn, in prime form, with good mobility defense and speed would have lost to old man hagler?

Come on man! COME ON!

 

I always thought Nunn was wide and slapped alot. hagler's jab would have reached him. Plus, I didn't think he was physically strong. I doubt he could have stayed away from hagler's abnormally long reach. Marvin's southpaw jab would have gotten through all night.

Plus, Hagler had the chin to take anything Nunn threw at him.

I just can't see Nunn beating hagler...especially after seeing how he fought like a bitch against Barkley. I remember Nunn coming out for the 12th screaming at barkley "this is gonna be war."

Almost as bad as Derrick Gainer later screaming, "that's boxing!"

 

Hagler got hit a lot by Mugabi. He was countered often, and had trouble landing on Mugabi early on in the fight. It's considered a great fight for a reason - because it was closely contested while it lasted.

You can argue that Mugabi's pace was unsustainable, and that it was always a matter of time before he folded to Hagler's pressure, but that'd be strictly hind-sight and not a fair account of how the fight unfolded live.

 

again, what rounds did Mugabi WIN

 

exactly

 

Yep. This is one of those fights where the loser did better than expected and as a result, folks inflate the competitiveness of the fight. Mugabi was game, but he was outclassed by Hagler.

And it's funny when revisionists try to act like Hagler was washed up when he fought Leonard.

 

Like you watched the fight live. ::

 

I would take both Leonard and Hagler over Nunn. Nunn is madly overrated on this forum.

 

I could see Nunn pulling it off vs the 87 Hagler.

The Hagler that beat Hearns though would break Nunn down.

 

As a matter of fact I did watch it live, although I don't think that has anything to do with the argument.

You think you're smarter than everyone else because you're old. But the fact is, you've allowed your experience to cloud your judgement to the point you're just one of those annoying older guys like the ones who pretend the world was better when we had computers with 16k of RAM, and programmers were allocated a minute of mainframe time per year.

Don't ever come at me again with an argument suggesting that because you've rotted longer on this rock than me that you somehow have an advantage.

 

Wow That's one of the worst responses ever. ::

And I will say what I want, when I want. And if you don't like it...I guess that's too bad for you. Maybe you should stop posting while under the influence.

Let me know when you are ready to tell the truth about the fights you've seen when they happened.

 

Nunn probably wins a decision over that Leonard at MW. Nunn could probably also out-snort Ray as well.

Hagler-Mugabi was reasonably competitive in the sense that Mugabi was hitting Hagler with some hard shots (both of them pissed blood afterwards). Hagler for the most part beat up Mugabi though, jabbing the fuck out of the Beast, and then getting the better of it up close in the late rounds. When I saw it for the first time I was expecting the fight to be closer, based on the way people talk about it. One of my first thoughts was "Hagler sure is jabbing him silly".

 

Whatever you say. Whatever you say.

Also, what makes you so certain about what I've watched live and what I haven't? I have no reason to lie about that shit because I don't see it as a basis for a debate, whereas in your case, it's your go-to argument anytime someone doesn't see things the same as you.

 

Nice try, but a swing and a miss for you. You will just say ANYTHING to have a response...misrepresenation, half-truths and outright bullshit are you go-to arguements for any discussion. Pretty much ANYTHING to attempt to bring down a fighter you don't like.

 

Who am I trying to bring down now?

 

I don't particularly like Double L...bt I have to say...you're such a cunt. Instead of simply disagreeing with the man's position and offering a reasoned disagreement based on the actual game of boxing....you have to question whether he saw it live.

You are one annoying cunt...and it compromises you as a poster because you do know alot about the game.

 

Sly why don't you like me? I like you. We have our debates, but I've never meant you any malice.