Khan Calls out Cotto at 155 for MW Title at 155!!...

First topic message reminder :

I'll love for someone to make a case for Khan

Boy has gone full Ret*rd-

Khan v @RealMiguelCotto I'd take that fight in a heartbeat at catch weight 155lbs for the @WBCBoxing Middleweight title

Stylistically cotto would be a great fight for me. He's a great champion. Just imagine that fight in UK.

Secondly what kind of disgraceful fight would this be if any fight happens for the MW title at 155!!! especially between a WW/small JMW vs a new WW.

Spinks being a better boxer....A better puncher at 175 and taller with a bigger reach is the reason for Hagler avoiding..

Face down by the 7th...

Still at least Hearns, Duran and Leonard had bollox...

hazharrison wrote:

milkyboy wrote:I understand that hagler dreamed of being champion, felt he was denied his shot, felt robbed against vito when he finally got his first shot and didn't want to give up the title when he won it. All understandable. 

But that refusal to give it up meant that in addition to fighting some great fighters moving up and some decent contenders, he also fought some dross... And hamsho twice. Now all champions have some fillers on their cv, but do you think that adds more to his legacy than a go at spinks, even if it was unsuccessful? Is robinson lambasted for maxim? It didn't settle the argument either but it was more interesting than rolling over another stiff.

Ultimately, these guys are chasing the dollar.  I'm fine with catch weights if they make interesting fights possible. In the good old days champions regularly took none title fights at weights above their championship weight. They fought more frequently obviously, but I think catch weights are fine if they keep the belt out of it... And that's down to the sanctioning bodies to stop it... And to not strip the fighters involved for inactivity if they don't defend the belt. They exist for those fees so neither  of  those things is  going to happen.

Catch weights rarely make for good fights - it's a marketing strategy to match names (regardless of weight) due to boxing's complete lack of sporting parameters. Golden Boy were notorious for it a few years back.

Butch Lewis floated the idea of a Spinks fight during the aftermath of Hagler-Hearns (Leonard had said this of Hagler's performance: "If I ever needed a reason to stay retired, that was it").

Hearns thought Hagler should go after Spinks. Hagler's response: "So you can move up and have the middleweights?"

Hagler was never going to give up that championship. It defined him.

Hagler-Spinks was never seriously mooted.

it was mooted by spinks

as a fan you'd rather see hamsho 2 than spinks?

I'm not knocking hagler for not fighting spinks, the bigger names were the guys below, but there was a window of opportunity for it. If he was all about legacy and not about money he might have taken it.

I see your argument... he'll fight anyone who wants to fight at his best weight...  but if the other 3 of the fab 4 took that attitude, then maybe we never had a fab four.

He's talking through his a**e...Milky !!

He's happy to see Hagler fight Obelmijas twice, Caveman lee, Hamsho twice, A lightweight, Two superwelters and welter..........

But If Mayweather beats the number 1 man at 154............He's a t**t...

You can't reason with idiots like that !!

Let's just hope McIlvanney writes an article saying he loves modern fighters.........

My take on Hagler moving up to fight Spinks is that if he had, he would have lost, probably on points. However, like haz says, this fight was never seriously mooted. Spinks or his people mentioned it, but there was never a big push for it. Now it's often mentioned as a way to belittle Hagler or make him look like some sort of bottler.

As far as I know, Duran, Hearns, and Leonard all outgrew their divisons and moved up, Hagler, did not outgrow his. Sure, all of them could still fight at light middle at the time they fought Hagler, but none of them jumped up 15lbs to fight Hagler. When Duran fought Hagler he hadn't been a lightweight for three or more years, Hearns hadn't been a welterweight for four, Leonard hadn't made 147lbs since 1982.

milkyboy wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

milkyboy wrote:I understand that hagler dreamed of being champion, felt he was denied his shot, felt robbed against vito when he finally got his first shot and didn't want to give up the title when he won it. All understandable. 

But that refusal to give it up meant that in addition to fighting some great fighters moving up and some decent contenders, he also fought some dross... And hamsho twice. Now all champions have some fillers on their cv, but do you think that adds more to his legacy than a go at spinks, even if it was unsuccessful? Is robinson lambasted for maxim? It didn't settle the argument either but it was more interesting than rolling over another stiff.

Ultimately, these guys are chasing the dollar.  I'm fine with catch weights if they make interesting fights possible. In the good old days champions regularly took none title fights at weights above their championship weight. They fought more frequently obviously, but I think catch weights are fine if they keep the belt out of it... And that's down to the sanctioning bodies to stop it... And to not strip the fighters involved for inactivity if they don't defend the belt. They exist for those fees so neither  of  those things is  going to happen.

Catch weights rarely make for good fights - it's a marketing strategy to match names (regardless of weight) due to boxing's complete lack of sporting parameters. Golden Boy were notorious for it a few years back.

Butch Lewis floated the idea of a Spinks fight during the aftermath of Hagler-Hearns (Leonard had said this of Hagler's performance: "If I ever needed a reason to stay retired, that was it").

Hearns thought Hagler should go after Spinks. Hagler's response: "So you can move up and have the middleweights?"

Hagler was never going to give up that championship. It defined him.

Hagler-Spinks was never seriously mooted.

it was mooted by spinks

as a fan you'd rather see hamsho 2 than spinks?

I'm not knocking hagler for not fighting spinks, the bigger names were the guys below, but there was a window of opportunity for it. If he was all about legacy and not about money he might have taken it.

I see your argument... he'll fight anyone who wants to fight at his best weight...  but if the other 3 of the fab 4 took that attitude, then maybe we never had a fab four.

Hagler wanted Leonard. Had he relinquished his championship to potentially lose to Spinks do you really think that fight would have happened?

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He's talking through his a**e...Milky !!

He's happy to see Hagler fight Obelmijas twice, Caveman lee, Hamsho twice, A lightweight, Two superwelters and welter..........

But If Mayweather beats the number 1 man at 154............He's a t**t...

You can't reason with idiots like that !!

Let's just hope McIlvanney writes an article saying he loves modern fighters.........

Boxing works when there's one champion per weight class who takes on all comers. It should always be about fighters proving they're the best - which Hagler did.

Mayweather has never managed that in the division he's spent the past God knows how many years in.

hazharrison wrote:

milkyboy wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

milkyboy wrote:I understand that hagler dreamed of being champion, felt he was denied his shot, felt robbed against vito when he finally got his first shot and didn't want to give up the title when he won it. All understandable. 

But that refusal to give it up meant that in addition to fighting some great fighters moving up and some decent contenders, he also fought some dross... And hamsho twice. Now all champions have some fillers on their cv, but do you think that adds more to his legacy than a go at spinks, even if it was unsuccessful? Is robinson lambasted for maxim? It didn't settle the argument either but it was more interesting than rolling over another stiff.

Ultimately, these guys are chasing the dollar.  I'm fine with catch weights if they make interesting fights possible. In the good old days champions regularly took none title fights at weights above their championship weight. They fought more frequently obviously, but I think catch weights are fine if they keep the belt out of it... And that's down to the sanctioning bodies to stop it... And to not strip the fighters involved for inactivity if they don't defend the belt. They exist for those fees so neither  of  those things is  going to happen.

Catch weights rarely make for good fights - it's a marketing strategy to match names (regardless of weight) due to boxing's complete lack of sporting parameters. Golden Boy were notorious for it a few years back.

Butch Lewis floated the idea of a Spinks fight during the aftermath of Hagler-Hearns (Leonard had said this of Hagler's performance: "If I ever needed a reason to stay retired, that was it").

Hearns thought Hagler should go after Spinks. Hagler's response: "So you can move up and have the middleweights?"

Hagler was never going to give up that championship. It defined him.

Hagler-Spinks was never seriously mooted.

it was mooted by spinks

as a fan you'd rather see hamsho 2 than spinks?

I'm not knocking hagler for not fighting spinks, the bigger names were the guys below, but there was a window of opportunity for it. If he was all about legacy and not about money he might have taken it.

I see your argument... he'll fight anyone who wants to fight at his best weight...  but if the other 3 of the fab 4 took that attitude, then maybe we never had a fab four.

Hagler wanted Leonard. Had he relinquished his championship to potentially lose to Spinks do you really think that fight would have happened?

It didnt happen til 1987 anyway, so yes. If hagler was forced to relinquish his championship, he'd have been first in line to win it back... which he would have done given the paucity of talent.

Basically if hagler was hanging around for leonard, he wanted to beat up a little guy with the big name for big bucks? Why is that any different to spinks wanting to fight hagler... spinks  fighting anyone prepared to fight him at his preferred weight.  Mooted by the media or not, it would have been a big fight and who else was going to suggest the fight if it wasn't spinks team? They'd both cleaned out their divisions of all the genuine threats.

Here's marvins view on it... light heavy was a nothing division and spinks should have to come down to meet him...

http://www.doghouseboxing.com/On-The-Ropes-Boxing-Radio/OTR-New-051513.htm

When leonard was fighting duran and hearns at welter, that was THE division... if they'd taken Hagler's approach, we'd have had a fab 3 and missed out on a few big fights

Atila wrote:My take on Hagler moving up to fight Spinks is that if he had, he would have lost, probably on points. However, like haz says, this fight was never seriously mooted. Spinks or his people mentioned it, but there was never a big push for it. Now it's often mentioned as a way to belittle Hagler or make him look like some sort of bottler.

As far as I know, Duran, Hearns, and Leonard all outgrew their divisons and moved up, Hagler, did not outgrow his. Sure, all of them could still fight at light middle at the time they fought Hagler, but none of them jumped up 15lbs to fight Hagler. When Duran fought Hagler he hadn't been a lightweight for three or more years, Hearns hadn't been a welterweight for four, Leonard hadn't made 147lbs since 1982.

15 lbs is a lot granted. But others have done it.

Duran was about 27 when he moved up from lightweight. He may have matured to a natural welter, but he was as much a middleweight as dwight qawi was a heavyweight, he just couldn't be a*sed to shift the weight.

Leonard fought norris, 4 years after the hagler fight, at light middle, no way was he ever a middleweight and he was undoubtedly in his prime as a welter. He'd only had 1 fight since 1982!

Hearns best weight was either welter or probably light middle. Hearns was actually scheduled to fight hagler in spring 1982, jumping straight from welter to middle, but he broke his hand and it was first postponed and then cancelled.

All three of these guys had chequered records at middle or above.  You can kind of make an argument for hearns, but the others didn't mature into prime middles. In each case they came up at the time specifically to fight hagler.

Can't speak for others, I seriously doubt he was scared of spinks or qawi who also called him out. He was one tough mother and a hell of a fighter, I'm not calling him a bottler or belittling him. I'm merely pointing out that his big fights were all against guys who did weight jump to meet him. They were big money fights. I'm sure that was the main attraction for hearns leonard and duran too. Just as i'm sure the greenback motivated spinks to go to heavy. Everybody else ran out of viable big name opponents and moved up... luckily for marv, three of them moved up to his class.  

Whatever the motivation and reasons, politics and business, they all pushed themselves more than him and were prepared to take risks he chose not to. Maybe it was just circumstance, maybe he did just love his belt too much to ever fight for another. He thought highly of monzon and he too was happy to fight napoles but never chased foster.

milkyboy wrote:

Atila wrote:My take on Hagler moving up to fight Spinks is that if he had, he would have lost, probably on points. However, like haz says, this fight was never seriously mooted. Spinks or his people mentioned it, but there was never a big push for it. Now it's often mentioned as a way to belittle Hagler or make him look like some sort of bottler.

As far as I know, Duran, Hearns, and Leonard all outgrew their divisons and moved up, Hagler, did not outgrow his. Sure, all of them could still fight at light middle at the time they fought Hagler, but none of them jumped up 15lbs to fight Hagler. When Duran fought Hagler he hadn't been a lightweight for three or more years, Hearns hadn't been a welterweight for four, Leonard hadn't made 147lbs since 1982.

15 lbs is a lot granted. But others have done it.

Duran was about 27 when he moved up from lightweight. He may have matured to a natural welter, but he was as much a middleweight as dwight qawi was a heavyweight, he just couldn't be a*sed to shift the weight.

Leonard fought norris, 4 years after the hagler fight, at light middle, no way was he ever a middleweight and he was undoubtedly in his prime as a welter. He'd only had 1 fight since 1982!

Hearns best weight was either welter or probably light middle. Hearns was actually scheduled to fight hagler in spring 1982, jumping straight from welter to middle, but he broke his hand and it was first postponed and then cancelled.

All three of these guys had chequered records at middle or above.  You can kind of make an argument for hearns, but the others didn't mature into prime middles. In each case they came up at the time specifically to fight hagler.

Can't speak for others, I seriously doubt he was scared of spinks or qawi who also called him out. He was one tough mother and a hell of a fighter, I'm not calling him a bottler or belittling him. I'm merely pointing out that his big fights were all against guys who did weight jump to meet him. They were big money fights. I'm sure that was the main attraction for hearns leonard and duran too. Just as i'm sure the greenback motivated spinks to go to heavy. Everybody else ran out of viable big name opponents and moved up... luckily for marv, three of them moved up to his class.  

Whatever the motivation and reasons, politics and business, they all pushed themselves more than him and were prepared to take risks he chose not to. Maybe it was just circumstance, maybe he did just love his belt too much to ever fight for another. He thought highly of monzon and he too was happy to fight napoles but never chased foster.

Because there was nothing like the emphasis on fighters moving between weights as there is today. Hearns and Leonard popularised this "five-time" alphabet titlist business in their race to become one first. Hearns became embroiled in that crazy duel as he couldn't get a rematch with Leonard.

Fighters move weight these days to meet other "names" to make money. Boxing's knackered infrastructure means the public can't follow it any more (with any clarity) so the TV guys pair a couple of the few recognisable faces it does have and hope that attracts viewers.

When Hagler was champion that still meant something. That was the pinnacle of the sport. It led to him being, arguably, the star of the 80s. This notion he played it safe is forum conjecture and nothing more. He did what was expected of a champion (and had been through history).

When - genuinely - has a fighter moved up to seek a challenge after completely exhausting a division (in the modern era)? Duran, Jones - maybe Trinidad - and after that I'm struggling.

Most do for a money fight. Others because they've been eliminated or can no longer make weight. None of those apply to Hagler at middleweight.

hazharrison wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He's talking through his a**e...Milky !!

He's happy to see Hagler fight Obelmijas twice, Caveman lee, Hamsho twice, A lightweight, Two superwelters and welter..........

But If Mayweather beats the number 1 man at 154............He's a t**t...

You can't reason with idiots like that !!

Let's just hope McIlvanney writes an article saying he loves modern fighters.........

Boxing works when there's one champion per weight class who takes on all comers. It should always be about fighters proving they're the best - which Hagler did.

Mayweather has never managed that in the division he's spent the past God knows how many years in.

Playing devils advocate - He has cleared out the 154 div of Cotto and Alvarez. IF he fights Pacman then it's really only Margarito & PWill @ 147/54 on his resume you could probably moan about him not fighting. And lest we forget Williams was a guy no one wanted to fight.

Bit of hyperbole there Haz. There are very few guys in the last 30 years who you could say "fought everyone". Leonard didn't fight Pryor, Bowe binned the belt instead of fighting Lewis, I could go on.

Apart from PWill & Marg (assuming he fights Pacquiao which I reckon he does) then who has he not fought? And I know you'll mention Mosely in his "prime", but he'd just put a battering on Marg - If FMJ didn't fight him straight after that fight it's people like you who'd be bitching and whinging that he avoided that fight as well.

Revisionistic hyperbolic and partially devoid of much truth Haz.

Cue angry response.

With the Hagler argument, I think it boils down as simply as this really, Haz; you're right to point out that Hagler was able to solidify himself as a truly great fighter campaigning at 160 alone and that he had no automatic obligation to go up in weight to seek out tougher challenges / bigger fights, so I see what you're saying in the sense that maybe we're setting the bar too high if we're going to have a pop at Marvin for that. But, as you yourself have admitted, other fighters have taken those additional steps which Hagler didn't even though they didn't necessarily have to, either.

Defend Hagler's right to stay put at 160 by all means, but don't get tetchy when people suggest that him doing so prevents him from being in the same class as certain others fighters who likewise didn't have to seek new challenges at higher weights but still did. As I said, it's a tough criticism of Marvin.....But when you're competing for a place amongst the greatest fighters of all time, the criteria will be tough at the end of the day.

I think Hagler is great...don't get me wrong..

But when a poster p**ses all over Mayweather for beating the number 1 154 pounder......22 pounds above his superfeather division........

and thinks it's great beating the likes Obelmijas and Hamsho twice........Rather than move up 10/15 pounds to fight a fellow great !! (Spinks often came in at 171)......

Then he is a bit of a wally..

After all Duran moved up 25 to fight Hagler.............Leonard and Tommy 13 pounds also....Robbo moved up 27 pounds for Maxim from welter......

Hank Armstrong.............Spinks 30 odd pounds to 205 and Holmes...

Robinson moved up 40lbs from lightweight to fight Maxim Truss while Armstrong moved up 34lbs to fight Garcia at middleweight. Pep, Monzon and Hagler are in a very small minority of great fighters who didn't try moving up.

Monzon had Foster as 175 pound champ didn't he ??

Suppose he didn't want to get murdered either...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Give Khan credit............He wants a big fight............

Good luck to him.....

His last two fights were against decent opposition............

606 is a strange place...............You're either a ducker or mocked when you want to fight the best !!

Yeah respect to him, but cotto at 155 for MW title, thats just stupid, if you going to call him out, make it realistic and if CW do it at like 151

milkyboy wrote:

Atila wrote:My take on Hagler moving up to fight Spinks is that if he had, he would have lost, probably on points. However, like haz says, this fight was never seriously mooted. Spinks or his people mentioned it, but there was never a big push for it. Now it's often mentioned as a way to belittle Hagler or make him look like some sort of bottler.

As far as I know, Duran, Hearns, and Leonard all outgrew their divisons and moved up, Hagler, did not outgrow his. Sure, all of them could still fight at light middle at the time they fought Hagler, but none of them jumped up 15lbs to fight Hagler. When Duran fought Hagler he hadn't been a lightweight for three or more years, Hearns hadn't been a welterweight for four, Leonard hadn't made 147lbs since 1982.

15 lbs is a lot granted. But others have done it.

Duran was about 27 when he moved up from lightweight. He may have matured to a natural welter, but he was as much a middleweight as dwight qawi was a heavyweight, he just couldn't be a*sed to shift the weight.

Leonard fought norris, 4 years after the hagler fight, at light middle, no way was he ever a middleweight and he was undoubtedly in his prime as a welter. He'd only had 1 fight since 1982!

Hearns best weight was either welter or probably light middle. Hearns was actually scheduled to fight hagler in spring 1982, jumping straight from welter to middle, but he broke his hand and it was first postponed and then cancelled.

All three of these guys had chequered records at middle or above.  You can kind of make an argument for hearns, but the others didn't mature into prime middles. In each case they came up at the time specifically to fight hagler.

Can't speak for others, I seriously doubt he was scared of spinks or qawi who also called him out. He was one tough mother and a hell of a fighter, I'm not calling him a bottler or belittling him. I'm merely pointing out that his big fights were all against guys who did weight jump to meet him. They were big money fights. I'm sure that was the main attraction for hearns leonard and duran too. Just as i'm sure the greenback motivated spinks to go to heavy. Everybody else ran out of viable big name opponents and moved up... luckily for marv, three of them moved up to his class.  

Whatever the motivation and reasons, politics and business, they all pushed themselves more than him and were prepared to take risks he chose not to. Maybe it was just circumstance, maybe he did just love his belt too much to ever fight for another. He thought highly of monzon and he too was happy to fight napoles but never chased foster.

But Hagler never looked like he was growing out of MW division, Leonard was a big WW, Hearns was a massive WW, Hagler was just a decent sized MW, don't think he could have dealt with a spinks or another big LHW. As for Duran, he was big LW, then he grew into a decent size WW, for me had no business at MW, but he was so great and so skilled he could deal with the size advantage fairly well to negotiate MW like hagler, Leonard, Hearns, Hagler all had a significant size advantage over him.

KO-KING wrote:

milkyboy wrote:

Atila wrote:My take on Hagler moving up to fight Spinks is that if he had, he would have lost, probably on points. However, like haz says, this fight was never seriously mooted. Spinks or his people mentioned it, but there was never a big push for it. Now it's often mentioned as a way to belittle Hagler or make him look like some sort of bottler.

As far as I know, Duran, Hearns, and Leonard all outgrew their divisons and moved up, Hagler, did not outgrow his. Sure, all of them could still fight at light middle at the time they fought Hagler, but none of them jumped up 15lbs to fight Hagler. When Duran fought Hagler he hadn't been a lightweight for three or more years, Hearns hadn't been a welterweight for four, Leonard hadn't made 147lbs since 1982.

15 lbs is a lot granted. But others have done it.

Duran was about 27 when he moved up from lightweight. He may have matured to a natural welter, but he was as much a middleweight as dwight qawi was a heavyweight, he just couldn't be a*sed to shift the weight.

Leonard fought norris, 4 years after the hagler fight, at light middle, no way was he ever a middleweight and he was undoubtedly in his prime as a welter. He'd only had 1 fight since 1982!

Hearns best weight was either welter or probably light middle. Hearns was actually scheduled to fight hagler in spring 1982, jumping straight from welter to middle, but he broke his hand and it was first postponed and then cancelled.

All three of these guys had chequered records at middle or above.  You can kind of make an argument for hearns, but the others didn't mature into prime middles. In each case they came up at the time specifically to fight hagler.

Can't speak for others, I seriously doubt he was scared of spinks or qawi who also called him out. He was one tough mother and a hell of a fighter, I'm not calling him a bottler or belittling him. I'm merely pointing out that his big fights were all against guys who did weight jump to meet him. They were big money fights. I'm sure that was the main attraction for hearns leonard and duran too. Just as i'm sure the greenback motivated spinks to go to heavy. Everybody else ran out of viable big name opponents and moved up... luckily for marv, three of them moved up to his class.  

Whatever the motivation and reasons, politics and business, they all pushed themselves more than him and were prepared to take risks he chose not to. Maybe it was just circumstance, maybe he did just love his belt too much to ever fight for another. He thought highly of monzon and he too was happy to fight napoles but never chased foster.

But Hagler never looked like he was growing out of MW division, Leonard was a big WW, Hearns was a massive WW, Hagler was just a decent sized MW, don't think he could have dealt with a spinks or another big LHW. As for Duran, he was big LW, then he grew into a decent size WW, for me had no business at MW, but he was so great and so skilled he could deal with the size advantage fairly well to negotiate MW like hagler, Leonard, Hearns, Hagler all had a significant size advantage over him.

Robinson made middle easy enough............Spinks ignored cruiser...............Duran made welter easy enough after light...............

DelaHoya, trinidad, Jones jr, Hearns, conn, Fitzsimmons, Manny, Pazienza, Camacho, Chavez, Armstrong, Taylor, Mccallum, Hoppo, Mayweather, Whittaker, Benitez, Leonard, Arguello ...........Is that enough ??? Or do you want more.........

Argument sucks...

Leonard wasn't a massive Welterweight nor was Duran a massive Lightweight, neither of them actually outgrew their divisions they moved up for the money and in Durans case because he got a bit lazy.

Greb wanted a shot at Carpentier.................Tiger won the 175 pound title from 160.......

Nelson tried his look at light against Whittaker.............

Starling took on Nunn for the middle title from welter..........

List is endless.........

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Leonard wasn't a massive Welterweight nor was Duran a massive Lightweight, neither of them actually outgrew their divisions they moved up for the money and in Durans case because he got a bit lazy.

Am going to take that as black and white you've just said he was being lazy....

He cleaned out LW, went chasing WW titles and you would NOT beat Iran Barkley for the MW title if you were an out of shape/fat blown up lightweight.

Jee whiz Hammer, been on the lunchtime juice or something?

He was just that, an out of shape blown up lightweight, it's as much to Barkleys detriment that he lost, Duran was not a guy with a big frame, were it not for all the partying he could have stayed at lightweight. He didn't but he was in no way a fully fledged Welterweight let alone a Middleweight but beating the average Barkley somehow proves otherwise.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:He was just that, an out of shape blown up lightweight, it's as much to Barkleys detriment that he lost, Duran was not a guy with a big frame, were it not for all the partying he could have stayed at lightweight. He didn't but he was in no way a fully fledged Welterweight let alone a Middleweight but beating the average Barkley somehow proves otherwise.

Why would he stay at LW when he beat pretty much everyone, lost only once (and that was a defeat he avenged)?? FMJ is probably a natural LWW but fights @ WW where the big fights are....

Would love to know how you think he wasn't even a fully fledged WW. The guy was knocking out Davie Moore @ 154 and looking in pretty good shape doing so. Really think you're on the windup here...

You don't go from LW to MW just because you've got fat - don't seem to remember Duran exactly looking like a teletubby in his fights at LMW/MW.

You don't win the MW title by being a fat LW who simply couldn't be arsed to train and just party.

Give me effing strength, ffs man!

In terms of Duran vacating his Lightweight titles in 1979, it was six of one, half a dozen of the other. Leonard was emerging as a potential star at Welter and a Duran-Cervantes fight at 140 had been mooted for quite a while, too. There were lucrative options and good challenges for Duran to seek out at the higher weights. However, his biography confirms the idea that, at the same time, he was also outgrowing Lightweight and finding it a bit of a strain to make 135 by that point. Had he kept taking himself down to the Lightweight limit, it's reasonable to suggest that it may have started impacting upon his performances - but the struggles with weight didn't emerge until he'd already made a shed-load of defences, unified and closed the curtain on the De Jesus saga, so moving up was a no-brainer. However, that he leapt right up to Welter to usurp Leonard via Palomino still speaks volumes, as he could easily have stopped off at 140 for the lower-risk Cervantes.

As for the Barkley fight, Coxy - Duran was certainly a podge by professional boxing standards by that point. To be expected, given that he was a career Lightweight now operating at 160 in his late thirties. Obviously body shape isn't always the best indicator of how in-shape a fighter is, though, because Duran withstood the pace there in a punishing, meandering fight against a huge Middleweight with a decent whack who went to town on his body all night. But if you really think that Duran ever looked anything like a proper Middleweight then you're off your head! He was clearly carrying a bit of excess timber by that stage and weight, but was just canny, tough and experienced enough to get results despite that handicap.

With Duran it was always a case of whether he could be arse'd or not.

Duran was always carrying a bit of extra weight ever since he stepped up from Lightweight, the move was for the money plain and simple, were it not for his excessive lifestyle he could have made the 135lb limit for years.

Against Moore and Barkley he wasn't in great physical shape, he carried a lot of weight on his legs that he didn't need and had a rather prominent stomach.

As Others imply coxy,  if duran was a natural middle, he'd have massacred barkley not gone tooth and nail. If he's a lightweight at 26, he's a bloated middle.

Haz' point about why guys move up is valid, it's usually because they've lost at the lower weight, and sometimes because they've run out of viable opposition there... And sometimes there's just a big money fight ready to be made if they're game for it.

Hearns and duran had both lost to Leonard for example. But napoles challenged monzon, robinson challenged maxim... Spinks himself, foster, jones, nelson, chavez etc etc had all pretty much cleaned up. I say pretty much because there's usually  some unfinished business. Arguello probably knocked off the best lightweights but didn't unify all his divisions as he trotted through weight classes, but he's an all time great.

In comparison, Mayweather gets beaten up for not beating allcomers at every weight, but except his fleeting visit at light welter there wasn't much doubt who the best guy in his divisions was... And he beat hatton at welter anyway (anyone who thinks the result is any different at light welter is watching the wrong sport). He's picked his moments a bit since then and no doubt manny is a huge stain ... And quite rightly, but you can pick holes in anyone's record. Sanchez for example never fought pedrosa, and apparently he fought down to ford and cowdell's level rather than them showing up some limitations. It seems Some guys are beyond objective critique and others are open season.

Had hagler run out of viable opposition? well obelmejias and hamsho twice suggest he was scraping the barrel, but the little guys kept moving up to fill the void and leave it open to debate.

Hagler had lots of viable opposition from 81 -85 ...........Why he fought Obel and hamsho twice...

You want to watch the HBO commentary team before Hamsho 2............They are asking eachother what is the point of this fight....

I don't mind Hagler staying at middle good luck to him............I just don't like some idiot then moaning about modern fighters lacking ambition and pooing pooing fights like Mayweather-Alvarez...

When his favorite Hagler feasted on enough crap to fill the Grand canyon

The reason Hagler fought Obel and Hamsho twice was because they were mandatories, and that's the way boxing was back then, you took care of your mandatories or you got stripped. The WBA ordered Hagler to fight Obel and I think it was the WBC that ordered the second Hamsho fight.

Sure, Hagler could just have refused to fight either of them a second time but I'm guessing then that he wouldn't have been undisputed champ any longer.

Hamsho, actually earned his second shot at Hagler by beating Bobby Cyz and Wilfred Benitez. I suppose if Benitez had beaten Hamsho and fought Hagler everyone would be happier because Benitez is a better name. But that's not how it worked out. The better middleweight won and got the title shot. Hardly Hagler scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Checked to see talk of Khan and Cotto, how foolish of me

WHU_Champo_League_in_7Yrs wrote:Checked to see talk of Khan and Cotto, how foolish of me

- to be fair it was a bit like a 2 part thread...firstly khan cotto, secondly 155 for the MW...hence the way the talk has gone

Coxy001 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He's talking through his a**e...Milky !!

He's happy to see Hagler fight Obelmijas twice, Caveman lee, Hamsho twice, A lightweight, Two superwelters and welter..........

But If Mayweather beats the number 1 man at 154............He's a t**t...

You can't reason with idiots like that !!

Let's just hope McIlvanney writes an article saying he loves modern fighters.........

Boxing works when there's one champion per weight class who takes on all comers. It should always be about fighters proving they're the best - which Hagler did.

Mayweather has never managed that in the division he's spent the past God knows how many years in.

Playing devils advocate - He has cleared out the 154 div of Cotto and Alvarez. IF he fights Pacman then it's really only Margarito & PWill @ 147/54 on his resume you could probably moan about him not fighting. And lest we forget Williams was a guy no one wanted to fight.

Bit of hyperbole there Haz. There are very few guys in the last 30 years who you could say "fought everyone". Leonard didn't fight Pryor, Bowe binned the belt instead of fighting Lewis, I could go on.

Apart from PWill & Marg (assuming he fights Pacquiao which I reckon he does) then who has he not fought? And I know you'll mention Mosely in his "prime", but he'd just put a battering on Marg - If FMJ didn't fight him straight after that fight it's people like you who'd be bitching and whinging that he avoided that fight as well.

Revisionistic hyperbolic and partially devoid of much truth Haz.

Cue angry response.

My point was that Hagler proved he was "the man" at middleweight whereas Floyd hasn't ever managed that at welter. Cotto and Alvarez are solid wins but Floyd didn't pick those two to prove he was "the man". He picked them as they were the most lucrative fights available. Again, absolutely nothing wrong with that but some would have you believe Hagler was safety first and Floyd was the guy seeking to be great. As 606 arguments go it's only slightly less mad than Golovkin pretending he can't get a fight so he could keep fighting lower level opposition for smaller purses.

88Chris05 wrote:With the Hagler argument, I think it boils down as simply as this really, Haz; you're right to point out that Hagler was able to solidify himself as a truly great fighter campaigning at 160 alone and that he had no automatic obligation to go up in weight to seek out tougher challenges / bigger fights, so I see what you're saying in the sense that maybe we're setting the bar too high if we're going to have a pop at Marvin for that. But, as you yourself have admitted, other fighters have taken those additional steps which Hagler didn't even though they didn't necessarily have to, either.

Defend Hagler's right to stay put at 160 by all means, but don't get tetchy when people suggest that him doing so prevents him from being in the same class as certain others fighters who likewise didn't have to seek new challenges at higher weights but still did. As I said, it's a tough criticism of Marvin.....But when you're competing for a place amongst the greatest fighters of all time, the criteria will be tough at the end of the day.

I've never suggested Hagler was greater than the likes of Armstrong or Duran but which fighters are you getting at? If a fighter cleans house and then moves up to win a legitimate championship (ala Tunney or Spinks) then you have an argument (saying that, Hagler rates over Spinks for me) but fighters moving up to win ABC titles are predominately lesser feats.

Hagler was a middleweight - no more no less. He walked around at 160 - he didn't drop 20-30 pounds before a fight like today's fighters do. Jumping weight for someone like Alvarez means fighting hydrated.

hazharrison wrote:

88Chris05 wrote:With the Hagler argument, I think it boils down as simply as this really, Haz; you're right to point out that Hagler was able to solidify himself as a truly great fighter campaigning at 160 alone and that he had no automatic obligation to go up in weight to seek out tougher challenges / bigger fights, so I see what you're saying in the sense that maybe we're setting the bar too high if we're going to have a pop at Marvin for that. But, as you yourself have admitted, other fighters have taken those additional steps which Hagler didn't even though they didn't necessarily have to, either.

Defend Hagler's right to stay put at 160 by all means, but don't get tetchy when people suggest that him doing so prevents him from being in the same class as certain others fighters who likewise didn't have to seek new challenges at higher weights but still did. As I said, it's a tough criticism of Marvin.....But when you're competing for a place amongst the greatest fighters of all time, the criteria will be tough at the end of the day.

I've never suggested Hagler was greater than the likes of Armstrong or Duran but which fighters are you getting at? If a fighter cleans house and then moves up to win a legitimate championship (ala Tunney or Spinks) then you have an argument (saying that, Hagler rates over Spinks for me) but fighters moving up to win ABC titles are predominately lesser feats.

Hagler was a middleweight - no more no less. He walked around at 160 - he didn't drop 20-30 pounds before a fight like today's fighters do. Jumping weight for someone like Alvarez means fighting hydrated.

No way did he walk around at 160

Duran wasn't lazy, or fat. He was a lightweight moving up 25 pounds NATURALLY. That's what you look like putting on that much weight. Remember Marquez moving up to face Floyd at welter? Same look. Trinidad at middle? Same deal. Not fat, not lazy, just filled out. Oscar against Sturm looked like a chubby, jowelly uncle.

Now check out the likes of Jones, Mosley, Pacquiao and the Memo-affiliated Marquez.

Duran beat Leonard, Moore and Barkley and pushed Hagler to the wire because he was that great. He was an absolute bloody marvel.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Hagler had lots of viable opposition from 81 -85 ...........Why he fought Obel and hamsho twice...

You want to watch the HBO commentary team before Hamsho 2............They are asking eachother what is the point of this fight....

I don't mind Hagler staying at middle good luck to him............I just don't like some idiot then moaning about modern fighters lacking ambition and pooing pooing fights like Mayweather-Alvarez...

When his favorite Hagler feasted on enough crap to fill the Grand canyon

Mayweather vs Alvarez was a fight to decide the best light middleweight in the world (Saul had just about proven himself second best at the weight). Floyd fought Alvarez as he was his most lucrative option (he'd fight him again if he could swing it) - he'd been eyeing him for years back when carrot top was creating a buzz in Mexico.

I contend that fight wasn't anything about ambition (on Floyd's part). Had Austin Trout nicked the Alvarez verdict, do you think Floyd would have "challenged himself" against him? Not a chance - no money in it.

There's nothing wrong with a fighter taking lucrative fights and escaping the sport with all their marbles but lets not pretend it isn't just that.

The win over Alvarez established Floyd as the best 154 pounder - something he's shown no inclination to defend. It was a win over a good, popular young fighter five pounds over his usual weight. Solid win but he'd have better served (legacy-wise) trying to dominate 147.

None of Haglers fights were about ambition, he didn't fight Duran, Leonard or Hearns to prove himself, he fought them to earn himself a tidy sum, every single boxer does it and will continue to do it.

Atila wrote:The reason Hagler fought Obel and Hamsho twice was because they were mandatories, and that's the way boxing was back then, you took care of your mandatories or you got stripped. The WBA ordered Hagler to fight Obel and I think it was the WBC that ordered the second Hamsho fight.

Sure, Hagler could just have refused to fight either of them a second time but I'm guessing then that he wouldn't have been undisputed champ any longer.

Hamsho, actually earned his second shot at Hagler by beating Bobby Cyz and Wilfred Benitez. I suppose if Benitez had beaten Hamsho and fought Hagler everyone would be happier because Benitez is a better name. But that's not how it worked out. The better middleweight won and got the title shot. Hardly Hagler scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Obelmejias wasn't a great challenger but he was a fairly good fighter - good enough to win a world title at super middle (against one of the top ten 168 pounders since the division's inception).

Hagler spent 50 fights striving for a title shot. When he eventually won it he said: "All I want to think of is destruction. Then nobody can take from me what’s mine. The only way they’ll get the title from me is to kill me.”

As I've said countless times, I don't think marv was scared of anyone, but to suggest he wasn't chasing the dollar himself is the mad argument haz, he  talked about it himself. Sure he wanted respect and greatness but he wanted dollars. He had a huge chip at the money Leonard was earning. Ironically he traded his insistance on 15 round fights for the lions share of the purse against Leonard. He got the dollars but not the W.

Atila is right about the mandatories, being unified meant regular spats between the WBA and WBC. The petronelli's and hagler kept saying they wouldn't be dictated to but somehow these fights still happened. It kicked off with the scypion fight, another mandatory... And an argument where hagler insisted on 15 rounds meant that neither the WBA or the WBC sanctioned it.  So team hagler were prepared to say we're bigger than the belts. He didn't get stripped, they both sanctioned the duran fight. Money talks. He didn't put his foot down with hamsho 2 though.

Re Obelmejias, his manager clearly had some handy photos of someone high up in the WBC, and hamsho a tough face first slugger withno discernible  talent whatsoever... except to absorb punishment, get guys at the right time and get dodgy decisions... did luck out completely to get benitez the day his fragile grasp on boxing greatness deserted him for good. As I said, hagler had told the WBA and WBC to shove it before but didn't this time.

Hagler to his credit didn't really want to fight these guys twice, maybe because he'd proved his point and there was no huge bucks involved... But he still did... While he tried to secure the big money fights in between against the glamour boys from the weights below. 

The middle weight division sucked, the media kept lining up big names from  below to fight him. He was lining up curry after the Mugabi fight.

The argument is, how is this any different to what happens today? It just happened that the media friendly fighters were all smaller than hagler. Had hagler been a welter champion, and Leonard, duran and hearns been middleweights, would marv have stuck at welter fighting for peanuts because he was old school and loved the belt? Of course he wouldn't. 

Spinks was high risk average reward, the guys hagler  fought were lower risk and in some cases huge reward. That's not a criticism it's entirely circumstantial. He did just what floyd would have done in the same circumstances, but floyd and others had to look up in weight for their pay cheques.

I've never suggested Hagler wasn't fighting for money - of course all fighters fight for money. As you've highlighted yourself: Hagler had no autonomy to drop belts or take over the weight matches. It had taken him that long to get a championship shot he was petrified of being frozen out again.

Hagler didn't stay at middleweight as it was the more lucrative option - he didn't know Leonard, Duran and Hearns would move up and challenge him. If he was cash orientated he'd have accepted Leonard's offer to fight him at 154.

His prerogative was to become a great champion and rule with an iron fist. He didn't avoid Hearns when Tommy moved up - a man who virtually blinded Leonard and decapitated the great Duran - he beat the living daylights out of him. That's great.

Floyd has had more autonomy over his career than any fighter in history and yet chose not to face his biggest rival in his own weight division.

Two completely different mindsets. I find it unbelievable that you'd try to mitigate Floyd's carefully plotted career path and compare that approach to Hagler's!

Hagler fought Leonard, Hearns and Duran - Mayweather wouldnt have. How long has Pacquiao been floating about in the same division having moved up from a lower weight? These guys would have chased Mayweather out of whatever division they found him in.

Haz, your comments are selective reading, selective arguments. Personally, I can't stand floyd, since he's got to welter he's been picky in his timing of opponents, and the manny fight not happening is a stain. I said it earlier, I've repeated it for your benefit. However, He's fighting guys generally who have size advantages over him on fight night. Hagler didn't have to.


You're right to pick me up on the last comment, About other fighters doing the same in the same circumstances. I intended to make a generalisation about comparable other great fighters but obviously floyd has manny against him in that regard and was a poor example.


However, As I pointed out, hagler did tell the belt holders to shove it in the scypion fight. The power balance shifted then, just like it did over time for floyd, then he takes hamsho 2 as a mandatory in a fight no one wanted to see. He actually got stripped anyway for insisting on 15 rounds again, and then they let him off a month later if he promised not to do it again. Imagine if floyd came out and said I'm not being dictated to by the belt  holders anymore, told them to shove it once... and then two fights later fought gatti for the second time because the WBC asked him to. You'd murder him for it. But it's ok for marv.

Who knows what floyd's resume looks like if he stayed at super feather, when he used to stop guys regularly... guys the same size as him...and before his hands went. Did he miss anyone of real note there?  Did he take the easy option with Castillo at lightweight, was hatton not unbeaten?

As for hagler Hearns. Barkley must be great too then for being brave enough to fight tommy and good enough to spark him... If that's the criteria. Hagler first signed to fight hearns in 82  before tommy had even fought at light middle and after he'd been stopped by Leonard. When the fight did happen he had 5 million reasons to do so. Great fight great performance great win. It was an even money fight though... and then only because of hearns duran. You can choke his chicken for taking the fight, but if you didn't like him, you'd be saying he was taking Leonard's sloppy seconds.

You're like a love struck teenager when you write about hagler, you can't accept any critique of him. Feel free to insert a rebuttal with a quote from hagler sounding like Mr T stating how mean and tough he was.

Hagler was paranoid that everyone was out to get him, used the bitterness to fuel him. He gave lots of seek and destroy soundbites when he started his reign. Proper blue collar anti establishment stuff. By the end of it he was part of that establishment, wearing his 'war' baseball cap, but chasing big paydays and was happy that a production line of smaller men kept cropping up to provide them. I haven't slated him for his career choices at all, he did what most guys in his position would have done... he certainly didnt duck anyone, it wasn;t his fault his division sucked, and I certainly haven't questioned him as a fighter. I hold him in the absolute highest regard, a genuine great and from 80-85 he was a beast, barring a strangely subdued performance, being out manouvred by duran.

A love struck teenager? Why do you feel the need to post stuff like that?

Hagler was caught up in a ridiculous situation whereby one organisation insisted he fight 12 rounds and another mandated 15. He was stripped after the Hamsho fight so I'm not sure your Gatt-Floyd comparison stands.

You keep saying: if Floyd had done this, or if Hagler was around today. The fact is Floyd didn't stay at super featherweight. Hagler isn't around today. Hagler crafted one of the finest championship runs in history. Floyd hasn't ever dominated at welterweight.

The Hearns that fought Barkley wasn't quite as intimidating a proposition as the version who faced Hagler. Roldan had come within a whisker of stopping him one fight prior. Hearns looked like God himself against Duran and Hutchings. But yeah, kudos to Barkley - Hearns nearly punched a hole through him before he hit that home run.

So to summarise: Hagler ducked no-one. The Hearns fight was a great performance and a great win but he benefited from lower weight superstars coming up in weight to fight him? I don't think anyone has ever contended otherwise.

I'm not sure why you're being so mardy as I think we agree on everything.

He loves Leonard the smarmy Kumquat.

He doesn't see it Milky and he never will...

Hagler loses to a three year out welter and that's ok..at 32..

May beats Maidana at 37 and this knob writes an article saying this proves he's not elite material..

He's beyond help !!!

Yeah, that all-time great Marcos Maidana.....

Hagler lost a highly contentious decision to one of the greatest fighters who ever lived in one of the most miraculous performances in boxing history.

Exactly the same.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He doesn't see it Milky and he never will...

Hagler loses to a three year out welter and that's ok..at 32..

May beats Maidana at 37 and this knob writes an article saying this proves he's not elite material..

He's beyond help !!!

I see where spring got his inspiration

No offence intended haz.

I don't think we do agree on everything, I think hagler called out the smaller guys... Who were more than willing, but turned a deaf ear to spinks/braxton doing the same. I don't blame him, they weren't ducks, it didn't detract from his reign, but when you are assessing the all time greats, some did take those challenges for whatever reasons and get extra credit for it in my book. 

I think we agree on how great a fighter he was, so lets leave it on that note.

ShahenshahG wrote:He loves Leonard the smarmy Kumquat.

You calling me a smarmy kumquat?

milkyboy wrote:

ShahenshahG wrote:He loves Leonard the smarmy Kumquat.

You calling me a smarmy kumquat?

Ha. Possibly and probably but initially it was aimed at Leonard. Though I do note your plea for attention and accuse you of being a pompous Tinkywinky

ShahenshahG wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:He doesn't see it Milky and he never will...

Hagler loses to a three year out welter and that's ok..at 32..

May beats Maidana at 37 and this knob writes an article saying this proves he's not elite material..

He's beyond help !!!

I see where spring got his inspiration

Good for you..

Onwards...