Hagler-Robinson

[JLP 6]

We all know these guys stlyes well. Hagler can brawl or box from the southpaw or orthodox position. I wonder how Robinson deals with it. Robinson can be hit by the jab, and Hagler has a strong jab. If Hagler can keep a jab on Robinson to get in and bang him to the body...

Hagler isn't likely to run out of gas in 15 not matter the pace. At 160 Robinson would have to deal with a fighter who took as good a punch as Lamotta, punched harder than Fulmer, and was Basilio tough. Robinson can handle it, but it is as tough a match-up for him as it is for Hag. When Robinson is greatly pressured he tends to be content to pick his shots one at a time untill and oppurtunity come open for combinations. Rounds like that are the one he tends to lose. I scored all the rounds that looked like this for Lamotta in the last bout. You cna see that he cannot let this happen to him against Hagler.


The battle will be won in the trenches. Robinson will not be able to hold Hagler of if Hagler feels the fight slipping on points. Robinson has better firepower but Hagler is the better inside fighter.

I see this fight ending in a few ways.

1.Robinson finding the range with the straight hand and coming back with a left hook the could posibly end the fight.

2. Hagler putting non-stop pressure on Ray until the bell and winning a close one.

3. Robinson winning due to stopage and cuts. Or just griding out and tough point decision with a knock down over Hagler.

I think Robinson has to at least drop Hagler to beat him. I don't think he can fight going backwards against a fighter as agressive, strong, and tough as Halger and win. If not Hagler mayl finish the fight stronger because of his conditioning and win because of his agressiveness

[blv30]

I think Hagler ekes out a close decision, but it could go the other way if he's not on gameplan.

[DEEAGLE]

If you think about the history of both men you're left with the thought how can you separate 2 of the best fighters the division ever saw. I'm not sure you can. Although Sugar is the best P4P fighter I.M.O, Hagler is the most PURE 160lber I've ever seen. In every category both men are special. Toss a coin because whoever you figure in this fight you're going to see an all time classic.

[walsh b]

Ray Robinson at his best at middle is just too fast with hands and feet for Marvin, if Leonard could make Marvin look slow and amateurish, I don't see why Roinson could not. He was after all was better by far at Middle than Leonard

[TheSentinel]

I don't think it's fair to compare Hagler in his last fight when speculating about the outcome. We assume it's both men at the height of their powers. You can always take a man at his worst in these matchups in showing how he would lose. I mean, Roberto Duran quit against Pat Lawlor!!!

[Steve McV]

Guys, Robinson was the greatest welter ever, and probably the greatest P4P. But at middle, he was not invincible, especially after his two years away from the ring. Now, before that, I'd say Sugar Ray rates no worse than a 50-50 chance against any middle in history. But as was pointed out, Hagler could both box and slug.

Pound for pound, I'd take Robinson over Hagler. At welter, he wins the all time title. But at 160? Robinson in a split decision. Or Hagler by TKO in the 13th, both men's faces bleeding and distorted. Take your pick.

[SigniferSanctusMichael]

Do you think Hagler's that much better than LaMotta?

[SigniferSanctusMichael]

Not to belittle Hagler, but Robinson had superior handspeed, footspeed, one punch ko power, experience, faced a far greater number of outstanding fighters, and had at least as solid a chin. I can't really see how Hagler could be anything other than an underdog against Robinson in his prime and in shape.

[walsh b]

I just think that Marvin has no real effective advantage, was he faster, was he fitter, tougher, better on his feet, had he a better chin, was he busier....I say NO to all of those. Robinnson has too much of everything and this gives him a comfortable UD......

[Ronald Lipton]

Lord have mercy am I getting old.


There is nothing Marvin could do to hurt Ray, or outpoint him.
Absolutely nothing. Ray Robinson in my opinion is sooooo far suprior in all categories than Marvin Hagler.

His ring savy, hand speed, both hands punching power would befuddle lefty Marvin much much worse than "Sugar" Ray Leonard did. He would rain on him, counter him, getting off first without being shook with any counters.

These matchups are on the best night either had, in their best shape, nothing less. We don't pick Marvin on a night he chased Ray Leonard ineffectively nor do we pick Walker Smith on the night Tiger Jones outpointed him.

We pick the best nights they had.

Just as a PS. Fullmer hit a lot harder and was much stronger than many fans today remember.

I respect the admiration for Marvin and to me he was absolutely Marvelous. Yet to me he always lacked the big punch with either hand, and the great hand speed and aggressiveness that would have elevated him to a different level.

That being said, his defenses, his ability to puzzle solve, his chin, his pride and determination make him an all time great to me.

It is just that Robinson is Robinson and time does not dilute his memory one iota with me, with the total absence of rose tinted glasses.

[Steve McV]

" Do you think Hagler's that much better than LaMotta?"

Yes.

The only thing LaMotta had over Hagler was toughness, and it isn't like the Marvelous One wasn't tough, its just that when God made LaMotta, all he had on hand for construction material were oak trees, some steel I-beams and a few whale bones, so...

When compared to LaMotta, Hagler had the greater skill and by far the greater hitting power.

Now, as a caveat, let me add that I was born in 1956 and thus didn't see LaMotta or Robinson in person, OK? I'm judging from what I've seen in fight films and what I've read, so my ideas are kind of second hand. One can get a pretty good idea about a fighter from films, but it's just not the same as seeing him in person. Especially if you've been around the fight game and have seen the great ones in gyms. I only fought in six amature bouts, so I can't claim to be an expert.

However, based on what I've seen on film, and from the remarks of my dad and grandad (who between them saw scores of great fighters in person, clear back to Sam Langford) I will say this; Sugar Ray's punching power was better than average. However, Hagler's striking power was greater. I don't think Hagler hit as hard as Graziano, for example, but I think he certainly had enough power that anybody in the ring with him was in a "clear and present danger" of a one punch, or one combination, knockout.

To an extent that's true of any fighter, and of course most of Hagler's stoppages were TKO's rather than ten counts. Robinson had one punch power (the "perfect punch" comes to mind) but I just don't see him hitting as hard as often as Hagler did. Robinson was a boxer with decent power. Hagler had considerable skill as a boxer, not as good as Sugar Ray in skill (but then, who was? Damn few!) but had more punching power.

And I repeat; I think, at welter, Robinson was the great P4P figher ever. There's a few others to challenge for that title in my mind: Ali, Burley, Duran at lightweight, to name a few... but until I see or read some convincing evidence to the contrary, the Sugar Man was Number 1 overall, and one of the greatest middleweights ever.

But when it comes to the middles, Hagler was also one of the greatest ever.

The Robinson who fought at welterweight vs. Hagler? Sugar Ray takes it. The middleweight Robinson before his retirement, vs. Marvelous Marvin? Toss up. The older Robinson, after his retirement? Hagler wins.

[walsh b]

I don't think anyone says Hagler couldn't punch, but he didn't have one punch KO power, he did however have a very damaging punch, but I think he'd really have to nail Ray with 3-4 consecutive to really trouble him and this just aint' gonna happen. Robinson was the more complete fighter. Marvin when up against a slick fast mover with a decent chin looked amateurish. Leonard proved this, so did Duran...both are not as complete as Robinson. Robinson would not have had to move as much as Leonard did to earn victory because Robinson was a stronger and better middle than Leonard. Ray Robinson could go toe to toe with Marvin and hold his own, beating him to the punch more than necessary. And if Robinson found that Marvin was too dangerous on the inside he could always revert back to his dancing and outboxing

[TheSentinel]

Hagler would beat Lamotta almost as easily as he beat Hamsho- without stopping him.

[JLP 6]

Stop bringing up the last bout of Haglers career. Leonard ran the entire fight, and only fought when his back was pressed against the wall. It was not like Leonard dominated Hagler or even beat him convincingly. Most people feel Hagler won. If it went 15 Hagler wins clearly.

The reality is that Hagler is a fighter with more skill than Robinson. Duran too. Hagler can fight inside and outside, right or lefty. Hagler has good power and speed. He cuts the ring off great and has a great jab.

Robinson can be hit and dropped. Hagler can be hit but not dropped. Advantage Hagler. Hagler could hang with Robinson.

[Roberto Aqui]

Hagler could easily hang with Robinson as a middleweight. Like someone pointed out, Robinson was beatable at this weight, and I'd pick Hagler in 2 of 3, all decisions, but I would not rule out Hagler getting to Robby for a stoppage just because they would be tough fights and Hagler liked to take it away from judges.

Robinson might well stand his best chance as a welter after he got his feet under him. His youth and quickness would serve him better and with his overall boxing skills I'd make him a pickem against the prime middleweight Hagler. The reasoning being Hagler had a fatal flaw in that he liked to box against boxers unless they piss him off like Hearns did. Robinson as a welter is the wrong guy to try to outbox and could probably weather Hagler's closing rush.

[walsh b]

What did Marvin do better than Robinson???, Nothing in my opinion and he's second best in three key areas, speed of hand, speed of foot and adaptability.....Hagler cannot beat Robinson if he can't beat Leonard or looks average V Duran. Robinson was more a natural Middle than Leonard and as much as I think Leonard was brilliant, he's still a notch or two below Robinson....Another distinct advantage Robinson has is his ability to throw 'punches in bunches' with power, enough to earn Hagler's respect anyway

[walsh b]

BTW, Hagler could hang with anybody at Middle, that's where his greatness lies, his chin and strenghth, that is also where it ends if he's up against Robinson. The real question is whether or not Robinson can hang with Hagler, he definitely can I say. Robinson has the clear advantage in all other areas apart from Chin and strength.......

[JLP 6]

Hagler has the stlye to offset Robinson's. Robinson has the speed. But he had speed over Basilio and Fulmer too. He had power over those guys as well. It didn't matter. They had the stlye to beat him at middleweight. Jake beat him in his perfect prime with equal skill of those two.

Jake did not have speed, power, or skill over Robinson, but he clearly was in Robinson's class. Hagler is a class above all those guys except Robinson, and can only be behind Monzon, Greb, and Robinson on the middleweight list.

Hagler brings a stlye that in his prime, not when he faced Leonard, that would be ever so hard to figure out. Robinson would have trouble with Hagler's jab from the southpaw stance. He would also find it difficult to stop Hagler from getting close to him.

Hagler had solid defense. He was adept at slipping punching and parrying shots as he came inside. Robinson has never faced a man that possessed all of the skills combined with fierceness that Hagler could employ if needed. Robbie would have his hands full.

[SigniferSanctusMichael]

Robinson faced a prime Gavilan at Welter and beat him twice. Also, he did not have a power advantage over Fullmer - have you seen the Fullmer fights?
Yes, LaMotta beat Robinson - once - and lost to him five times. LaMotta also beat Bob Satterfield - but no doubt Hagler would have beaten Satterfield as convincingly as he fiercely and skilfully demolished Roberto Duran.
I don't mean to be rude, but isn't there just a wee bit of exaggeration going on here?
Finally, why do some of our correspondents insist on comparing Hagler only with late Robinson? Before he turned twenty-six Robbie had already beaten LaMotta four times.

[JLP 6]

Robinson was not 26 when he fought at middleweight. Most people consider all of the 5 fights before 1951 very close. Mayweather-Castillo close. Most people believe that Jake actually won two of the first 5. Maybe three. there had to be some kind of reason why they fought some many times.

Jake beat more than Robinson. He beat Holman Williams, Cerdan, and Zivic. The Gavilan bouts were considered very close affairs.

Why do guys always bring up the Leonard bout? Wasn't Hagler a old champion then. I never hear about the Briscoe bout where hagler beat the brakes off Bennie by sticking and moving just like Robinson fought. Hagler was a great boxer, not just a slugger.

Hagler could box effectively from orthodox or southpaw. He hit hard, took shot like Lamotta, and he had good defense. Tht is not an exaggeration. Robinson not having weaknesses that hagler could expoit is an false idea and exageration of Robinson's greatness.

[TheSentinel]

You know, NO ONE came remotely close to ever really rocking Hagler. This fact cannot be emphasized enough. I feel his chin was even a cut above Monzon's. Also, MMM had freakishly long arms. Even though he was 5:9, he had the reach of at least a 6:00 fighter. Please, don't talk like the Duran fight was life or death- only corrupt judges could have Hagler trailing after 13. Fortunately, Hagler finished so strong that the judges could not give Duran a truly odorous verdict. How many guys had his palette of abilities? Concrete jaw, counterpunching skills, ability to switch-hit effectively, substantial power, and dogged determination. At his best, Hagler gives any fighter in history his weight all or more than they could handle.

[walsh b]

Sentinel, I don't think anyone is saying he wasn't great and on his best night (V Minter) for example he was a real force, but did he have enough to beat the greasy fast, tough, fit and versatile Robinson???. Ray was a cut above in almost all areas. Speed and movement are what gives Ray the edge. Marvin needs Ray to carry the fight to stand a chance of victory. If Robinson goes toe to toe Hagler has a chance to win, but so too does Robinson. Ray throws far too many shots for Hagler to simply ignore and walk through. Shots with venom behind them, faster and harder than Leonard's shots or Hearns. Plus Ray's chin sees him taking Marvin's best. Robinsons ability to be effective on the backfoot will also play a huge factor, Hagler needs to be going forward to win, Ray can win in any scenario.....

[SigniferSanctusMichael]

Three of the fights Robinson won against LaMotta before 1951 were unanimous decisions. In all of them Jake fought at Middleweight.

[JLP 6]

Sugar Ray Robinson cannot beat Marvin Hagler inside. Hagler is much stronger than Ray and he throws better combinations inside.

Ray will be on his backfoot the entire fight. Ray will not be able to stand in front of Hagler and just trade punches. Hearns could not do it and Hearns hit just a hard as Robinson.

Hagler is better conditioned for a tough battle than Robinson at middleweight and could apply pressure that would make Ray work harder than he ever had in a 15 round bout. Jake made him work hard. Hagler with better boxing skill and stronger punch would make life hell.

I watched Ray beat on inside by the much smaller Carmen Basilio. His fight is outside and he would not think of making war with Hagler. The only reason Duran fought below even terms inside with Hagler and did not get KO'ed is that Duran is possibly the best infighter of all-time and top 5 in defense.

Leonard was running all around the ring to avoid trading with Hagler. Running. that last round Leonard was running away from Marvin. That was the worst performance of Haglers career, but that was one of the top performances of Leonard. Hagler probably deserved the nod anyway.

[SigniferSanctusMichael]

Robinson fought Basilio when he was 37 and 38 years old: you keep objecting to people bringing up the Leonard fight (which I haven't done) because it was so late in Hagler's career, but you don't seem too bothered about adopting the same tactics when discussing Sugar Ray. Who was Hagler beating when he was 38?

"Ray will not be able to stand in front of Hagler and just trade punches. Hearns could not do it and Hearns hit just a hard as Robinson."
- I might just as easily say, "Marvin will not be able to stand in front of Robinson and just trade punches. Graziano could not do it and he hit harder than Hagler." The reason Hearns could not stand and trade with Hagler had nothing to do with Hearns' power (anymore than power was connected to Graziano's defeat), but rather with his style, mobility, defence, chin etc. Are you comparing Hearns with Robinson in these categories?

I am also not convinced with your explanation of Hagler's performance against Duran - I would put it down to an underpar performance on Hagler's part. But if you really think that there are good reasons for Duran's success against an on form Hagler, I'd say that's a very good argument against his chances vs Robinson.

[JLP 6]

Sorry I didn't reply sooner. I was at work trying to type and work. My computer is down at home. Back at work now.

Ray's career at middleweight starts at age 31. Some of his best fights at middleweight come after that age. The Basilio bouts were great fights. He lost the first one, but clearly won the rematch. Robinson in the Graziano bout was at his middleweight best. How old was he in that bout?

Graz dropped Robbie with one shot that didn't even land clean. Graz is not the fighter Hagler was, inside, outside, on his side, on your side. Still, Robinson was all over the ring, dancing, sticking and moving. Only when he hurt Graz did he come inside too finish. Everytime before that encounter as soon as Graz looked to return fire Robinson backed out.

I compared the trading power of Robinson and Hearns. You said that Robinson could trade inside with Hagler and come out on top. I do not think so I that was the my reason for it.

I think Hagler was great in that fight. I know that I am the minority in the oppinion but my reason for it is clear. Hagler beat an opponent that very hard to hit on the inside. He keep Duran at bay with the jab, and won most of the enchanges. The judges had it close, but I had it unamimous, by at least 4 rounds. Duran was the same guy who ruined Davey Moore and out fought Barkley. Barkley was the same guy who ko'ed Hearns. Duran was still a task.

Robinson can beat Hagler, but it will not be an easy fight. And he will not do it by fighting Hagler inside.

[Dragnet 69]

Marvin was a great fighter but was mechanical against Duran and Leonard which they were able to exploit. I think Sugar Ray would do the same. Robbie by clear cut dec. TIP

[Jim Kidd]

Hagler was at his best when his opponents came to him. When he was the aggressor against boxers like Leonard and Duran, much of his effectiveness seemed lost and he seemed ordinary. Much of Hagler's effectiveness was due to his accurate counterpunching against fighters who came to him.

If Robinson boxed Hagler, Hagler would be a step behind all night long. If he slugged with him, it would be a much harder night. A prime Ray Robinson beats him with any style.

A sometimes hot, sometimes not as hot version who was aging would have to box.

[JLP 6]

Good reads while the fantasy section is slow.

[sr71ko]

I am a big Hagler fan, but I also appreciate SRR. The best SRR was at 147lbs and below. That SRR was like SRL, Ali, and Hearns combined as one. SRR was a bigger puncher pound for pound compared to SRL and Ali. But at 160, SRR was good but not great. Hagler was stronger and was a harder puncher than LaMotta, Basilo, Pender, Fulmer, and others that SRR had lost to. Overall SRR would still be a nightmare for any middleweight in history because of his power and style. My only fear for Hagler was cuts. SRR was a fearsome puncher like Hearns... so the cut factor would be challenging. Hagler with his great strength, power, and underrated boxing skills. This would have been a series fights, but I still believe that Hagler would beat Robinson at least once. Hagler, Monzon, and B-Hop were the most consistent champs at 160 lbs. If Hagler had been in SRR place, he would not have won the 160 title 5 times because he would not of lost. The middleweight version of SRR was an older fighter and not quite the beast he was at 147 or below. That is why I lean towards Hagler by a 15 round decision.