Who ranks higher all-time: Michael Spinks or Marvin Hagler?

[Thread Stealer]

Just a random comparison I meant to do earlier, then another thread I was on reminded me to do it.

[WhataRock]

Probably Marvin...Id have him a few spots over Spinks.

[The Funny Man 7]

For my money Hagler's reign at middleweight was much better than Spinks' at light heavyweight, and Spinks' wins over Holmes (the second win being very suspect) are balanced out by his loss to Tyson. That Tyson loss really hurts his legacy.

[smitty_son408]

Backlash from the General I see:D. I say Hagler rates higher P4P. Stronger resume, more depth, superior or at the very least even skill level (Spinks was one hell of a fighter though). Hagler's ability to switch hit, play the boxer-puncher role dominating with the right hand and immediately switching to kill mode at the very hint of weaknesses impresses me much more. IMO Hagler was sharper at putting combinations together also.

[WhataRock]

The Tyson loss is meaningless for me..if anything I give Spinks props for it. Because we have yet to see a middle-lightheavy do anything as ballsy as that since. He was clearly past it for that fight.

Roy had a chance to take on Lennox but priced himself out on purpose. Toney had a shot but roided himself out of contention.

It doesnt count against him in my book...no more then the close points losses that Hagler had before his prime.

[Sweet Pea]

For my money Hagler's reign at middleweight was much better than Spinks' at light heavyweight, and Spinks' wins over Holmes (the second win being very suspect) are balanced out by his loss to Tyson. That Tyson loss really hurts his legacy.I don't think it really hurts him at all if you know the circumstances and what he accomplished prior.

[BENNY BLANCO]

I feel the Tyson loss hurts Spinks, not because he lost within one round but because he did'nt even try to put up a fight and just quit in my humble opinion.

[KOTF]

I don't even factor Spinks' loss to Tyson anyway when I rate him since he wasn't supposed to beat Larry Holmes or any elite HW for that matter he's one of the best LHW's of all-time, in my top 5 LHW list

[the cobra]

Probably Hagler, but I would have them right next to each other.

[redrooster]

p4p I have Mike far below Marvin but for the decade he is second only to Marvin.

Mike failed miserably in his only big fight.

[redrooster]

by the way, did anyone catch the interview with Holmes on the Spinks Tyson fight? He was asked who would win it. Larry chose Iron Mike (as did I). They asked him "by knockout?" and larry responded with "yes, by knockout"

[essexboy]

Hagler by a fair amount

[MRBILL]

This is a very tuff call............... Hagler is my top-dog at 160, and a definite all-time Middleweight champion, while Mikey Spinks is certainly a top-3 all-time 175 pounder and former great Light-Heavy......... It's hard to call it, but I give the nod to Spinks by a cunt hair.........
:bbb:admin

SR.BILL

[mr. magoo]

I'm one of the minority here, but I picked Spinks by a narrow margin - though I can fully respect the majorities pick for Hagler.

Spinks took the gold in the olympics. Upon turning pro, he proceded to dominate a very competitive light heavyweight division and did so with a rather small number fights under his belt. He vacated the weight class without a single loss or even a knockdown to ascend to the heavyweight ranks and win the lineal heavyweight crown. The only loss of his career came well past his best against a prime wrecking machine who was heavily favored to beat him.

While I have no problem with Hagler's resume, it is a reasonable observation to make that the majority of his most notable fights came against Roberto Duran, Thomas Hearns and Sugar Ray Leonard - all of whom were rising in weight to meet him. Of those three, one was past his prime and fought him to a controversial decision. The second man battled him life and death for the brief period that it lasted, and the third was returning to the ring after a 3 year layoff and fighting for the first time ever at 160 lbs, yet defeated him.

Once again, this is no easy pick, but for the reasons listed above and perhaps a few others that I can think of, Spinks has earned my vote by a matter of inches.

[My2Sense]

Mike failed miserably in his only big fight.

Sure, if you've somehow magically found a way to combine his fights with Tyson, Mustafa, Qawi, and Holmes(both of them) into a single fight... :roll:

[DRmullen2]

tuff one. thing on spinks guys he went up in weight hagler never did. rate em hagler at 160 and spinks at 175 only or who wins hagler vs spinks with the great marvin moving up in weight. i like hagler as a fan more.

[asero]

easily the 5 yr p4p king

[Stevie G]

Hagler,fractionally. Like most of us,though,I rate them pretty close together.

[Mr Butt]

hagler

[ChrisPontius]

I'm one of the minority here, but I picked Spinks by a narrow margin - though I can fully respect the majorities pick for Hagler.

Spinks took the gold in the olympics. Upon turning pro, he proceded to dominate a very competitive light heavyweight division and did so with a rather small number fights under his belt. He vacated the weight class without a single loss or even a knockdown to ascend to the heavyweight ranks and win the lineal heavyweight crown. The only loss of his career came well past his best against a prime wrecking machine who was heavily favored to beat him.

While I have no problem with Hagler's resume, it is a reasonable observation to make that the majority of his most notable fights came against Roberto Duran, Thomas Hearns and Sugar Ray Leonard - all of whom were rising in weight to meet him. Of those three, one was past his prime and fought him to a controversial decision. The second man battled him life and death for the brief period that it lasted, and the third was returning to the ring after a 3 year layoff and fighting for the first time ever at 160 lbs, yet defeated him.

Once again, this is no easy pick, but for the reasons listed above and perhaps a few others that I can think of, Spinks has earned my vote by a matter of inches.

I voted for Spinks as well. He was dominant in his own weight class, and went up to challenge and beat the champion 40 lbs over his natural weight. Some may say Holmes was old, and he was, but at the same time, he was undefeated with 48-0 and had one of the longest reigns in heavyweight history. His knockout loss to Tyson does not bring him down very far, in my opinion. It would be like Hagler fighting a peak CW Holyfield after 2 years of inactivity at the end of his career.

[mr. magoo]

I voted for Spinks as well. He was dominant in his own weight class, and went up to challenge and beat the champion 40 lbs over his natural weight. Some may say Holmes was old, and he was, but at the same time, he was undefeated with 48-0 and had one of the longest reigns in heavyweight history. His knockout loss to Tyson does not bring him down very far, in my opinion. It would be like Hagler fighting a peak CW Holyfield after 2 years of inactivity at the end of his career.


Yeah, Hagler probably has greater name recognition by virtue of his membership in the fabulous four. But, mere association isn't enough. He needed to do better in some of those fights.

[Titan1]

Hagler by a hair. He was more dominant in his division than Spinks, who's fewer amount of fights by hurt him in comparision like this.

[My2Sense]

Surprised Hagler would be winning this, and especially by such a landslide.

I don't really see that much of an argument for Hagler. Just comparing Spinks as a LHW to Hagler at MW, I think Spinks has roughly as good a resume despite not being the champ as long. Either way, he far outdid Hagler IMO by going up and winning the "impossible" fight against Holmes. People talk about Spinks' loss to Tyson as being "embarrassing," but I think Hagler's loss to Leonard was at least as much so, maybe more, given the circumstances. Leonard was coming out of retirement following a detached retina, and fighting for the first time at 160; and Hagler was a hefty favorite to win. Most people expected Spinks to lose to Tyson, just perhaps not so quickly.

[bxrfan]

The poll sucks, people who are picking Marvin are crazy!

They see Spinks loss to Tyson, which is heavily unfair. Let's see a past it Hagler go up to Cruiserweight and see what happens when he faces Holyfield, eh? :roll:

Alan Minter< Marvin Johnson

Vito Antuofermo< Eddie Mustapha Muhammad

Roberto Duran< Dwight Muhammad Qawi

Thomas Hearns< Larry Holmes 1

John Mugabi> Larry Holmes 2

Comparing their best five wins, Spinks outdoes Hagler in all but one. One can also see from this that Spinks best wins were against people at or above his weight class. Three out of five of Hagler's opponents came from below his weight class.

Spinks loss to Tyson and Hagler's loss to Leonard were both equally embarrising, but I'd rather be a former light heavy understandably get knocked out by the most ferocious heavyweight of his time than get outboxed and lose a disputed split decision against a former welterweight fighting for the first time at 160 and the second time in five years. It must be said that both were past it at this stage, but still, one was the favorite (Hagler), and one was the underdog (Spinks).

[ironchamp]

For my money Hagler's reign at middleweight was much better than Spinks' at light heavyweight, and Spinks' wins over Holmes (the second win being very suspect) are balanced out by his loss to Tyson. That Tyson loss really hurts his legacy.

Considering who Mike Tyson was at that particular time I find it hard to fault Spinks for losing. But he reigned supreme in a deep LHW division and rose up above the ranks after Marvin refused to come up in weight to face him he took on another challenge, the undefeated HW Champion Larry Holmes.

Some could argue that Hagler should be faulted for losing to what could be considered a blown up welter in Leonard, who was inactive for 5 years prior to thier meeting. While SRL was great and therefore made it a very competitive match (whether or not you gave him the nod) so was Tyson.

Bottom line, In thier respective divisions, Marvin ranks higher amongst his peers. But his HW reign contained a very talented bunch and his HW stint in beating Holmes makes a big difference and therefore I give him the nod.

[Bad_Intentions]

Marvin.

[My2Sense]

The poll sucks, people who are picking Marvin are crazy!

They see Spinks loss to Tyson, which is heavily unfair. Let's see a past it Hagler go up to Cruiserweight and see what happens when he faces Holyfield, eh? :roll:

Alan Minter< Marvin Johnson

Vito Antuofermo< Eddie Mustapha Muhammad

Roberto Duran< Dwight Muhammad Qawi

Thomas Hearns< Larry Holmes 1

John Mugabi> Larry Holmes 2

Comparing their best five wins, Spinks outdoes Hagler in all but one. One can also see from this that Spinks best wins were against people at or above his weight class. Three out of five of Hagler's opponents came from below his weight class.

Spinks loss to Tyson and Hagler's loss to Leonard were both equally embarrising, but I'd rather be a former light heavy understandably get knocked out by the most ferocious heavyweight of his time than get outboxed and lose a disputed split decision against a former welterweight fighting for the first time at 160 and the second time in five years. It must be said that both were past it at this stage, but still, one was the favorite (Hagler), and one was the underdog (Spinks).

Some good points here.

[mr. magoo]

I will reiterate the fact that I voted for Michael Spinks, but in all fairness its not unreasonable to pick Hagler either. Both men were all time greats with their own unique acheivments. I think Hagler's career had more Charisma primarily due to his excited style as a puncher combined with his association to the fab four. Spinks on the otherhand had accomplishments that slightly eclipse Hagler's but were somewhat quiet in a way.

[Cheese]

I feel sorry for Marvin Hagler. He was a great boxer but he is so underrated.

[bxrfan]

I feel sorry for Marvin Hagler. He was a great boxer but he is so underrated.
. . . . :lol::rofl:lol:

Haven't been on these boards for very long have ya? :p

[RNONV]

Hagler after alot of thought. But two of my favs alltime.