Originally Posted by
Stoneline
Yes in my opinion Chavez was not on Hagler's level, I believe if they were in the same weight class Hagler would have beat him. I think Chavez was hyped up from early on. His first 50 or so fights were against novices, he was awarded some dodgy decisions also. The fight against Whitaker was shocking, Whitaker outclassed him. Hagler was the type of fighter that no one could have outclassed.
Okay, we disagree then. Chavez was awesome at his weight. Simply awesome. Hagler is also among my favorites (that's why I listed him and quoted him).
You say Hagler was the type of fighter no one would have outclassed, I guess you forget how Leonard made him look silly
You see, this is where the art of thinking correctly comes into play
Hagler did lousy against an
old, retired welterweight who was 13 lb
lighter than he was, naturally at his best weight, yet Leonard (spent and retired) moved up to face Hagler
and beat him ... yet you sing the praises of Hagler
So, while you point out the fact that Chavez struggled to fine a slick Whitaker,
who was in his prime, you fail to understand
it was CHAVEZ who moved up 10 lb to face Whitaker ... at his best weight!!!
You see, you're not thinking correctly. I mean, if you don't factor in things like this, weight, etc., then how can you make accurate statements? You can't.
Chavez was 87-0, and up 10 lb over his best weight, when faced Whitaker. That isn't "hype," buddy, that is one bad mofo.
Hagler was 62-2-2 when he faced the spent, naturally 13-lb smaller Leonard, who "bulked up" to face Hagler.
Chavez cleaned out his entire division, facing everybody who was anybody, and never lost.
Hagler was awesome, and cleaned out his division, but he did lose twice (avenging them), and then let a little bitty guy bitch-slap him for 12 rounds.
Hagler never once moved up ... because he knew he would have been in BIG trouble, trying to move up and face Michael Spinks ... as Chavez moved up and blew away Rosario, etc.
So think again on your "rating system"
Hell, had Chavez stayed at Junior Lightweight, I can't even begin to imagine him EVER losing to a little bitty guy coming up 10 lb to fight him ... no way.
Originally Posted by
Stoneline
I understand we all have our favorite fighters, Hagler is one of mine, Chavez is one of yours, we are going to speak up for them lol.
Hagler is definitely one of my favorite fighters, which (again) is why I mentioned him and quoted him
But you are wrong about Chavez and not thinking correctly if you call that BEAST of a fighter (for his weight) "all hype" ...
Originally Posted by
Stoneline
Ok back on the dogs. I agree, durability is one of the best traits a dog can have without a doubt. I do like a dog that gets it done quick but they must be able to stay in there if need be too. I am not talking about a dog that if he can't get it done quick he can't win.
Gameness and durability are THE backbone of what a bulldog should be ... and, of course, if you can build on that foundation and add things like speed, brains, mouth, finish, then I like that too
Originally Posted by
Stoneline
At the end of the day no one wants to go home after hunting with a half dead dog so this is why I prefer a dog that gets the job done as quick as possible.
I understand. The flipside to that is, a dog that gets it done as quick as possible tends not to pace itself. That can be okay, if he's physically superior to his opponent. It will make him look real good.
However, dogs like this, when they face a "Hagler" (since you like him, lol), a dog that is every bit as strong and capable as it is, but who is a WALL, and CAN'T be steamrolled ... the barn-burner is NOT going to get it done early; they're just not.
And if they're not used to pacing themselves, and if they're not used to being in the trenches with an equal, this is usually why you see the "fast dog" quitting when they get in a war: they're not used to it and they don't handle it as well.
Originally Posted by
Stoneline
Just to clarify, I have nothing against dogs that get stronger as the show goes on and show their gameness in winning at the end, I love that but given a choice I would prefer to go home without having to see how game my dog is.
To each his own
I didn't say I wanted to see my dogs get banged up. I said I like it when they're just able to stay out of trouble, nullify the attack, establish control ... and just pace themselves. They pour it on when they other lets up, and then really pour it on. I don't want my dog to be a stupid punching bag "that just scratches."
That is not what Hagler did, what Chavez did, or what Ali did, was it?
Did they just sit there and "scratch" with no skills? No.
So that is not what I want in a dog, either.
I want the dog to be gamer, tougher, stronger, and relentlessly dismantle ... I never said anything about "having to prove" their gameness.
I think Hagler was game as hell ... but I never really saw him have to prove it by "coming from behind" ... he proved it by how badly he wanted to win, by relentlessly demolishing his foes.
Hope that clarifies
Jack