View Full Version : why didn't hearns demand a rematch with hagler?


simsimon
01-16-2006, 09:16 PM
while the opening bell was still ringing in round one of the hearns/hagler fight, hearns dropped a bomb on hagler that split the latter's forehead open (as can clearly be seen on the tape) and would have knocked a lesser man clean out. according to emmanuel steward, hearns broke his hand in round one (http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/w0403-di.html), and likely, i would have thought, with that early shot. if that is true, hearns must surely have believed that a rematch was in order, as he clearly had hagler hurt and stunned when the hand gave way, and would likely have emphatically finished the job there and then if only he could have continued hitting hard. hearns could have been confident that he had a good fifty percent chance of beating hagler in a rematch, and, win or lose, would have made a real shedload of money out of a second fight.

so, for me, the biggest question in the whole of sport: why did the rematch never happen?

JMCbulls
01-16-2006, 09:47 PM
welcome to boxingscene,


no matter wat happened, broken hand or not, hearns would lose.

Dempsey1238
01-16-2006, 09:57 PM
it was a good 3 rounds. But I feel Hagler would have won the rematch. I do not belive the demand was high for a return.

simsimon
01-16-2006, 10:03 PM
: I do not belive the demand was high for a return.

have you any evidence to back that claim? i just can't believe it! nobody can have considered the fight that they had to have been anything less than amazing, and that would suggest to me that there would have been a great deal of interest if a rematch had been announced.

simsimon
01-16-2006, 10:04 PM
: welcome to boxingscene

thankyou very much, it's nice to be here!

Soliloquy
01-16-2006, 10:10 PM
of course the rematch was in high demand. It was only 3 rounds and it's been considered as one of the greatest fights of all time.

Dempsey1238
01-16-2006, 11:02 PM
3 great rounds. But what else could Hearns do to Hagler but thown the kitchen sink at him??

I belive it will be other great fight, with Hagler of couse winning again. You relly belive it will draw a hugh gate like last time?/

hellfire508
01-17-2006, 12:12 AM
3 great rounds. But what else could Hearns do to Hagler but thown the kitchen sink at him??

I belive it will be other great fight, with Hagler of couse winning again. You relly belive it will draw a hugh gate like last time?/

I think it would. However I do agree, Hagler would win again.

Hey - is ESB down again for you?

Dempsey1238
01-17-2006, 12:30 AM
yeah its been down again,

They usely crash and recover once a year or so.
But this time they crash, recover for a while. and crash again.

Like I said, I just dont see how Hagler would lose the rematch. I guess it can fill out a Arena and draw a crowd like the last one. But for 3 rounds it was a thriller. but I dont think it may be as magical as fight 1.

joeboxer
01-17-2006, 12:31 AM
Tommy wanted a rematch.


Hagler was not down for it.

simsimon
01-17-2006, 01:13 AM
: But what else could Hearns do to Hagler but thown the kitchen sink at him?

this question seems to suggest that hearns gave it 100% in the first fight. he didn't, because he couldn't. he had a broken hand, he couldn't throw a decent punch. the answer to the question above is "he didn't need to throw the kitchen sink, he could instead have simply hit hagler hard, as he did only once in the first fight which was where he put hagler's senses through a food-processor."

um, i really (i swear it guys!) didn't want to get partisan, but since everybody is siding with hagler here, i can't resist putting my cards on the table. we know that hagler went looking for hearns from the moment the bell went, and almost immediately hearns countered with some seriously hurtful punches. unfortunately for hearns, they were even more hurtful to himself than they were to hagler!

in any rematch, i assume that hagler would have tried, once again, to nail hearns rather than trying to box him, or frustrate him, or whatever; that view is based on the observation i have made that hagler seemed - unbelievably - to have had some kind of inferiority complex. it was never enough for hagler to whup a guy, he always had to whup the guy playing the guy's own game. of course he was plenty good enough to do this in almost all cases. but against the very top opposition, it's an unwise conceit. sugar ray leonard boxed pretty, so when hagler fought him, he wasted half the fight trying not just to beat leonard, but trying to beat him with flashy, pretty boxing. that's why he lost. if he had come out against leonard and roughed him up from round one - just as he did, incidentally, against hearns - he would have beaten leonard's ass into oblivion. where's my proof? just look at the last half of the the fight.....

he had the same sort of "i gotta prove i can beat this guy even if i make it easy for them to box as they like to box" approach when he fought hearns. it was never going to be enough for hagler just to beat hearns. he had to prove that he could take hearns' biggest shots first. why the hell else would he deliberately walk into a punching hearns, while doing everything he could to slip away from a punching leonard? having beaten (the injured) hearns the first time in three rounds, i think hagler would have employed the same "lets trade punches" routine in a second fight.

assuming that in a rematch, hagler would once again have gone straight to war with hearns he would once again have faced the same sort of counter attack. the chances of hearns breaking his hand a second time are slim; it's much more likely that hearns would have quickly handed hagler his ass on a plate. no one - not even hagler - could brazenly walk into one of those hearns nuclear attacks and survive.

anyway, that's just my view, and it could very well be total bull**** :-P

the REAL question i have remains; not "who would have won a rematch?" but "why wasn't there a rematch?" the only answer given so far is that there was no popular interest. that i find completely unconvincing! any other reasons anyone would care to advance? boxing politics? hearns scared of hagler?

simsimon
01-17-2006, 01:22 AM
joeboxer,

i didn't see your reply before i posted. thanks for providing another answer. surely though hagler wasn't err..... scared! hagler would not have walked away from a fight with an express train! i can't believe he was scared of hearns.

fabulous
01-17-2006, 01:48 AM
I heard Hagler wasn't reluctant giving rematch but after Mugabi they considered it. But then Leonard challenged Hagler and Heanrs fight was off.




in any rematch, i assume that hagler would have tried, once again, to nail hearns rather than trying to box him, or frustrate him, or whatever; that view is based on the observation i have made that hagler seemed - unbelievably - to have had some kind of inferiority complex. it was never enough for hagler to whup a guy, he always had to whup the guy playing the guy's own game. of course he was plenty good enough to do this in almost all cases. but against the very top opposition, it's an unwise conceit.


Hagler was taken out of his came against Leonard, that's true because Leonard played mind games with Hagler and won.
Against Hearns he didn't have another opportunity. Box with Hearns meant suicide to Hagler. Hagler came out with tactical plan to go after Hearns and Hearns was stoopid to take this plan. Against Duran Hagler came out with tactical plan to box but so did Duran. Hagler just wasn't great making tactical adjustments during the fight.

But in rematch I don't see different result. hearns of course can outbox and win decision against Hagler but Hagler is too tough and has good stamina. Hearns chin and stamina will let him down against Hagler, there always will be a moment in fight where Hearns is hurt. And when Hagler senses that Hearns his hurt he will finish him. Hearns was just too vulnarable in middleweight and above.

gLobE199
01-17-2006, 12:30 PM
hearns got ktfo and thats why he didnt want no more hagler

can i get a amen

fabulous
01-18-2006, 08:51 AM
hearns got ktfo and thats why he didnt want no more hagler

can i get a amen

wrong, Hearns badly wanted the rematch. He believed that if he fights different he can beat hagler. I doubt but rematch would have lasted longer for sure.

jabsRstiff
01-18-2006, 09:08 AM
Hagler did not allow Hearns to box, period. That happens sometimes. Sometimes, the stronger man dictates what goes on in there.
If Hearns didn't fire back immediately, he would have been blown away, overwhelmed. He fired back, but was hitting one of the hardest heads,& sturdiest chins, in boxing history. This enabled Hagler to continue to walk through Hearns' punches.
Hearns could box his ass off, but that was only if he was able to keep the opp. out at the end of his punches. Hagler walked through those punches.

wmute
01-19-2006, 02:46 AM
do you guys know the story of the leg massage to hearns?

anyway I think the reason for no rematch was that hagler had 2 more fights and retired. Seriously I don't think hagler or hearns ducked anyone or even thought about ducking anyone or were even afraid of anything.

edit: I wrote sucked instead of ducked which made the sentence quite weird

Oasis_Lad
01-19-2006, 02:51 AM
hagler would have won any number of rematch's

Marvelous63
01-20-2006, 01:29 PM
while the opening bell was still ringing in round one of the hearns/hagler fight, hearns dropped a bomb on hagler that split the latter's forehead open (as can clearly be seen on the tape) and would have knocked a lesser man clean out. according to emmanuel steward, hearns broke his hand in round one (http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/boxing/w0403-di.html), and likely, i would have thought, with that early shot. if that is true, hearns must surely have believed that a rematch was in order, as he clearly had hagler hurt and stunned when the hand gave way, and would likely have emphatically finished the job there and then if only he could have continued hitting hard. hearns could have been confident that he had a good fifty percent chance of beating hagler in a rematch, and, win or lose, would have made a real shedload of money out of a second fight.

so, for me, the biggest question in the whole of sport: why did the rematch never happen?

The rematch never happend because hearns brawled with hagler and felt what it was like. He didnt want to do that again. Also, hearns gave hagler his best shot, and hagler kept on coming. That can be really to a fighter

MotorCityCobra
01-22-2006, 03:37 AM
Hearns initiated that brawl as much as Hagler did, & as someone mentioned earlier--- Emanual Steward found Hearns getting his legs massaged hours before the fight. Steward says that a massage relaxes the muscles & that he would have problems in a distant fight.

After their 1985 fight both fought in March of '86 (Hagler vs Mugabi/ Hearns vs Shuler) in what was a prelude to a rematch but Hagler ended up taking the Leonard fight instead.

After Hearns lost to Leonard in 1981 he signed to face Hagler (I believe the date was set for April 24, 1982) in Windsor, Ontario. Hearns "claimed" a broken pinky finger & had to pull out (I was glad because I felt he needed a confidence building fight before a matchup like that). Hearns stablemate Caveman Lee stepped in (after Mickey Goodwin, another Kronk boxer pulled out) & was KO'ed by Hagler in about a minute.

While Hearns had an awesome jab & great boxing skills, I think in a rematch that Hagler would have worn him down & eventually KO him.

Easy-E
01-23-2006, 06:44 PM
hagler destroyed hearns in the first fight and would have done so again
end of story

Oasis_Lad
01-23-2006, 06:45 PM
hagler destroyed hearns in the first fight and would have done so again
end of story

exactly end of

tommyhearns804
01-29-2006, 07:18 AM
Why would Hearns want a rematch?He knew he could never hurt Hagler and of the odds of him outboxing him for the distance was slim.One brutal knockout for my boy Hearns was good enough

supaduck
01-29-2006, 12:32 PM
But still, it'd be another fantastic fight im sure.

fabulous
01-29-2006, 03:58 PM
Why would Hearns want a rematch?He knew he could never hurt Hagler and of the odds of him outboxing him for the distance was slim.One brutal knockout for my boy Hearns was good enough

Hearns hurt Hagler in first round. And he broke his right hand in first round, his punches didn't have power after that.

Everybody can be knocked out but I don't think that even Hearns could do it to Hagler. Hagler besides chin had pretty good defense and if Minchillo could go to distance with Hearns then could Hagler.

Hearns chance was to box Hagler and he as sure as hell had skills and attributes to outbox Hagler.
Their second fight would have been longer, Hearns would have fought different fight. Hearns was damn arrogant after knocking out Duran in two rounds that he fought that he can knock out Hagler with 3 rounds. :)
Also many don't know that Hagler didn't have great knockout power, he was accumulative puncher and his right hand was good but left was rather average. But I think Hagler would have stopped Hearns still inside 9 rounds.
And as I said already it IS FACT that Hearns demanded rematch and he was sure that he can fight this time better.

75th
01-29-2006, 04:06 PM
Why would Hearns want a rematch?He knew he could never hurt Hagler and of the odds of him outboxing him for the distance was slim.One brutal knockout for my boy Hearns was good enough
Did you watch this fight?

Hagler was hurt in the encounter, and who knows what would've happened had he not broken his hand about midway through the first.

DaddysBoy
01-29-2006, 04:10 PM
Hearns never demanded a rematch cause he knew he would be beaten to **** once more. Hagler owned his ass.

fabulous
01-29-2006, 04:57 PM
Hearns never demanded a rematch cause he knew he would be beaten to **** once more. Hagler owned his ass.


Are you a Moron or what? :(

Hearns demanded a rematch, this is fact. STFU if you don't know about it.

simsimon
02-04-2006, 10:12 PM
fabulous,

you said:

Hearns demanded a rematch

and i'm a believer, but i wonder if you have any evidence to back this claim, such as a link, like the link i supplied in my opening post on this thread.

if a solid body of evidence could be built up - THOMAS HEARNS, YOUR FANS NEED YOU! - then all this horse**** hagler fan big talk could be refuted more easily.

hagler was surely one of the very greatest of boxers, but one oughtn't to be superstitiously idolatrous. hearns might well have beaten him a rematch, and hearns knew it. where is the evidence that hearns demanded a rematch?

sleazyfellow
02-04-2006, 10:51 PM
i only have one round of this fight on my computer :( does anyone know where to get the full thing? yeah their shoulda been a rematch considering this one was great...just like pryor/arguello

fabulous
02-06-2006, 06:41 AM
fabulous,

you said:

Hearns demanded a rematch

and i'm a believer, but i wonder if you have any evidence to back this claim, such as a link, like the link i supplied in my opening post on this thread.

if a solid body of evidence could be built up - THOMAS HEARNS, YOUR FANS NEED YOU! - then all this horse**** hagler fan big talk could be refuted more easily.

hagler was surely one of the very greatest of boxers, but one oughtn't to be superstitiously idolatrous. hearns might well have beaten him a rematch, and hearns knew it. where is the evidence that hearns demanded a rematch?


Well, Hearns fans should know more precicely. In ESB maybe JohnThomas can give you more info. I just heard that there were talks for rematch between Hearns and Hagler's camp but they were interrupted after Leonard came back and wanted to fight Hagler.

i also have seen Ring magazine alltime P4P awards show where Hearns talked about how badly he wanted to do it again and differently but it happened more than 10 years after the fight.