Tweet
Earlier this year I read both the "Four King's" book which highlights the Leonard, Hagler, Hearns and Duran era and brilliantly describes all of the bouts that involved them, and Roberto Duran's autobiography "Hands Of Stone". Anyway, let's cut to the chase. From what I had read in those books I got the impression that the Hagler-Duran fight really wasn't anywhere near as close as the judges had it and that Marvelous Marvin should have won far more clearly. The 3 judges had Hagler winning by 1 point, 1 point and 2 points and this has been derided by many people. However I wanted to judge how close to or far from reality their cards were myself because a lot of decisions in this sport get questioned when they shouldn't be and get called things that they aren't (Like people saying Cotto-Mayweather was close and that certain fights were robberies when they weren't, which I made a thread about in which I listed several of them). I just got done watching it and I did my best to really pay close attention to Duran because I think I have a tendancy to lean towards boxers rather than fighters because I prefer that style. Anyway, I really didn't think it was close or seriously competitive at all. I scored it 9 rounds to 5 with 1 even and I really don't see how you could have it much closer than that. Maybe 1 of the rounds I gave to Hagler could've gone the other way likewise the even one but I think at least 2 of the rounds I gave to the Panamanian could've gone the other way, as well.
It's crazy to think that Hagler needed to win those last two rounds to keep the title. Incredibly, if Duran had just won 1 of them on two judges scorecards, he would've won the title and I just think that's criminal. I'm not saying the fight was easy for Hagler, because it wasn't and Roberto performed very well, but overall I just don't see how you could have it so close. Duran it seemed was really only landing right hands consistently with some body punches here and there. The champion on the other hand was landing jabs, straight lefts, right hooks, uppercuts and body punches and seemed to land the vast majority of the clean and hard punches in the fight. I guess the judges missed that, at least they had the right man winning, but the scoring was still a disgrace in my view. Unless my mind is deceiving me, the Japanese judge actually scored 6 of the rounds even which is crazy. I thought Hagler won most of his rounds clearly.
What I want to know is do you all agree with me or is there anyone who thinks that it was a seriously close bout (meaning a 4 point margin or less)? If you want to watch the fight then you can find the whole thing compressed into one file on youtube or in Simbros thread in the download section. Feedback on this issue is very much appreciated.
It's crazy to think that Hagler needed to win those last two rounds to keep the title. Incredibly, if Duran had just won 1 of them on two judges scorecards, he would've won the title and I just think that's criminal. I'm not saying the fight was easy for Hagler, because it wasn't and Roberto performed very well, but overall I just don't see how you could have it so close. Duran it seemed was really only landing right hands consistently with some body punches here and there. The champion on the other hand was landing jabs, straight lefts, right hooks, uppercuts and body punches and seemed to land the vast majority of the clean and hard punches in the fight. I guess the judges missed that, at least they had the right man winning, but the scoring was still a disgrace in my view. Unless my mind is deceiving me, the Japanese judge actually scored 6 of the rounds even which is crazy. I thought Hagler won most of his rounds clearly.
What I want to know is do you all agree with me or is there anyone who thinks that it was a seriously close bout (meaning a 4 point margin or less)? If you want to watch the fight then you can find the whole thing compressed into one file on youtube or in Simbros thread in the download section. Feedback on this issue is very much appreciated.
Comment