Leonard vs Hearns II who won

[BennyST]

I thought Hearns won it very easily. I simply cannot understand how anyone thinks Leonard won it.

You would have to have Leonard seven of the twelve rounds, which just did not happen. To have him winning it, which is just complete insanity or ignorance of boxing rules, you would have to have him not only winning seven rounds, but would have had to score the last round 10-8 or just given him eight rounds.



The fact is that Hearns won the fight. In the rounds where little happened, Hearns outboxed him, controlled the pace, fought his fight etc etc. He won it easily. No two ways about it.

[BennyST]

I scored it a draw, both were faded but both had good moments.

I felt that it was an evenly matched affair save for the two knockdowns (the first of which shouldn't have been called! Watch the slow motion.....no punch lands).....and also rounds 5 and 12 which were landslide Leonard (he may well have received 10/8 rounds from several of the judges here).

It was a good fight by two legends, I didn't feel that either deserved it!!

Yes, it does. He is hit by a big right hand, backs up, then gets grazed by a punch on the top of the head and goes down. A KD is scored when they go down because of a punch. If the punch didn't land would he have gone down? No. He was hurt because of a punch and then slightly grazed by one and went down. Perfectly legitimate KD.

You have to ask as a rule, would he have gone down without the punch? If yes, then you can score it as a slip. If he went down from being hurt or was just grazed by a punch, then it's a KD and must be scored as such.

Round five could not be scored a two point round, unless they were paid off by Leonard's people. Without a KD, you have to really dominate the whole round and do more than Leonard did. There were good punches landed and he was wobbled, but not nearly enough for a two point round. Hearns took the first half of the round, Leonard won the second half easily. If the whole round had been like the second half, then you could have scored it a two point round. Not as it was though.

[BennyST]

Just for curiosity, can those who scored it a draw...or even had Leonard winning......put their cards up? Or just tell us which rounds you scored for Leonard. I'm very curious as to which rounds you could have had him winning to have given him a draw or have him winning it.

[Sugarj]

Just for curiosity, can those who scored it a draw...or even had Leonard winning......put their cards up? Or just tell us which rounds you scored for Leonard. I'm very curious as to which rounds you could have had him winning to have given him a draw or have him winning it.

I'll give the full fight a watch tonight on video, I last scored it a draw maybe 5 years ago....and I'll put up my round by round scores. I'll be gracious enough to admit Hearns a 'just' winner if thats how the scores work out this time without any blinkers.

I've gone over the round three knockdown again and again just now. Both land simultaneous right hands, Hearns is the better blow, Ray backs up but the follow up right (at best!) grazes the back of Ray's neck. That is not a legal contact area, nor did it make much in the way of contact.

Check out the following You Tube post:

Thomas Hearns -vs- Ray Leonard II 6/12/89 part 2

Watch 3 mins 50 in with the knock down coming seven seconds later in slow motion or 3:30 from above. I'll argue to the day I die that, that knockdown should not have been called, it should have been ruled a slip.

[Silencers]

I know I had Hearns winning clearly because I remember thinking he was robbed when I watched it, I think I had it 8 to 4 in rounds. 116-110 because of the knockdowns. Leonard has even said he thought Hearns won that fight.

[BennyST]

I'll give the full fight a watch tonight on video, I last scored it a draw maybe 5 years ago....and I'll put up my round by round scores. I'll be gracious enough to admit Hearns a 'just' winner if thats how the scores work out this time without any blinkers.

I've gone over the round three knockdown again and again just now. Both land simultaneous right hands, Hearns is the better blow, Ray backs up but the follow up right (at best!) grazes the back of Ray's neck. That is not a legal contact area, nor did it make much in the way of contact.

Check out the following You Tube post:

Thomas Hearns -vs- Ray Leonard II 6/12/89 part 2

Watch 3 mins 50 in with the knock down coming seven seconds later in slow motion or 3:30 from above. I'll argue to the day I die that, that knockdown should not have been called, it should have been ruled a slip.

I've seen it many times. Yes, it was a slip....Caused by a punch. Without the punch hitting him, and it did hit him, he would not have gone down. That, in boxing rules, is a legitimate knock down.

You might argue it until you die, but Ray Leonard sure didn't argue. In fact, he didn't blink an eye nor say a single thing about it. Any fighter on earth, no matter what happens, argues if they slipped and it was called a knock down. He didn't argue because he went down due to being hurt from a punch. He was hit, hurt and then knocked down from a grazing punch. It was a knock down. Doesn't matter how weak the punch. If any punch causes the fighter to go over, it's a knock down.

You can't just not call it one because it wasn't a hard punch. It him him in the side/top of the head and because he was already hurt, he went down. There is nothing to the contrary to say it wasn't.

I do agree with you that it was as much him slipping as it was the punch. But, he was hurt from a punch and without both of those shots (the first one that hurt him badly and the second weak one) he would not have gone down. When that happens, you must rule a knock down.

[BennyST]

^^^

Troll post.

It's all in the eye of the beholder. And I'm not the only person that thinks Leonard won. One of the official judges did, too.

Unlike you though, he got paid extra for that by some dodgy character. Why do you say Leonard won cause I doubt anyone's giving you money for doing so?

[Sugarj]

I've seen it many times. Yes, it was a slip....Caused by a punch. Without the punch hitting him, and it did hit him, he would not have gone down. That, in boxing rules, is a legitimate knock down.

You might argue it until you die, but Ray Leonard sure didn't argue. In fact, he didn't blink an eye nor say a single thing about it. Any fighter on earth, no matter what happens, argues if they slipped and it was called a knock down. He didn't argue because he went down due to being hurt from a punch. He was hit, hurt and then knocked down from a grazing punch. It was a knock down. Doesn't matter how weak the punch. If any punch causes the fighter to go over, it's a knock down.

You can't just not call it one because it wasn't a hard punch. It him him in the side/top of the head and because he was already hurt, he went down. There is nothing to the contrary to say it wasn't.

I do agree with you that it was as much him slipping as it was the punch. But, he was hurt from a punch and without both of those shots (the first one that hurt him badly and the second weak one) he would not have gone down. When that happens, you must rule a knock down.

In all my years of following the sport I've seen countless slips ruled as knockdowns and plenty of knockdowns ruled as slips. Its life!

Tommy's punch grazed the back of Leonard's neck (I cant see that it hits the side or top of his head at all, he ducked under it), that is not a scoring punch. The momentum (plus the fact that Leonard was hurt from the previous right hand) sent him down. No hard feelings, its just how I see it.....and I've watched it plenty of times this morning! Leonard did not complain because he was clearly hurt from the previous right. I cant possibly change my mind on this one, we'll just have to disagree there.

I'm not truely blaming the ref for a bad call. It all happened very quickly, I might have counted for it too under the circumstances. Tommy's right was quick!

As for my 'draw' interpretation of the fight. I'll post up my round by round scores. My opinion might be different this time, who knows?

For as much as Leonard didn't dispute the knockdown, Tommy didn't dispute the draw. He didn't look disappointed when the draw was announced.....and he seemed pretty accepting in the post fight interview.

[Barn]

In all my years of following the sport I've seen countless slips ruled as knockdowns and plenty of knockdowns ruled as slips. Its life!

Tommy's punch grazed the back of Leonard's neck (I cant see that it hits the side or top of his head at all, he ducked under it), that is not a scoring punch. The momentum (plus the fact that Leonard was hurt from the previous right hand) sent him down. No hard feelings, its just how I see it.....and I've watched it plenty of times this morning! Leonard did not complain because he was clearly hurt from the previous right. I cant possibly change my mind on this one, we'll just have to disagree there.

I'm not truely blaming the ref for a bad call. It all happened very quickly, I might have counted for it too under the circumstances. Tommy's right was quick!

As for my 'draw' interpretation of the fight. I'll post up my round by round scores. My opinion might be different this time, who knows?

For as much as Leonard didn't dispute the knockdown, Tommy didn't dispute the draw. He didn't look disappointed when the draw was announced.....and he seemed pretty accepting in the post fight interview.

That's the way Tommy was he was a grateful guy and seemed to be happy with anything for some reason. As I have said earlier he didn't want Steward to metion he broke his right hand as it would take away from Haglers win.

[Tiozzo]

had this fight been a fifteen rounder, Leonard would likely have stopped Hearns again

and I'll just add that it was a closer fight than most people make it out to be... Leonard was coming strong in the second half of the fight if my memory serves me right

You may be right! But this wasn't a 15 round okay? And If you simply go by the punches landed I don't know where we will be.Fact is Hearns landed the cleaner harder punches and Leonard didn't do as much...Coming back to Judges it's not the first nor the last bad decision from them.I scored it 7-5 and that is giving the 5th and 12th rounds to Leonard.

as you can see in my former post, I never talked about punch stats, so I have no idea why you even bring that up

I go by what I saw : Hearns probably won a close fight, that's it
the 2 KDs (should have) made the difference in the fight
Leonard had Hearns in a whole lot of trouble once, maybe twice
the 15 round fight was of course a reference to their first fight when Leonard rallied back to score a KO in the 14th round when he was behind on the cards : watching the fight, I feel Hearns wouldn't have been able to go that distance again