Duran Leonard Hearns Hagler

[Hagler★]

im goin with
Hagler
Leonard
Duran
Hearns

[hemichromis]

Hearns is my fav

Hagler is the best

p4p duran was best

[BennyST]

So are we talking P4P or just the best at the time between the four of them? If we are talking P4P I would rank them as:
Duran
Leonard
Hagler
Hearns

If we are talking about the best between the four fighting each other then it would probably be:
Leonard
Hagler
Hearns
Duran

Unlike most I see the losses and wins as something like this; Leonard beat all of them but also lost to Duran and, despite the ridiculous draw, was thoroughly beaten by Hearns in their rematch. Nonetheless, he is the only one of them to have beaten all the other three. His win over Duran in the rematch was spectacular, but slightly tainted by Duran being not at full fitness, but, I still think his best win was against Hearns at 147. They were both at their peaks and he was getting thoroughly out-boxed throughout the early rounds until getting the amazing come back KO.

Hearns was devastating despite being KO'd by both Leonard and Hagler. I do believe that if Hearns had fought Leonard at 154 the first time he would have beaten him quite solidly as he showed more stamina at that weight. This was Hearns' best weight and only fought Duran at it unfortunately (well, unfortunately for Duran anyway)...obviously that didn't happen though so it makes no difference. Best win was obviously the great two round KO of Duran. As no one else has been able to get close to doing this, it was the most dramatic win of all of them along with his loss to Hagler.

Hagler was only at MW the entire time unlike the other three who moved up in weight. Had close fights with both Duran and Leonard, which he won and lost respectively, and gave a thorough beating to Hearns in the greatest short fight ever. Unlike many people I do believe he lost to Leonard, being ****** enough to try and out-box him as a righty for the first few rounds. Quite easily one of the best MW's ever and was very underrated during most of his career.

Duran was obviously at the tale end of his prime when moving up to fight Leonard the first time, winning and then losing in the infamous and ridiculously named 'No Mas' fight. Gave Hagler a very tough fight being the only one to go the fifteen rounds with him in a title defense and showed that Hagler was vulnerable to right hand counters. Was horribly and not surprisingly KO'd by Hearns, who was the only fighter to ever do so before or after, in two rounds. As mentioned previously by someone, Duran was the only fighter who was well above his natural weight and age when fighting against the others which obviously comes into play as he had fallen into terrible training routines and coming overweight for most fights. In a way it also shows how great he was though as few were able to hang with these guys while in their absolute peaks with full fitness and natural weights.

[wpink1]

I think you have to go, Leonard, duran, Hagler then hearns....Leonard beat all of them. No one else can say that. Duran beat a prime leonard, and even though he fought hearns and hagler at or before the age o 32 so these fights are relevant, you can not say he was at peak weight. I think peak duran was lightweight then the fight vs Leonard 1 and 2. yes I said the 2nd fight. Duran was in peak form, he just could not deal with the movment and became frusterated, there was no cramps. Duran has admitted that himself several times. I have it on video and in his own autobiography.

Hears was probably the most devastating of them all, but he lacks that big victory, and failed in his biggest 2 fights. I agree at 154, Leonard and he would have been a bit tougher for leonard to beat him. However what few fail to recognize is that, in every encounter, when they are involved in solid back and forth action, leonard is the one that came out the better. Even in the fight when he dropped leonard twice, those where from the outside and ray was clear when he got up. When ray got to him, he was hurt, dazed. So I am not so sure that simply because Hearns was stronger at 154 he would beat Ray, Remember Ray during his peak years had one of the best jaws around, he never went down, and Hearns would sitll have to find a way to deal with leonards power, which also would be greater at 154. It goes both ways.

Hagler coming straight forward was a beast, but Duran showed that boxing him, could beat him. I think peak leoanrd beats Hagler when ever they fight, if he boxes. Leonard was shot in 87 when they fought, and no Hagler was not shot. Contrary to false information, Hagler was in the twilight of his career. He had just beaten a string of his toughest opponents all by ko. He was well rested only 32 years of age. Yes he probably slowed, but every one does at age 32. Compare Haglers drop off, to Leonard drop off due to inactivity (which no one does) and you will see that it is a bump. Leonard was no where near as fast, no stamina, a shell of himself and still boxed circles around hagler. A 1982 fight, would be the same only a faster version of the fight in 87, and hmmm Ray would have had more stamina and been more active. I struggle to see how people think only Hagler would have been better in 82 had they fought. Think about how Hagler looked in 83 vs Duran, who was not a solid middleweight and no where near the boxer that Ray was at the heavier weights. Think about how ray was able to go toe to toe with Duran for 15 rounds, and close the show vs Benitez and Hagler in the later rounds...Then carry that forward to Ray in 87, when he was visably worn out in round 7....hands down at his side about to faint in round 9, then fell after the end of the fight, from exhaustion. Ray was a shell of himself in 87. He simply knew that hagler had to get set and step before punching, and Hagler liked to counter, where ray made him lead (lunge), and because of rays movment in and out, when hagler went to counter, ray was outside of haglers range, further than hagler was used to, thuse making hagler punches longer in arc than he was used tooo, thus making the puncher longer with less snap and appearing much slower than the short accurate powerful counters that straight ahaead fighters (mugabi, hearns) placed themselves inthe position to catch.

[Thread Stealer]

I think you have to go, Leonard, duran, Hagler then hearns....Leonard beat all of them. No one else can say that. Duran beat a prime leonard, and even though he fought hearns and hagler at or before the age o 32 so these fights are relevant, you can not say he was at peak weight. I think peak duran was lightweight then the fight vs Leonard 1 and 2. yes I said the 2nd fight. Duran was in peak form, he just could not deal with the movment and became frusterated, there was no cramps. Duran has admitted that himself several times. I have it on video and in his own autobiography.

Hears was probably the most devastating of them all, but he lacks that big victory, and failed in his biggest 2 fights. I agree at 154, Leonard and he would have been a bit tougher for leonard to beat him. However what few fail to recognize is that, in every encounter, when they are involved in solid back and forth action, leonard is the one that came out the better. Even in the fight when he dropped leonard twice, those where from the outside and ray was clear when he got up. When ray got to him, he was hurt, dazed. So I am not so sure that simply because Hearns was stronger at 154 he would beat Ray, Remember Ray during his peak years had one of the best jaws around, he never went down, and Hearns would sitll have to find a way to deal with leonards power, which also would be greater at 154. It goes both ways.

Hagler coming straight forward was a beast, but Duran showed that boxing him, could beat him. I think peak leoanrd beats Hagler when ever they fight, if he boxes. Leonard was shot in 87 when they fought, and no Hagler was not shot. Contrary to false information, Hagler was in the twilight of his career. He had just beaten a string of his toughest opponents all by ko. He was well rested only 32 years of age. Yes he probably slowed, but every one does at age 32. Compare Haglers drop off, to Leonard drop off due to inactivity (which no one does) and you will see that it is a bump. Leonard was no where near as fast, no stamina, a shell of himself and still boxed circles around hagler. A 1982 fight, would be the same only a faster version of the fight in 87, and hmmm Ray would have had more stamina and been more active. I struggle to see how people think only Hagler would have been better in 82 had they fought. Think about how Hagler looked in 83 vs Duran, who was not a solid middleweight and no where near the boxer that Ray was at the heavier weights. Think about how ray was able to go toe to toe with Duran for 15 rounds, and close the show vs Benitez and Hagler in the later rounds...Then carry that forward to Ray in 87, when he was visably worn out in round 7....hands down at his side about to faint in round 9, then fell after the end of the fight, from exhaustion. Ray was a shell of himself in 87. He simply knew that hagler had to get set and step before punching, and Hagler liked to counter, where ray made him lead (lunge), and because of rays movment in and out, when hagler went to counter, ray was outside of haglers range, further than hagler was used to, thuse making hagler punches longer in arc than he was used tooo, thus making the puncher longer with less snap and appearing much slower than the short accurate powerful counters that straight ahaead fighters (mugabi, hearns) placed themselves inthe position to catch.

Well thought out post, but I disagree mainly with the last paragraph.

Hagler looked good in 1983. He looked as good as ever against Sibson. I thought Hagler-Duran was one of the most exaggerated "close" fights ever. The judges had it close, but I didn't think it was that close. Leonard had indeed declined from the layoff and age in 1987. He got fatigued pretty quickly against Hagler. Sure he was using his legs a lot, but this is a guy that took a hammering to the body for 15 grueling rounds in Montreal and still finished stronger than Duran. Hagler had slowed down, his hands and defense being the most noticable. He usually had a very effective parrying defense, and nice side-to-side head movement, but often looked awful against Roldan in 1984. Against Mugabi he looked slower and more hittable, although his jab was still great.

I find it funny how some people always talk about Leonard (admittedly) seeing that Hagler had slowed and wanting to fight him, as if that gave Leonard some big advantage, when Ray was a smaller guy who had fought just once in the previous 5 years (looking lousy in that fight), and not once in 3 years.

[wpink1]

I honestly have reviewed that Hagler fight vs Leonard and hagler in 83 vs Duran, and Hagler had the same speed. What was different is that in the 1st four rounds hagler played around with ray and Ray moved in and out on his toes. Round 5 Hagler showed a lot of speed coming after ray. Ray came down off his toes, and these were much shorter crisper punches, and they looked just as fast as he was before. Now the difference is that Leonard held inside, moved to either the right or the left side of hagler, in rounds 10-12 ray was on his toes again.....Keep in mind the rounds ray was flat footed, Hagler won....

Some people make a big deal out of Ray not being stopped. Well outside of his comeback fiasco vs Kevin Howard, up until that point Ray had never even touched the canvass, before. So I find it hard, to suggest that he would be stopped.

I think Ray would have won a overshelmingly lopsided victory vs hagler had they fought in 82. Ray would have been much faster than the ray that Hagler faced, as hagler would be too. I think in the speed category this would favor Ray as he has much more to gain by having his speed back in check. As for power, Ray had a stellar chin and hagler while being a great Ko artist, his punches came from accumalation. I dnt think Ray would fight the type of fight w/ hagler that would allow him to be worn down. I think you would see much like Leonard Duran II. As for stamina, they both would have had greater stamina, but again this favors Ray as if Ray got the bigger ring (which he most definately would have asked for) he would box haglers ears off, much more decisive than he did in 87. I would be ugly, not hurting hagler, but stunning him, landing shots at any time he wanted too. Hagler has never shown the ability to cut off the ring, and he would be in a situation where he would have to follow Ray the entire night........

[hemichromis]

anyone of them could easily dominate their weight class at almost any other point in history. they just happened to come at the same time.

[VERSION1 (V1)]

MARVELOUS Marvin Hagler went 2-1 imo he went 3-0 vs the rest

[Hearnsz]

According to this poll it goes like this:
1. Roberto "Hands of Stone" Durán
2. "Marvelous" Marvin Hagler
3. "Sugar" Ray Leonard
4. Tommy "The Motorcity Cobra" Hearns

So do the majority of you folks agree with this?

[Panamaniac]

According to this poll it goes like this:
1. Roberto "Hands of Stone" Durán
2. "Marvelous" Marvin Hagler
3. "Sugar" Ray Leonard
4. Tommy "The Motorcity Cobra" Hearns

So do the majority of you folks agree with this?

If you polled the the entire web repeatedly, Duran would invariably be #1, Hagler and Leonard are pretty much interchageable and would take turns being #2 and 3, and Tommy would invariably be #4.