Hagler's loss to Leonard

[bojangles1987]

Leonard wasn't exactly young and fresh himself. Though I think Hagler won, he put himself in position to lose that fight by giving away so many early rounds. He was the better fighter, but he let Leonard psyche him out.

[blacklodge]

Not to be fickle, but I don't consider Hagler to be in his prime when he fought Geraldo. He hadn't even beat Minter yet.

[KILLA RIGHT]

I dunno, Leonard lost that fight, IMO.

Hagler lost the first three rounds (dunno why he fought southpaw!) to Ray easily. But as soon as Hagler got in closer and started ****ing Leonard, Leonard took a page out of Ali's book and would run for most of each round but fight in the last 30 seconds. Judges were won over by this tactic.

yup hagler won that fight

[masta]

Well, since I created the thread, I might as well give my opinion on the topic.

I think Hagler gave the first three rounds away because he wanted to show Leonard that he could beat him at his own game.

Overall, I scored the fight for Leonard. But if Hagler fought southpaw in the first three rounds then my score could have been different.

[Princemanspopa]

Not to be fickle, but I don't consider Hagler to be in his prime when he fought Geraldo. He hadn't even beat Minter yet.

Sure that makes sense,if you haven't actually watched Hagler before he fought Alan Minter.Hagler's championship reign began when he beat Minter,but that sure as hell isn't when his prime began.

He was the better fighter

No,he wasn't.

yup hagler won that fight

You've never even seen that fight.

[BOLLOCKS]

Hagler was robbed.

[StarshipTrooper]

Hagler was robbed.

And here I thought you got the chair a few years ago

Poet

[blacklodge]

Sure that makes sense,if you haven't actually watched Hagler before he fought Alan Minter.Hagler's championship reign began when he beat Minter,but that sure as hell isn't when his prime began.

I don't consider a fighter's prime to be a universal combination of age and/or number of fights. I've seen his fights, thanks for the assumption by the way, and I put his prime, which I define as best performances, starting in about '82. Caveman Lee to Hearns, particularly Hamsho II. I would even go as far as to say that the Hagler of '79-'80 may have lost the Duran fight, as he hadn't quite reached the level of ring intell and experience necessary to make the adjustments he did in that fight and win the late rounds.

[BennyST]

Everything has already been said about this fight that possibly could be said. Hagler was past his best, but so was Leonard so it evens out there and Leonard was also coming off an incredibly long lay-off.

The fact is though that Leonard sc****d it out by the skin of his teeth through his own will and determination and also, through Hagler's own ******ity and arrogance. As is well known, he thought he could beat Leonard at his own game and would show him up by out-boxing him. It completely misfired because he was much slower than he had been and his reflexes, counter punching etc were just not what they had been but he refused to allow that concession and gave Leonard the first few rounds without any thought about the consequences.

Really, really ****** fight by him. It was one of those fights that Hagler lost, but Leonard also won. It wasn't just Hagler losing it or just Leonard winning it. Both guys did what they did to make that fight turn out the way it did. I think Hagler would have definitely won a rematch, so while he was certainly past his best that doesn't actually account for his losing the fight. It was simply his ego that lost him the fight. That is all it was.

Just out of curiosity, to the guy that said he had the score 9-3 and Leonard won it easily.....Ummm, how? You only gave Hagler three rounds? Try watching it without sound and instead of focusing solely on Leonard have a look at what Hagler does this time. You might come out with a different opinion because there is no way that fight was anything like 9-3 for Leonard.

[mrboxer]

How can it be when Hagler clearly gave away 4 rounds, it was only a 12 round fight so 6 rounds and you get a draw, Leonard won 4 rounds quite clearly in most peoples eyes, those 4 rounds came inside the 6th round. If you start giving out drawn rounds then you are trying to eradicate possible rounds Leonard could! of won because you want Hagler to win, which is obviously biased, so if you dont give out even rounds then you saying that Hagler swept the board after those 4 rounds that Leonard won, which is highly unlikely, so lets say Hagler did not win all the remaining rounds and Leonard won one, that is a 5 rounds to Leonard in what you are claiming to be a robbery!!! & the most controversial decision ever awarded:boxing.

None of that sounds logical to me.

i agree everything you wrote does not sound logical