Leonard vs Hearns II

[JMaster]

I don't know why people call it a robbery. I thought it was a close fight and I had it 114-113 for Leonard.

Call me a bad judge, but I know what I saw.

[BennyST]

I don't know why people call it a robbery. I thought it was a close fight and I had it 114-113 for Leonard.

Call me a bad judge, but I know what I saw.

You're a really bad judge.

And no, it wasn't a close fight.

Well, seeing as you scored it, put up your round by round score for us and then we can judge it more accurately.

Which rounds did you give Leonard to have him win?

[JMaster]

You're a really bad judge.

And no, it wasn't a close fight.

Well, seeing as you scored it, put up your round by round score for us and then we can judge it more accurately.

Which rounds did you give Leonard to have him win?

Didn't save my scorecard, but I do remember my final score.

Aside from the two knockdown rounds, which other rounds did Hearns clearly win?

Around halfway through the fight they showed the punch stats. Leonard landed more punches in the first half than Hearns did. The same half of the fight that Hearns supposedly "dominated".

[HaglerSteelChin]

I don't know why people call it a robbery. I thought it was a close fight and I had it 114-113 for Leonard.

Call me a bad judge, but I know what I saw.

I saw it 113-112 for SRL when i first saw it. I already talked about it already in a previous thread about decisions people thought were bad but weren't.

There were two rounds 5 and 12 that could have been scored 10-8 for SRL as he had Hearns badly hurt. There were a few rds which have gone either way, putting all things considered i don't think having it a draw was a classic robbery.

There are many examples of guys getting knockdown twice and still winning fights or getting draws.

[JMaster]

There are many examples of guys getting knockdown twice and still winning fights or getting draws.

Pacquiao vs Marquez I is a good example.

[prinzemanspopa]

It was the real fight of the year!

It wasn't a shocking decision but I definately feel the wrong man won that night.Leonard simply waited too long to get off.He spent far too long within Hearns range as Hearns used his jab and combinations to sweep virtually every one of the early rounds on my scorecard.


Leonard's mistake was overrating his power and underrating Hearns chin as he tried to load up on shots and look to take Hearns out with one shot.Leonard started putting together his shots around the 5th round and hurt Hearns badly in that round I believe.


Leonard finished stronger and once again looked to have Hearns almost out in the last round but Hearns survived and his dominance in the earlier rounds,atleast in my view should have gotten him the decision.


Had Leonard not been knocked down twice then perhaps there's an argument,but the two knockdowns did happen and it should have been decisive to the result.


The judges must have given Leonard the 10-8 rounds that they robbed him of during the first fight.

[HaglerSteelChin]

Pacquiao vs Marquez I is a good example.

Many people make an issue about one of the judges making an error by scoring it 10-7 instead of 10-6, but even if he had it 10-6 as i did, JMM won in my book. Pac won the first two rounds and was 5 points ahead, but i felt JMM won 8 of the last 10 rds. So if you score it 8-4 than you have it 113-112. In addition, there was atleast one rd where Pac was hurt and taken to the ropes by Marquez.

There are many examples of guys getting knockdown two or more times and still earning a win or decision. Hopkins vs Mercado 1, Bentiez vs Curry 1, Mccline vs Peter, Peter vs Klitschko, Jirov vs Meli- just to name a few examples out of the top of my head. In fact, in some of those fights the figher was knockdown three times. Although I will concede the Benitez-Curry was a questionable decision.

Gil Clancy felt Hearns was robbed and of course Emmanuel Steward. Leonard had loss reflexes and was less agile so he got dropped twice on the fight. It wasen't a shock as a weight drained Lalonde took him down in the previous fight. There were about 9 rds that clearly went to each fighter. But there were about 3 rds that could have gone either way. I don't see it as a horrible draw as some view it. Gee if this was a horrible draw, than WTF does that make the scored draws on Holyfield-Lewis 1 or Chavez-Whitaker look like?

[Miburo]

I find the whole business of scoring rounds 10-8 when no knockdowns occur ridiculous. 10-8 with no knockdowns should be reserved for VERY special situations.

[Sugarj]

I had it a draw, Leonard's work in rounds 5 and 12 offset the knockdowns in my opinion, and I didn't score these rounds 10-8 either.

I didn't feel that one of the knockdowns was really deserved. Its been a while but I seem to remember Leonard being hit with a right, backing up and going down from a blow that mildly skimmed the back of Leonard's head. It should have been ruled a slip even though Leonard was hurt from the earlier blow. I'll have a look at this again!

I couldn't find Hearns a winner in this fight, great that he was. A draw was very fair. Tommy looked relieved to have got the draw when the verdict was announced too, (he smiled and not in a sarcastic, disappointed way) and didn't dispute the result.

[Sugarj]

Yep, just watched it again and the slow motion replays for the first knockdown that was scored in round 4. I'd argue that no punch landed and that no count was deserved.

Leonard was hurt from an earlier blow from what 5 seconds earlier? But he wasn't staggering and the blow didn't seem close to me from any angle.

Contrast this with what Leonard did the very next round to Hearns!