Sugar Ray Leonard v Marvin Hagler

[bishop2006]

Hagler won the fight.

Winning the last 10 seconds of the round doesn't change the fact you spend the previous more than 2 minutes backpeddling away from your opponent who was out throwing and out landing you.

I agree,when i first watched the fight i thought Ray won,but i was watching what Ray was doing,not Hagler,then i watched it again,i didnt pay attention to the crowed going crazy when Ray threw a flurry,i just watched closely round by round,at the end i had Hagler winning,Ray kept trying to steal rounds in the last 30 seconds

[wpink1]

What was hagler doing though..Nothing really. He have away the 1st 4 rounds..and lost clealry rds 10 and 11.... the only rounds up for discussion is rounds 12, 5 and 6. Revist rounds 10-11...tell me how you can have Hagler winning either of those rounds.... I agree ray did a lot of stuff to rob hagler, but hagler did NOTHING but come forward and miss,,,,wildly.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uv50u0Hvwm0&feature=related

[col Blake]

how can a fighter rob a round, do the judges only watch the last 30 secs of a round

[Silencers]

Ray won the rounds in the last 30 seconds. He even admitted this was his game plan. Hagler didn't do enough in the 2:30 of the rounds he lost to make a lasting impression on the judges and Ray took advantage of that.

[wmute]

I had Leonard winning.

however.

1) In a rematch, Hagler would have won.

2) Had they fought in their primes, Hagler would have won.

[wpink1]

Silencer Completley agreed. Hagler simply did not do enough to win. And contrary to popular myth, You dont have to BEAT the champ..etc..All you have to do is win on points o 2 of the 3 judges scorecards..Which is what Ray did. I hear this myth all the time and I ask them, so what your saying is the Champ starts the fight with points in his favor already?

The draw goes to the champ, other than that it is who wins via at least 2 out of 3 of the judges.

[wpink1]

Had they fought in their primes..Ray whitwashes Hagler. hagler only chance would be a KO. One thing nobody every factors in, is that Ray was retired for 5 years.with only 1 fight. Around Rd 7 ray lost his legs, and was depending on short bursts. He came down off his toes for most of the final 2/3 thirds of this fight, allowing it to be closer. Had a fight in their primes happened in a big ring, hagler would have had a very very tough time catching ray, as you have never seen hagler cut off the ring before and he didnt during this fight either. Also, Hagler had a tough time when boxing Duran in 1983 which was during Hagler prime. Duran forded hagler to lead and punch at a slightly mobile target and it was very close. Duran was not 1/2 half the BOXER ray was, especially at that time in his career at that weight, what do you think a young Ray who had stamina, still had his speed (which was way off during the hagler fight, it may have appeared fast but on in comparison to hagler, not what he usually possessed), skills and much better combination punching with something on his punches, vs slappying in the actual fight.

Hagler simply would not be able to deal with a prime leonard.

[titoi]

Hagler simply would not be able to deal with a prime leonard.

That's competitive for one of the most misguided opinions I've ever come across on this site. Congratulations - you're in rare air indeed! Please, share some more opinions! Pray tell - was Tyson really the greatest boxer of all time? Or perhaps it's Mayweather. Do share.

[wmute]

Had they fought in their primes..Ray whitwashes Hagler. hagler only chance would be a KO. One thing nobody every factors in, is that Ray was retired for 5 years.with only 1 fight. Around Rd 7 ray lost his legs, and was depending on short bursts. He came down off his toes for most of the final 2/3 thirds of this fight, allowing it to be closer. Had a fight in their primes happened in a big ring, hagler would have had a very very tough time catching ray, as you have never seen hagler cut off the ring before and he didnt during this fight either. Also, Hagler had a tough time when boxing Duran in 1983 which was during Hagler prime. Duran forded hagler to lead and punch at a slightly mobile target and it was very close. Duran was not 1/2 half the BOXER ray was, especially at that time in his career at that weight, what do you think a young Ray who had stamina, still had his speed (which was way off during the hagler fight, it may have appeared fast but on in comparison to hagler, not what he usually possessed), skills and much better combination punching with something on his punches, vs slappying in the actual fight.

Hagler simply would not be able to deal with a prime leonard.

A prime Hagler would toy with a young welterweight.

Prime Hagler boxes and moves, counterpunching from every angle and every direction.

Hagler's fast strong southpaw jab takes away Leonard speed.

Not to mention in their primes the fight would have gone 15 rounds, and Leonard would not have made it out on his feet if the tried to land enough to win.

[wmute]

That's competitive for one of the most misguided opinions I've ever come across on this site. Congratulations - you're in rare air indeed! Please, share some more opinions! Pray tell - was Tyson really the greatest boxer of all time? Or perhaps it's Mayweather. Do share.

I think it's simply the case that this poster has seen only the hearns, duran, mugabi, leonard fights (the last four fights of hagler's career) and thinks hagler is just a very tough southpaw brawler