May/Pac = SRL/Hagler?

[Joe Beamish]

I'd agree with you if Leonard simply "ran", running is what Dirrell does lol. SRL outboxed Hagler, he made him miss, made him pay and then was out of range again. Leonard was literally throwing out combinations of punches while on the move. His faded legs meant that he had to often fight with his back against the ropes and even then Hagler couldn't effectively control SRL.



Are you talking to me?



I agree, Floyd Mayweather won quite easily. I predicted he would (albeit in a better fight) some 2 years ago. Manny Pacquiao is fading and fading fast. the JMM KO was a huge dent to the great fighter.

I also always say, that SRL beat Hagler and did so quite easily. SRL had his way with the great middleweight. That's why I'm comparing to two fights. Yes the 80s match up had more action and was definitely more fun but in terms of clash of styles and dominance of victory(imo anyway), they couldn't be more similar. Not to mention the fight would have been better if it had taken place some 4 years earlier.

This is an eccentric point of view. You're free to have your own point of view, even if it differs wildly from what most people think. Almost nobody in boxing thinks that Leonard "easily" won the fight. I'd say half of true boxing fans think Leonard barely won it or it was a draw, and the other half think Hagler won it, or it was a draw.

Contrast this with Mayweather/Pacquaio. Where almost everybody feels secure that Floyd won the fight quite obviously.

[DeadLikeMe]

Another reaches the bargaining stage

[-PBP-]

Another reaches the bargaining stage

LOL. This is a good sign. One step closer to the acceptance stage. Maybe by the end of the year.

[Hype job]

Is there another thread comparing the biggest fight of the 2010s with the biggest fight of the 1980s?

If not, then you can go back to jail for not paying alimony to your upteenth child with some fat ass hoe.

looooooooooooooooooooooooooooool

[xhiddenx87]

SRL easily won that fight against Hagler? FOH

If u like pure boxers with only defense as they leading strenght, good for you. (i'm not saying SRL was this, he was way more than this)

But don't try to tell us that the fight was "easy work" because it wasn't. 95% of the people who watched that fight agreed that was a close fight, and a good one.

Just an quick info. Leonard went up to MW to fight the boogeyman (Hagler).
that's why his W was so great.

It's like Maywheather going to fight GGG.

[soul_survivor]

LOL. This is a good sign. One step closer to the acceptance stage. Maybe by the end of the year.

I hope you don't think I'm one of those fighter fans who think Pacquiao won or whatever...Maybe read my original post and my posts over the course other last 2 years.

If you think otherwise then I will bury you with what I know about the sport. so stfu and go back at playing gang****er.

[MisterHardtop]

This is an interesting comparison and having a brief read through this thread, I feel many are becoming worked up over the closeness of the fight, Hagler/Leonard not Mayweather/Pacquiao. I do agree with the majority that the original superfight from the 1980s was far closer and competitive than the coming together of capitalism and greed in Las Vegas last month. However, I still believe it was a clear win for Ray Leonard, no matter how close and competitive the fight may have been.

I was at ringside and many people couldn't pick a winner (my good friend Mr Jeff Powell only had a single point separating the two, whereas I had 2 points in favour for Ray) but I have always held the believe that Ray did enough to win, even if Hagler, the most Marvelous of middleweights, made it tough as hell. Having said all that, the lack of competitiveness in Mayweather v Pacquiao does not defeat the point that the TS is trying to make. Maybe he is been caught up in some of the arguments in this thread but there are a fair few similarities.

First off, the timing of the bouts. Everyone at the time agreed that Leonard v Hagler could have taken place at least 3 years earlier and would have been a far better fight. Leonard after all was a more complete fighter in the early 80s than he was when he returned to the ring. Hagler too, was a supreme technician with an engine like a freight train and power to boot. The fight was delayed due to an unfortunate injury and a possible reluctance on the part of Leonard to return.

In the case of Mayweather and Pacquiao, the fight was also delayed, maybe a half decade too late. Pacquiao, the great puncher of his generation was no longer the feared monster of lore and Mayweather, once so flaccid in wanting the fight, was now the instigator. The reasons for the delay may be different but the fights were not what we had all hoped for.

The second similarity is in the coming together of two of boxing's most sought after style matchs ups: the bull versus the matador. Now, both Hagler and Pacquiao are more than just reckless, offensive monsters, these are men that can counter punch and box from the outside when they want to but their default setting is destroy. Leonard, a far more complete pugilist than Mayweather, could be an offensive missile too (just ask Tommy Haerns) and Mayweather himself, with his limited offense can be an aggressor. However, both men, when push comes to shove, like to stay out of trouble and make their opponent miss. The styles gelled far better in 1987 than they did in 2015 but that is not to take away from the fact that the two styles were so similar.

So, yes, I can see the similarity between the two super fights but it is clear one was a far superior exhibition of the sweet science, whereas the latter was the perfect representation of so much of modern sport: all pomp and circumstance with very little substance.

Just my two pence.

[Hype job]

10-20 years time the public will see it as a very close fight like I did.

[Hype job]

at the Floboners getting all defensive deep down they know it was a lot closer than people make out when they rewatched it... but because of the half decade of animosity they're exaggerating how convincing the win was... I said it would be a close affair and the winners would claim it was a shutout... to be fair the Pac hardcore would probably do the same..

[Just Now Hit Me]

To beat the champion you have to take his title. Especially Money May. You can just box him and leave it to the judges; you must run up on him and put it on him... only thing is, everyone who did that got knocked out. Mayweather can piece you up and run combinations on a ni.gga. TBE till the day I d-i-e that's no l-i-e.