Just how bad was Haglar robbed if at all against SRL?

[Unforgiven]

Originally Posted by MagnaNasakki

It's a valid tactic. I'm not gonna penalize what a guy is doing when the ref isn't. If he's the general, and he's landing, and the opponent isn't and can't force different behavior, one guy is outboxing the other guy.

Hagler was landing too. He landed a body shot or two as Leonard was claiming him, but obviously that doesn't catch the eye as much as even a shot from range that is partially blocked.
Those rounds were very close. Leonard seems to impress more with his demeanor.

[MagnaNasakki]

Originally Posted by Unforgiven

Hagler was landing too. He landed a body shot or two as Leonard was claiming him, but obviously that doesn't catch the eye as much as even a shot from range that is partially blocked.
Those rounds were very close. Leonard seems to impress more with his demeanor.

I like the big flush left hook that knocks Hagler off his stance WAY more than I like any five arm punches to the body.

Marvin didn't really start to land fully leverage, hurtful body shots till the fifth, and the effect was immediate.

[Unforgiven]

Originally Posted by MagnaNasakki

I like the big flush left hook that knocks Hagler off his stance WAY more than I like any five arm punches to the body.

Marvin didn't really start to land fully leverage, hurtful body shots till the fifth, and the effect was immediate.

Yeah, well, if we're going to talk about shots that move the opponent in directions they are not meaning to go in, over shots that just nominally land ... Hagler has the fight tied up.

imo.

... and scoring fights IS a subjective matter.

[redrooster]

Originally Posted by Unforgiven

I guess it's subjective, but I tend not to reward fighters for ducking in and grabbing their opponent.
If a fighter is backing away from his opponent, and then when the opponent gets a little bit closer he just moves in a claims the opponent, I don't think that merits points.

There are different ways to score fights, I'm sure.

anyone that says leonard swept the first few rounds will probably say Norris Leonard was a 120-116 fight

Leonard has always been a low volume output fighter. fact is, he didnt do enough to clearly win rounds 1, & 3. I will not bend over backwards for him and score those rounds for him any more than I would not deduct points for his flgrant fouls in rds 4 & 7

I thought he did great against a shot, ex-great fighter who declined drastically in the five years since the fight was first seriously discussed, but he came up short

[FlyingFrenchman]

No matter who won... the fight was close. Hagler clearly won some back to back middle rounds, and this is what a lot of people remember most. During these rounds Hagler was aggressive and controlled the tempo... that's what most people like to see. They could care less if the other fighter is slipping or blocking most of the shots (I'm not saying Leonard was during these rounds).

I had Leonard winning a close fight. I'm not sure how you could have a guy winning by SD??? How many times are you scoring the fight, and why do you change your mind 1 out of 3 times?

There was no robbery, and even if Hagler would have won... that wouldn't have been a robbery either... even though I thought Leonard won.

Close win either way or a draw is the only way this can go IMO.

[FlyingFrenchman]

Originally Posted by redrooster

anyone that says leonard swept the first few rounds will probably say Norris Leonard was a 120-116 fight

Leonard has always been a low volume output fighter. fact is, he didnt do enough to clearly win rounds 1, & 3. I will not bend over backwards for him and score those rounds for him any more than I would not deduct points for his flgrant fouls in rds 4 & 7

I thought he did great against a shot, ex-great fighter who declined drastically in the five years since the fight was first seriously discussed, but he came up short

Hagler was shot? There is very little evidence to back up this claim. Hagler may have not been at his very best but he was far from shot. Hagler was not fighting often at this point but when he did fight he still looked good and he was winning by KO. In 1984 he stopped Roldan and Hamsho. In 1985 he stopped Hearns. In 1986 he stopped Mugabi. He lost very few rounds vs. these 4 fighters.

Oh, I guess because Roldan scored a knockdown in 1984 (questionable, and Hagler was not hurt) and Hearns cut Hagler in 1985, that he must have been slipping!?! Or maybe because Duran did better than expected in 1983? Duran was the only fighter that lasted the distance vs. Hagler between 9/1980 and 3/1986. When was this man great if he wasn't great in these fights?

Leonard retired in 1982. He had fought mostly at WW with a few fights at JMW mixed in, including a win over Ayub Kalule for the JMW World title belt, KO9. He did not defend the title and returned to WW to make 2 more defenses before retiring in 1982.

He returned in 1984 at WW and beat Kevin Howard, KO9. Leonard was dropped in the fight and retired again. Still, no fights at MW and comfortable at WW.

Leonard came back in 1987 for his first fight at MW and beat Hagler. It was a big win for Leonard.

So, tell me again how Leonard should have been favored and how he was picking on a washed up Hagler.

[salsanchezfan]

Originally Posted by FlyingFrenchman

Hagler was shot? There is very little evidence to back up this claim. Hagler may have not been at his very best but he was far from shot. Hagler was not fighting often at this point but when he did fight he still looked good and he was winning by KO. In 1984 he stopped Roldan and Hamsho. In 1985 he stopped Hearns. In 1986 he stopped Mugabi. He lost very few rounds vs. these 4 fighters.

Oh, I guess because Roldan scored a knockdown in 1984 (questionable, and Hagler was not hurt) and Hearns cut Hagler in 1985, that he must have been slipping!?! Or maybe because Duran did better than expected in 1983? Duran was the only fighter that lasted the distance vs. Hagler between 9/1980 and 3/1986. When was this man great if he wasn't great in these fights?

Leonard retired in 1982. He had fought mostly at WW with a few fights at JMW mixed in, including a win over Ayub Kalule for the JMW World title belt, KO9. He did not defend the title and returned to WW to make 2 more defenses before retiring in 1982.

He returned in 1984 at WW and beat Kevin Howard, KO9. Leonard was dropped in the fight and retired again. Still, no fights at MW and comfortable at WW.

Leonard came back in 1987 for his first fight at MW and beat Hagler. It was a big win for Leonard.

So, tell me again how Leonard should have been favored and how he was picking on a washed up Hagler.

You must excuse Rooster. He's a good man, I like having him around and think every forum needs a redrooster-type, but he is well known in these parts for playing up a hatred for Leonard that is..........let's call it entertainingly single-minded. To the point, frankly, that it can't be taken terribly seriously. If Leonard gave a million dollars to charity, Rooster would claim that he stole the money from Hagler.

[redrooster]

Originally Posted by FlyingFrenchman

Hagler was shot? There is very little evidence to back up this claim. Hagler may have not been at his very best but he was far from shot. Hagler was not fighting often at this point but when he did fight he still looked good and he was winning by KO. In 1984 he stopped Roldan and Hamsho. In 1985 he stopped Hearns. In 1986 he stopped Mugabi. He lost very few rounds vs. these 4 fighters.

Oh, I guess because Roldan scored a knockdown in 1984 (questionable, and Hagler was not hurt) and Hearns cut Hagler in 1985, that he must have been slipping!?! Or maybe because Duran did better than expected in 1983? Duran was the only fighter that lasted the distance vs. Hagler between 9/1980 and 3/1986. When was this man great if he wasn't great in these fights?

Leonard retired in 1982. He had fought mostly at WW with a few fights at JMW mixed in, including a win over Ayub Kalule for the JMW World title belt, KO9. He did not defend the title and returned to WW to make 2 more defenses before retiring in 1982.

He returned in 1984 at WW and beat Kevin Howard, KO9. Leonard was dropped in the fight and retired again. Still, no fights at MW and comfortable at WW.

Leonard came back in 1987 for his first fight at MW and beat Hagler. It was a big win for Leonard.

So, tell me again how Leonard should have been favored and how he was picking on a washed up Hagler.

maybe u dont want to admit it openly and that's the real problem cuz if u did, it would take away from Leonard's accomplishment


how do u explain the exclamation on leonard's part "I can beat him!" following Hagler Mugaib?

leonard could have made the same statement following the first Hamsho fight but instead he preferred not to make waves lest he get the chance to prove it

obviously u cant tell the difference between one performance and the next

can u tell the difference between 1966 Ali & 1980 versions? becuz that's pretty much what we're looking at here

besides, Hagler's decline thru out 1984 is well documented; extended by Duran, hit repeatedly by cyclops Roldan, almost lost, etc

[knockout artist]

I still feel Hagler won this fight, just 115-113, but it's not a robbery. Hagler came on strong because Ray ran out gas, probably due to his inactivity and questionable lifestyle outside of the ring. This was a close decision that could have gone either way, and I give Ray full credit for the win (even though I scored to Hagler), genius strategy

[Richel Hersisia]

imo Sugar Ray was the clear winner of that fight. 7-4-1 on my scorecard

[FlyingFrenchman]

Originally Posted by redrooster

maybe u dont want to admit it openly and that's the real problem cuz if u did, it would take away from Leonard's accomplishment


how do u explain the exclamation on leonard's part "I can beat him!" following Hagler Mugaib?

leonard could have made the same statement following the first Hamsho fight but instead he preferred not to make waves lest he get the chance to prove it

obviously u cant tell the difference between one performance and the next

can u tell the difference between 1966 Ali & 1980 versions? becuz that's pretty much what we're looking at here

besides, Hagler's decline thru out 1984 is well documented; extended by Duran, hit repeatedly by cyclops Roldan, almost lost, etc

You probably think the lunar landing in '69 was fake, 911 was an "inside job", the Sandy Hook shootings were fake, and that the Ravens and the 49ers in the Super Bowl was prearranged.

'66 Ali was clearly better than '80 Ali but a case can be made that an early to mid-70's Ali (he should have retired in 1975) was as good or even better than '66 Ali. I'll explain. Yes, Ali wasn't as fast or flashy but he was smarter, bigger, and stronger. He was more experienced and proven vs. better competition. He know had faced Frazier x3, Norton x2, Foreman, and others. Sure, he was still a bit rusty vs. Frazier in their first fight and lost but he still fought great vs. another great. He clearly won their 2nd fight and managed to win their rubber match after going thru hell. He came in a little lazy vs. Norton and lost by decision. He beat Norton in their rematch. Norton should have won in '76 but I'm not going past '75. He was older and sometimes came to fight at less than 100% but he was still great and sometimes as good as he once was.

[Bill1234]

Originally Posted by Rex Tickard

I still believe Leonard won round 3 - I read your case for Hagler, but I still feel Hagler did too little over the second half of the round, while Leonard scored with numerous lead rights.

I'm more surprised at your scores for the last two rounds. I thought Leonard clearly won the 11th while Hagler won the 12th.

Fair enough.

I'll look at the 11th and 12th again.

Round 11 starts at 4:56. I'm not gonna do a break down as detailed as the other one (calling notable landed/missed shots).



I agree with you, round 11 was Leonard's. The first half of the round was even, but Leonard took it in the 2nd half.

Round 12 starts at 1:11



I also agree with you, Hagler's round.

Good call on those 2 rounds, I've now switched them but still come out with 7-5 for Hagler.

[redrooster]

Originally Posted by FlyingFrenchman

You probably think the lunar landing in '69 was fake, 911 was an "inside job", the Sandy Hook shootings were fake, and that the Ravens and the 49ers in the Super Bowl was prearranged.

'66 Ali was clearly better than '80 Ali but a case can be made that an early to mid-70's Ali (he should have retired in 1975) was as good or even better than '66 Ali. I'll explain. Yes, Ali wasn't as fast or flashy but he was smarter, bigger, and stronger. He was more experienced and proven vs. better competition. He know had faced Frazier x3, Norton x2, Foreman, and others. Sure, he was still a bit rusty vs. Frazier in their first fight and lost but he still fought great vs. another great. He clearly won their 2nd fight and managed to win their rubber match after going thru hell. He came in a little lazy vs. Norton and lost by decision. He beat Norton in their rematch. Norton should have won in '76 but I'm not going past '75. He was older and sometimes came to fight at less than 100% but he was still great and sometimes as good as he once was.

I asked why Leonard didnt make known his revelation that he could beat Hagler until after scraping by Mugabi. Why not declare it during the first Hamsho fight? In fact, Ray said he wanted Hagler then but by fight's end had already chickened out. He chickened out of it becuz he knew the only possible outcome would be himself lying facefirst, courtesy of a Hagler fight hook


Fact is, he was no more interested in Hagler then than he was in Micheal Nunn after witnessing the decapitation of Kalambay from ringside, or an immediate rematch with Norris

[Colonel Sanders]

I think Leonard was robbed of a UD.

[Colonel Sanders]

Originally Posted by salsanchezfan

You must excuse Rooster. He's a good man, I like having him around and think every forum needs a redrooster-type, but he is well known in these parts for playing up a hatred for Leonard that is..........let's call it entertainingly single-minded. To the point, frankly, that it can't be taken terribly seriously. If Leonard gave a million dollars to charity, Rooster would claim that he stole the money from Hagler.