Leonard vs Hagler Who wins the Rematch?

[Sweet Science]

Lets say they both agreed to an immediate rematch say in July/August 1987. Who wins and why?

Still 12 rounds.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Watch for the slew of Hagler votes from the same kind of people who said he was shot the first time.

[Sweet Science]

Originally Posted by My dinner with Conteh

Watch for the slew of Hagler votes from the same kind of people who said he was shot the first time.

That's one of the things I was looking for.

Damn you foiled my trap!!

[young griffo]

Hagler UD 12.

Hagler fought a poor strategic fight first time around and I believe he still had the physical tools to beat Leonard if they'd fought a rematch within 12 months of their first meeting.

[McGrain]

If there was a rematch i'd be backing Hagler to get it right. But there are so many unknowns I sure as shit wouldn't be gambling on the result.

[Senya13]

Leonard. Nothing would have changed. Hagler had 12 rounds the first time to change something, he couldn't.

[McGrain]

Originally Posted by Senya13

Leonard. Nothing would have changed. Hagler had 12 rounds the first time to change something, he couldn't.

This implies that Hagler had only one plan available to him. Obviously not the case.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Originally Posted by Sweet Science

That's one of the things I was looking for.

Damn you foiled my trap!!

Sorry mate.

[Senya13]

When you getting hit at will (nobody likes to get hit, even if they are very durable) and are unable to set up your own attacks, you can only hope for a lucky punch. Hagler tried both the aggressive and the counter-punching modes, nothing worked for him.

[McGrain]

He won some rounds (how many is subjective, I accept) so saying that "nothing worked fo rhim" may be pushing it a bit.

[BoppaZoo]

Flip a coin thats your answer.

Hagler would come in with different tactics as would Leonard.

The first fight was close enough.

[Senya13]

By nothing worked I meant the ability to use his advantages (strength, power, durability) to change the course of the fight.

[smokin joe]

more important who would of won if they fought in there primes

[JohnThomas1]

Perhaps the overlooked equation here is motivation. Hagler was Ray Leonard's personal Mt. Everest, and he scaled it. He yearned this fight for years. There is no doubt in my mind Leonard was going to be flat in any rematch, he had nothing to gain and had already climbed to the summit. Hagler was full of anger, bitterness and all the rest of it and is a proven better performer in rematches where he can go over the initial encounter and then formulate a sound gameplan based on this new knowledge. He would have stayed southpaw, came out faster and generally fought a tidier fight. I think these two points give Marvin the goods. Leonard's fire and desire had died. He was fading and aging just as fast as Hagler too. His next fight against Lalonde was seen by Emmanuel Steward as a very ordinary effort from a fighter who was fading fast. Steward noted a definite decline from the Hagler effort and said he thought Leonard had actually slipped as much as Hearns and he thought Tommy could take him in their upcoming fight. He was right.

[fists of fury]

Originally Posted by JohnThomas1

Perhaps the overlooked equation here is [i]motivation.[i] Hagler was Ray Leonard's personal Mt. Everest, and he scaled it. He yearned this fight for years. There is no doubt in my mind Leonard was going to be flat in any rematch, he had nothing to gain and had already climbed to the summit. Hagler was full of anger, bitterness and all the rest of it and is a proven better performer in rematches ...

Exellent point JT.