What would Hagler have done next?

[JohnThomas1]

Originally Posted by Duodenum

Marv successfully defended the undisputed middleweight championship 12 times, which remains an all time division record, one which might be unbreakable with the IBF and WBO thrown into the mix. However, in his own mind, Hagler considered Monzon, not Rodrigo Valdez, as the legitimate middleweight champion between 1974 and 1976 (during Valdez's five match WBC MW title winning streak). Nonetheless, if one wants to get strictly technical about it, Hagler broke Monzon's undisputed MW defense record against Mugabe, and can lay claim to holding it.

Carlos Monzon defended the undisputed middleweight title 11 times. His defenses against Mundine, Licata and Tonna were for the WBA title only, after he was stripped by the WBC for defending against Napoles instead of Valdez. (Incidentally, Hagler's match with SRL was only for the WBC title.) Bernard Hopkins made only one defense of the undisputed middleweight championship, his final one against Howard Eastman. (It took him that long to collect the WBA, WBC, IBF, and finally, the WBO version of the title from De La Hoya. At least in Hagler's day, it was just the WBC and WBA versions.)

Although Bob Arum was naturally thrilled with the excitement of the Hagler/Hearns barnburner, he stated after that war that he didn't consider a rematch between Marv and Tommy to be viable after the definitive conclusion of their brief affair. However, Arum also said after the 15 rounder between Hagler and Duran that he would be "honored" to arrange a rematch between those two. Because Hagler, Hearns, Duran and SRL were all promoted by Arum and Top Rank, this essentially reveals the feasibility of those rematches taking place.

Thanks mate, that helped plenty.

I will say Hagler - Hearns II was ready to go immediately after they both won on the same card. Until Sugar intervened.

[timmers612]

Hagler would have won easily in a rematch,,,you guys are really missing it! My brothers and I watched stunned as Haglers slow punches went over a wide open Ray's head several times. Marvin was ageing and in this fight he just got old as some fighters do. Ray boxed smartly but if the bout had taken place a few bouts earlier I wouldn't see him beating Marvin.

[Robbi]

Originally Posted by Robbi

Yeah. Hagler's purse for the rematch was $12 million. Im guessing a Hearns rematch he would have pocketed about $8 million max, maybe 10 at a push. And the inactivity of Leonard looked like easy meat on paper, with his drawing power creating more dollars. As you say bigger purse, less risk.

In hindsight, a big mistake. But if I was Hagler I'd have choosen Leonard as well.

Just quick correction on a wording mistake. Hagler's purse for the Leonard fight was $12 million.

[Longhhorn71]

Originally Posted by timmers612

Hagler would have won easily in a rematch,,,you guys are really missing it! My brothers and I watched stunned as Haglers slow punches went over a wide open Ray's head several times. Marvin was ageing and in this fight he just got old as some fighters do. Ray boxed smartly but if the bout had taken place a few bouts earlier I wouldn't see him beating Marvin.

Sugar Ray, a la Oscar, at the end of his career would only fight if all the cards were stacked in his favor.

Problem was, he made a mistake with Terry Norris, and got the
crap beaten out of him (maybe as bad as in Duran No. 1)

Sometimes it was good to see Leonard humbled a little.

[80s champs]

I wonder how a Hagler Hearns rematch would have gone?. Hagler was declineing,and Hearns was getting stronger,though not as motivated in the future fights. Remember how he Totally changed in the Leonard rematch when everyone including Leonard thought that he was shot? Hagler would have motivated him. A scenario if anyone has any ideas?

[JohnThomas1]

Originally Posted by 80s champs

I wonder how a Hagler Hearns rematch would have gone?. Hagler was declineing,and Hearns was getting stronger,though not as motivated in the future fights. Remember how he Totally changed in the Leonard rematch when everyone including Leonard thought that he was shot? Hagler would have motivated him. A scenario if anyone has any ideas?

I know one thing, he certainly would not have slugged. Whether it made any diff at all or not is anyone's guess. Stonehands from memory gave Hearns a top shot in the first if he boxed, i wonder what his thoughts on a rematch were.

[Robbi]

Originally Posted by JohnThomas1

I know one thing, he certainly would not have slugged. Whether it made any diff at all or not is anyone's guess. Stonehands from memory gave Hearns a top shot in the first if he boxed, i wonder what his thoughts on a rematch were.

Hearns would have won the rematch I believe, which was set for late 1986 if memory serves me correctly.

Not sure Hagler's tactics against Hearns would have been like chalk and cheese compared to what he showed against Leonard. Similar no doubt. Pressuring for sure, although standing off Hearns like he did with Leonard for 4 rounds would spell disaster. Looking back then, Hearns was still very much a swift mover around the ring, and he'd need lateral movement to pull off the win second time around. Suppose it depends exactly how effective Hagler was with his pressure, and what Hearns allowed him to do regarding getting inside. Standing flat-footed and firing heavy bombs would be wise for Hearns, only briefly. For the most part constantly creating distance behind his jolting left jab would be the bread and butter weapons.

[redrooster]

hagler was not the same Hagler by 86. Too many wars for him. Time to retire.

[Dave's Top Ten]

I dare say if Barkley could reach him witthin 3 rounds then an over the hill hagler could....

Originally Posted by Robbi

Hearns would have won the rematch I believe, which was set for late 1986 if memory serves me correctly.

Not sure Hagler's tactics against Hearns would have been like chalk and cheese compared to what he showed against Leonard. Similar no doubt. Pressuring for sure, although standing off Hearns like he did with Leonard for 4 rounds would spell disaster. Looking back then, Hearns was still very much a swift mover around the ring, and he'd need lateral movement to pull off the win second time around. Suppose it depends exactly how effective Hagler was with his pressure, and what Hearns allowed him to do regarding getting inside. Standing flat-footed and firing heavy bombs would be wise for Hearns, only briefly. For the most part constantly creating distance behind his jolting left jab would be the bread and butter weapons.

[laxpdx]

I would've loved to have seen Hagler-Ayala come to fruition. I give Marvin a slight edge (if its before 86), but what a bash-fest!

I dont think Hearns could have ever beat Hagler.
Hagler was too good, too strong.
Against middleweights Hearns was either blasting them out, having wars with them, or getting knocked out. I cant see him outboxing Hagler, not even the Hagler who fought Leonard.
Hearns would end up engaging with Hagler, or Hagler would slow down a boxing Hearns, weaken him and outfight him.

Good middleweights like Barkley, Kinchen, Roldan made life difficult for Hearns (or beat him).
Hearns isn't going to do to Hagler what he did to Shuler. Hagler wins every time.

[red cobra]

A fight against Mike McCallum and a possible loss or a controversial draw, and then maybe retirement. He could also have fought Michael Nunn, and due to encroaching age, could have been made to look bad, again, with a possible decision loss of his title. I think Marvin walked away and stayed away for a reason. He knew he had seen better days.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Originally Posted by Sonny's jab

I dont think Hearns could have ever beat Hagler.
Hagler was too good, too strong.

Me neither. Arum's statement when asked whether there'd be a rematch: "How am I gonna convince people i'd be different next time" rang true with me. Although Hearns win over Shuler proved him wrong and that public will be convinced of 'anything' eventually, and a rematch would have sold regardless. But I think, despite the 'rematch' going further, the result stays the same- Hagler by stoppage.

[RoccoMarciano]

Originally Posted by Sonny's jab

Yeah, if SRL wanted a rematch it would have happened.

Hagler wanted a rematch. What does that say about the great SRL?

Anyway, if Hagler would have won, a rematch would have been granted to Ray Leonard.