Was Duran-Hagler even going into the 15th round on judges scorecards?

Itd go down as a pretty awful robbery, really...His credentials boost a bit, I'd give you that, but sometimes, winning an awful verdict over another respected hard charging champion can actually HURT you.

 

All 3 judges said Duran fought the smarter fight & there's no way that could be called a robbery. Just because Haglers trundling foreward all the time dos'nt give him or his fans the right to think that wins rounds. Duran's performence & tactical nous nearly pulled it off.:deal

This is the problem in America as it seems that if you are the aggresser it's a god given right to get the round regardless of savvy defensive/countering manouvers by the opponant. Yanks go to watch a fight & the rest of us go to watch a boxing match:deal

 

It wasn't that close and shouldn't have been.

No doubt that Duran gave a great account of himself and gave Hag some problems.

 

i gave duran 6 rounds first time i watched it. now assuming hagler fights the same fight if it's 12 rounds not 15 (which he wouldn't) it wouldn't have been a robbery if duran won but a touch questionable imo. still, he was brilliant and arguments to the contrary would likely fade quickly as people fell in love with duran all over again after that one

 

You cannot have it both ways. If he is the greatest ever by beating Hagler, well then Duran is seen as great at middleweight according to the rules which help Duran become great. If he loses that means he was old and washed up. The logic bends the rules for Duran, and does not go with what really happened. What about Duran losing to Benitez in an almost outclassing a year and a half before this? And if he was good enough as you all say to fight and trouble Hagler at middleweight, then he was not this small middleweight as you all say, so his losses to Benitez,Hearns and Leonard were legit losses and not just a guy old and out of shape. In reality, in the Hagler fight-all Hagler had to do was be more aggressive and he won the rounds.

 

With all due respect,Duranimal,your country's favorite fighter in recent years is Ricky Hatton,who was much more of a brawler than a practitioner of "savvy defensive countering maneuvers" per say,as well as one of the dirtiest fighters of this era.Duran is my favorite fighter ever(Hagler's my second),but I had it scored about 9-6 or to Hagler when I watched it.It seemed that when Marvin got more aggressive,he was far more effective.

 

Yes, and it's the British, not us that have dominated gloved boxing since its' inception..

I'm sure nobody in the 80's knew a whit about boxing here in america right?

 

He has a point though. In the US aggression goes a very long way. Perhaps too much emphasis is put on it over there. Over here boxing is also called fencing with fists and seen as an art, defence and clean punching means more than aggression, even more than the UK. Many "robberies" here come from exactly that difference of perception.

Similar case, in the US boxing is seen as sport and entertainment. Over here it´s just a sport. It doesn´t need to be entertaining as long as both guys give their best and they are good at what they are doing - nobody minds getting entertained though they get appreciated, that´s where the strange liking of Germans for guys like Maske and Wlad comes from.

Anyway, even with a "German" mindset and as a Duran fan you can´t give Duran more than 6 rounds, if you stretch very, very, very far 7, but I think between 4 and 6 is the most realistic result.

 

Well. Duran and Hagler both knew what the scoring criteria were going into the fight, so it's not really an excuse... Either way, Roberto didn't win that many rounds on effective punches alone, certainly not enough to win. For example, he won round 11 solely on controlling the middle of the ring and Hagler doing nothing.

Also, Valuev certainly didn't hold Holyfield to a draw and almost doing the same to Haye based on scoring clean punches. Often enough, judges in Germany are just downright Don King dirty. Haye actually scored the better punches against Wlad in my book, but Wlad still won almost every round (on both my card and the judges') with effective agressesion.

 

To quote myself:

:thumbsup

You can make a decent enough case for Valuev beating both Holyfield and Haye. And the Holyfield fight was actually in Switzerland and he lost to Haye in Germany, didn´t he?
It´s pretty obvious that a fight isn´t judged on clean punching alone I thought this didn´t need to be explained. I stated what the different of perception of what boxing is is between here and the US. Americans prefer aggression - and since recently it seemingly doesn´t matter anymore if it´s effective or not too - while Europeans largely, and especially in Germany, prefer defence and clean punching and that many scoring differences come from that.

And yeah, there are crooked decisions in Germany, not worse than anywhere else though. Alexander-Kotelnyk? Williams-Lara?

 

Going back to the starting question.
Yes, all three judges gave Hagler the last two rounds.

Woller

 

You can't be serious with this.

 

I think the fact that the UK's population is approx 59 million to the US 311 million might have a bearing on that. The US has 22 fighters currently rated in the top ten rankings of the Ring ,and 1 Ring world champ,the UK has 7,top ten rated , so not a bad ratio for the Brits.

 

How many of those 3 judges were American?


If this is true, why didn't Hagler get the nod over Leonard?