Where would Hagler be ranked had he beaten SRL?

Hearns looked pretty huge in there. I'm not just talking about height. He was 159 pounds and had the frame to carry it. In fact he had the frame to be a light-heavy, as he showed 2 years later. Hagler never had the frame to be a light-heavy.
i just thinks its a bit absurd to think of Hearns as too small.

Let's face it, Hagler destroyed Hearns. all the "could haves", "should haves" and "what ifs" are rendered useless in this case.
Hagler absolutely smashed him to pieces. It was brutal and scary.

 

as far as how we rate them, Hagler had nothing to gain from beating Leonard anyway. Leonard wasnt even a contender, just a name. an inactive, retired eye-injured fighter who brought a big payday.
so if hagler beats leonard no one would count it as a great win. whether he smashed him out in 2 rounds in a hypothetical fight or ended up with the decision in the one we saw, it would count as perhaps his weakest defence !

all that remains is how far we penalize Hagler for "losing" to leonard.
For me, its not that much at all. firstly, because i think Hagler nicked it by a point or two. secondly, because its right at the end of his career and hed been expected to retire anyway.

As for Leonard, he gets all the credit even if the judges had it like i see it. The "victory" is still his, even in close defeat.
This fight added something big to his legacy.

But i still dont think his record overshadows Hagler's reign of supremacy

 

Marvelous Marvin Hagler is the greatest middleweight in the history of boxing. One of the greatest fighters of all time and for the ages. In my opinion though clearly past his best he won the contest against Leonard and was cheated out of it. I have always felt that the ideal boxing champion should be along the lines of Hagler. Sugar Ray Leonard is an all time great. No doubt about it. I was never a fan of his as I did not like him as a man nor could I cheer for him. However he beat all my heroes the great Thomas Hearns, Duran, Ayub Kalule and the magnificent Benitez. He would have been dynamite and competitive in any era. He has to be ranked as either the greatest or 2nd greatest Welterweight in the history of the sport alongside the original Sugar Ray Robinson. Obviously we will need to look at this again when the careers of Floyd Mayweather Junior and Ajose Olusegun are over. Sugar Ray was better than my Puerto Rican hero the great Felix Tito Trinidad.

 

I'd have several rebuttals to these counterpoints... if I didn't at least half way agree with all of them if I'm being honest with myself. I'm not the one to pick sides and have agendas where fighters like Duran, Hagler, Leonard and Hearns are concerned. I respect them and enjoy each of them way too much to diminish what they accomplished. On any particular day, I may like one better than the other and watch a bunch of film and still get a rush out of it. When it comes down to it, these are my fighters from my favorite eras (1970-89) and I'd put them up against any other greats throughout history. In a H2H sense, I think they're flat out the best to ever to it.

Where you make the case for Hagler, it's very traditional and I like that where one's accomplishments are concerned. Hell, a large part of Duran's legacy rests upon his divisional dominance and taking out very good fighters, future/past champs and #1 contenders such as Buchanon, DeJesus (x2), Lampkin, Viruet... Marcel, Kobayashi and the lot. As far as I'm concerned, Hagler makes a damn good case as Fighter of the 1980s. Nobody can complain that his title defenses were crap when he took out every rated middleweight of his time worth a grain... actually closed out his reign by wiping out three consecutive No. 1s prior to the Leonard fight. This guy made his entire life out of being a great fighter and establishing himself. He'd die in that ring to achieve it. A man's man and fighter's fighter to be sure.

 

I'm in 100% agreement. This is how it worked for me too.

 

same here, i value haglers reign over rays career

 

I never saw it as smashed him to pieces. They brawled and Hearns ran out of gas and Hagler landed the last punch. The fact is that fight hurt Hagler in the long run more than Hearns believe it or not. He never took a year off between fights and it was obvious he was not really motivated for Mugabi, and with Leonard he had only had one fight in 2 years. Hagler won the fight and put his all out, but the price he paid and getting hit with those punches seemed to take something out of him was big. He was never the same after Hearns.
Hearns had a good upper body in 1985, but he was not as bulked as he was in March of 1986, and his legs in 1985 seemed very lean compared to Haglers. I didn't say Hearns was too small, but in a fight like that where you brawl, the more natural guy at the weight will probably win. Hagler might not have gone down to the canvas, but he took punches and got cut up..

 

I did not have Peterson winning that fight. He won it because of the ref. in my mind, but he still won the fight officially, so Khan has to get a rematch and win for his legacy. Titles make guys better, so if Peterson wins the rematch, it derails Khan's career a little. I love Khan's skills ands speed, but like Jermaine Taylor, he fights without a gameplan.

I always put the 1989 Duran/Leonard 3 as significant. It showed the style domination Ray had over Duran. Duran should have done better than he did considering people thought he fought so great against Barkley. although I always thought he would beat Barkley before that fight happened.

Getting the nod makes no difference to me for Thomas, but on paper it does make a difference. Beating any version of Leonard who was champion makes a difference, regardless of which Leonard. Most people see how Leonard was quicker and could beat Duran everytime out after June 80, but they use the official result of the first fight to prove how great Duran was, even though Ray didn't fight his fight. Most people on ESB use the official result rather than the obvious facts that Ray could beat Duran 10/10 after Nov of 1980.

 

it is a matter of favoring consistency and hardwork over skills and wins over other ATG fighters in a rather short career with Leonard.

 

i think he was probably declining before the Hearns fight. 1983 Sibson fight was probably his peak. he lost a little bit in every fight after that.
it was an injury in training that made him take a year off before Mugabi.

I think mugabi took the most out of him. hagler must've been motivated the way he fought him. Mugabi gave hagler a tougher fight than Hearns did. its a shame that fight seemed to ruin Mugabi

 

khan fought like a ***** and moaned for weeks in the aftermatch. forearm shoves are no compensation for an inside game. peterson won it close but clear imo and will likely knock khan out in the rematch.

how can a fight in 88 at smw be significant when it features guys who were natural welterweights and lightweights respectively? duran won his first title 16 years before that night, it has zero bearing on anything mate.

they fought in their primes twice going 1-1.

noone's talking about paper, we're talking about rankings and tommy wouldn't rank any higher had he been given a decision most people scored for him anyway. by the same virtue, hagler wouldn't rank any higher for being given a bogus decision.

 

Leonard's resume is still quite good IMO.

09/78: Floyd Mayweather [15-1] (#5 WW) W-TKO10
10/78: Randy Shields [31-4] (#3 WW) W-UD10
12/78: Armando Muniz [44-13] (#6 WW) W-RTD6
01/79: Johnny Gant [44-11] (#4 WW) W-TKO8
06/79: Tony Chiaverini [30-4] (#4 LMW) W-RTD4
08/79: Pete Ranzany [45-3] (#6 WW) W-TKO4
09/79: Andy Price [28-5] (#10 WW) W-KO1
11/79: Wilfred Benitez [38-0] (WW Champ) W-TKO15
03/80: Dave Green [33-2] (#8 WW) W-KO4
06/80: Roberto Duran [71-1] (#2 WW) L-UD15
11/80: Roberto Duran [72-1] (WW Champ) W-TKO8
06/81: Ayub Kalule [36-0] (LMW Champ) W-TKO9
09/81: Thomas Hearns [32-0] (#1 WW, WBA) W-TKO14
02/82: Bruce Finch [28-3] (#6 WW) W-TKO3
04/87: Marvin Hagler [62-2] (MW Champ) W-SD12
11/88: Donny Lalonde [31-2] (#5 LHW, WBC) W-TKO9

 

I don't think Hagler declined too much, he was just fighting awkward guys post 1983. Duran in 1983 was a mystery as to which Duran would show up, and Marvin prepared for an aggressive Duran, which still baffles me since he could have taken apart Duran had he come at Marvin. Roldan was awkward also and threw punches from everywhere, which is why Marvin looked bad and went down when Roldan pulled him down, and then there was Hamsho who always was awkward being southpaw and who headbutted Marvin in the rematch. Hearns hit Marvin clean but still Marvin looked good and beat a prime Tommy. But I do believe that the Hearns fight took as much or more out of Hagler than out of Hearns. At the time I thought Marvin would thrive and get better and beat Curry and others who moved up, but he declined in motivation, which then led to him taking time off, which is not great for a guy who relied on being sharp and busy.

 

I am not sure what will happen in the rematch. Khan is a little reckless, but he has fast hands, so if he puts some discipline behind his speed he can beat Peterson easily. But he will not change and he will make it another close fight, but this time I think he wins a UD>
Duran/Leonard was significant-this was two guys who were champions still in 1989 and the fight showed how Leonard still had the edge in style and speed. You would have thought that Ray slowing down would mean Duran could get to him, but he couldn't at all and Ray looked fast as always.
Leonard was not prime when he fought Duran. That is a misconception. Ray was coming into his prime when he fought Hearns in 1981, but to say his prime was right after he won his first title? I don't think so. Ray was suckered into fighting Duran's fight. Had Ray boxed like in the second fight he would have won the first fight by UD.

 

It is good, but I meant is without the Hagler and post Hagler fights , Hagler might be regarded as greater. Beating Hagler did mean something to me, regardless of Marvin slipping and being inactive. Inactivity hurt Marvin more than Ray. Marvin got where he was because of hard work. When he stopped working as hard he slipped.