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

I agree completely. Over the first half of the fight, Leonard was hitting him sharp and hard, and making him miss to the degree he looked clumsy. He was completely the ring general- Hagler was chasing him with no real skill, purpose, or effect. Leonard won anywhere between 4 of the first 6, to, on some cards, all 6. I only gave Hagler round 5 myself.

118-110 is a bad card, but it's not so far off as to imply corruption. Once you bank half the fight, and the other half is gritty and competitive give and take, a scorecard can conceivably come back wide. It's possible. After the first 6, it was 100% Leonard's fight to lose, he was a mile ahead.

 

The early rounds were close. It's become a cliche to say Leonard swept the first 5 rounds. But Leonard was diving in and grabbing a lot from the opening round on, impressed a lot of people I guess. Even if I give Leonard the close early rounds, Hagler won the fight.

 

Leonard won the first few rounds at a canter. That's what won the fight for him. Hagler stalked him when he should have charged out,and not given the rusty Leonard a chance of building up a rhythm. Had he done this,he could have turned the decision his way. The right guy got given the nod by the judges.

I made it 7-4-1 Leonard.

 

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.

 

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.

 

The first two are the most dramatic. Hagler got just about zero done in them. Quite literally, zero. They may be the most decisive rounds in the fight outside of 8.

 

It doesn't - it prevents the opponent from scoring points, while the other fighter scores with punches in between tying up.

And that's precisely what Leonard did through the first four rounds IMO.

 

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 landed some punches too. The second and third round look about even.

But, hey, I give Leonard the rounds just to appease the majority. And Hagler still ends up in front after 12.

 

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.

 

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.

 

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

 

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.

 

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.