Duran vs Leonard who fought Hagler better?

Perhaps Duran would have won on the cards after 12, but that's only because the cards were ****. Hagler wasn't behind at any point in the fight.

Anyhow, that's a pretty pointless analysis, since Hagler would have fought differently if it was a 12 rounder. Just as Leonard would have fought differently if it was a 15 rounder.

Leonard won, Duran lost (much more widely than the cards suggest). That's all she wrote.

Was Duran's losing effort better than Leonards' winning effort, though? I think the case perhaps could be made, even though I wouldn't agree.

 

This is all true, and besides, a title fight should be for 15, not 12. I think Hagler would have beaten Leonard over 15.

 

Maybe, but we'll never know. What we do is that a fight over the 12 round distance was scheduled and completed in '87, and Leonard's hand was raised.

 

And this was to the error of Hagler, who as champion, should have pushed for the 15 round limit.

 

Indeed. He made his bed. No sympathy.

 

Did you actually watch Duran vs Hagler? Duran won a few rounds and that's it. Duran did well not to get hurt by Hagler, who for some reason showed him far too much respect and didn't really go after him.

 

The scorecards for Duran/Hagler were pretty weird.

 

Leonard was able to get Hagler's respect and largely shut him down over the first four rounds. Duran was also able to reduce Hagler's offense, but not nearly to the extent Leonard did.

Although Duran gave Hagler a genuinely close, hard fight, I felt the scoring was ultimately very sympathetic to Duran, whereas I thought Leonard deserved no less than a draw against Hagler.

 

Leonard fought Halger better.
/Thread

 

I don't think this is certain at all.

If the fight had ended after 10 rounds and Leonard got the decision, I think people would feel just as strongly that Hagler would've won if the fight had been scheduled for 12. But as is, Leonard rallied to win the 11th IMO, which secured no less than a draw on my card, and also held his own in the 12th.

IMO, Hagler basically "shot his load" in the 9th round, and the fight would've continued to see-saw after that, without any certainty as to the eventual winner.

 

I would have to say Duran by a wide margin.

Hagler was much younger and less shopworn, and Duran fought him. That means more to me than the running technical boxing leonard did with Hagler.

Duran proved he could bang with a top 3 MW of all time. Leonard should not have won the Hagler fight. Hagler did enough to hold on to the title either via draw or close decision.

Duran was fighting a better Hagler at the same age Leonard fought with with him, and gave him hell. Leonard gave him a track meet.

The fact that it was only 12 rouunds helped Leonard immensleyl.


To me the Duran loss to Hagler was a greater performence than the Leonard win. It adds to Durans legacy. I just have a hard time giving credit to Leonards win as I think he lost that fight and Hagler had slid so much.

 

Leonard beat Hagler, Duran did not. Hagler controlled Duran and Duran troubled him a little and landed a few right hands. But Leonard outboxed him and outfought him and used speed. No comparison. Leonard had the tools to beat Hagler and Duran did not.

 

Leonard won, Duran lost.

Leonard was winning rounds late, Duran was hanging on, and should never have been ahead.

Leonard fought him better. I don't even think its a close argument. I'd rather a victory on paper than a moral victory any day. This aint ballet, people. It's not theatre. It's a sport. Wins and losses. Success and failure. Leonard succeeded, Duran failed.