One cannot lie all the time while fixing matches. You get a team where people lie at their turn. As long as nobody gets held accountable, we're in business. For Leonard to win (Hagler), one needs to award him absolutely every close round, and even those he didn't win, like the 11 (won on all cards). Go on youtube and hear the furious cries of "BULL****- BULL****" as soon as the Hearns draw gets announced. Did the HBO crew peep a sound? It was OK for them to celebrate the Hagler upset, but for the rest, not so much. Leonard's smugness cost him the first Duran fight; a career lightweight beat a future super middle champ. And everybody knows he stole the Hagler/Hearns verdicts. Rather than wrongly celebrating him to this day as the best of the fab4, people should adress him instead as "what could have been, but wasn't, whatever the history books say".
http://deadspin.com/5809475/learning-to-hate-sugar-ray-leonard-all-over-again http://www.si.com/vault/1997/03/10/...of-his-40-years-in-another-ill-fated-comeback From Leonard's book: "If Hagler felt the bout was stolen from him, it begs the obvious question: Why didn’t he ask for a rematch? Mike Trainer and I were open to the idea, but we never heard one word from him or his representatives. He took off for Italy and his dreams of an acting career."
Hagler had a persecution complex and as a result, most probably believed that the judges wouldn't be just even if there were a rematch. We're also talking about an aged Hagler who'd just been in yet another war.
I always thought Leonard narrowly edged it. I can see some arguments which might have narrowly favored Hagler. In all probability a draw would have been a fair outcome, but I agree with you. There was no robbery there. It certainly wasn't like Whitaker getting shafted against Ramirez or Holmes getting the short end of the stick against Spinks in their rematch.
I'll always maintain that the judges had it right in Leonard's fight with Hagler. The second Hearns fight was a different matter - Very close but Hearns' two knockdowns over Ray clinched it for him in my book.
It's a statement to Leonard's hypocrisy. Leonard vacated the middleweight title immediately at the press conference after the fight, and retired, as he said he would beforehand. Marvin wanted to face him right off the bat, but Leonard would have none of it. He finally offered him a rematch in 1989, way too late for Marvin who had grown tired of waiting and had retired. http://worldinsport.com/marvelous-marvin-hagler/
I'd have to watch the fight again as I haven't seen it in years. But I can remember feeling that the decision was fair. I saw it once in 1987, again sometime in the early 90's and another time maybe 10 years ago. On all occasions my view remained consistent.
I gave it to Leonard ,but wouldn't have complained had it gone to Hagler. Hearns deserved the verdict in the second Leonard fight ,imo.