I distinctly remember Larry Merchant commenting on Hagler's lacklustre performance against Roldan by saying that there are the 1st signs of slippage or something along those lines.
John, correct me if I am wrong but wasn't Kostya a big favorite against Hatton? And wasn't Pedroza a big favorite over McGuigan?
I have 2 opinions of Carlos Monzon: 1. He is one of the greatest middleweights ever. 2. He was a murdering sociopath. Not that it matters, but he gets no pass from me. And no, I still don't like Sugar Ray Leonard, not that that matters either.
Yes. That's why I say SRL's performance was more impressive than Hagler's, when circumstances are considered, despite me having Hagler a clear winner on scoring. But what I said was right. The idea than no one said Hagler was past it before that fight is just very very WRONG. So I pointed that out.
Catches so much slack. I can't imagine any other fighter fighting Duran x3, Hearns x2, Hagler and Benitez be accused of a carefully crafted career. On top of that he passes the eye test with flying colors and then some.
Correct. This had been going on for 3 years. It was all over the publications but these people ACT like "that's news to me!" They make nothing of the fact it was his last fight "what? Why'd he RETIRE!" it's just an act of ignorance playing as tho nothing were amiss
add to that the Norris fight but without a win If it makes you feel better, I think Leonard was a better opponent than Bennie Briscoe.
True. In fact, it was widely reported at the time that Hagler was almost certainly retired already, after the Mugabi fight, and he took some persuading to agree to one more fight. I still think Leonard's performance is more remarkable, to come back off the lay-off and compete over a full 12 rounds with Hagler. But Leonard is the first to say he came back because he saw Hagler had slipped enough to take on, so I am not sure where the revisionism is coming from. The only guy at the time who didn't think Hagler had slipped significantly was probably Hagler himself, or at least he wouldn't completely admit to it.
Magazines all over wrote that Hagler had shown some age against Mugabi. But SRL did take that leap of faith to slay the dragon and capture the gold.
That was two young guns against aging warriors Clint and almost all the money bet was on Hatton in that instance due in no small part to perceived rustiness. Zoo had only fought twice in 2 1/2 years so you can imagine what Leonard had against him having fought once in 5 years. Bucking these sorts of handicaps was unheard and the reason why guru's like Futch were saying Leonard had no hope. Unlike Hatton and McGuigan SRL was also aged.
SRL's performance was certainly most impressive especially given i had him the clear winner. Yes quite a few were saying Hagler was, well not so much "past it" as such but most certainly fading.
All the more reason the odds should not have been so lopsided in Hagler's favor. The oddsmakers were obviously not paying attention to Hagler's lacklustre outings like against Roldan and Mugabi. Also Hagler had only fought 3 times in 3 years as well before facing Leonard. He was as inactive and rusty as Kostya was before the Hatton fight, John.
Leonard had not even been fighting Clint. 3 years earlier when he actually did he looked very poor against an average guy. If anything the odds should have been worse for Ray. Hagler was not the guy most up against it, not by a LONG shot.