SRL’s legacy if he’d lost to Hagler and Hearns.

I touched on this a little in another thread where I questioned Leonard’s resume due to how few fights he had. The main argument for his resume still being great was the fact that the names on his resume, though few, were against some of the best to ever lace them up. So I took a closer look at his resume and I realised if Hagler had been given the decision against Leonard (which many people think he deserved) and then you gave Hearns the win against him in their rematch (which almost everyone agrees he deserved) then Leonard’s resume is 34 wins 0 draws and 5 losses and his resume no longer has Hagler on it and he no longer has Hearns 2x. So how would you rate Leonard’s legacy if the judges had been a little more fair in these two iconic clashes?

 

The Hearns draw doesnt contribute to his resume, imo. I consider he lost that fight, but won the important contest at his best weight when both were prime.

If the Hagler fight had gone exactly the same, but the judges had scored for Hagler, his standing would take a knock, imo. The contest would still contribute to his legacy, I.e. a close fight that could reasonably be scored either way against a long standing and top 3 all time, if slightly faded, MW champ, when he had been so inactive. But to lose the name Hagler in his official W column would hurt his standing a little, imo.

 

I can't overly comment here because i can't score the Hagler fight for Hagler in a million years. Close fight but the least i can give it to Leonard by is two points.

He doesn't get a lot of credit for the Hearns rematch, if anything it raised Tommy's stocks a little. Leonard himself has stated on at least three public occasions Tommy beat him. He's certainly never opined that Hagler beat him.

 

His stock would drop a little. Not so much the Hearns fight,as he won the first,but more the Hagler one as it was considered a definitive fight for both.

 

I have often stated that his true record is NOT 36 -3 -1 (mediocre for an all time great) but is actually 35 - 5 which is why he ranks low for an all time great such as Mayweather who sports a spotless 50 - 0, or Roy Jones who made countless defenses over three weight classes

Wins over a prime Curry & Pryor would do wonders for his standing

 

The Hagler decision was fair. The second Hearns fight Leonard himself said Hearns won. Wouldnt change too much as he did defeat Hearns the first fight and if Hagler had been given the nod if wouldnt lower him too much considering his long layoff etc.

 

It doesnt matter what you have often stated his record is 36-3-1, your ¨ẗrue record" doesnt matter its just your opinion. He offered to fight Pryor but Pryor wasnt interested.

 

Rarely will u find someone who admires Hagler more than me in here but 115-113 for SRL is the most lenient I can do. If not a Hagler avy then its a Holyfield lol.

Hearns did beat him in the rematch at least how I saw it. As stated tho, SRL beat Hearns when they were prime and that would've been a hit on SRLs resume if he didn't. It's arguably his best win but he still would've been a legend even without it. Short career or not the names he beat n fought matter more.

 

Who do you rank higher p4p, the 74-32-61 George Dixon, or the 36-0 Joe Messi?

 

Definitely Messi as I have Dixons true record as 50-56-61, so there.

 

Haha. Well there's no come back to that irrefutable logic ;-)

 

In fact, if Hagler had been given the nod, many people if not most would be saying Leonard got robbed! it would be inverse psychology.

 

I'm not sure about that. The fight has an order around it that has lasted 35+ years. I'm not necessarily saying Marvin won it. Most reasonable fans had it razor close but one of the official judges apparently was watching a entirely different fight than what was actually happening in the ring. 118-110 I believe. Jojo Guerra? You could gift Halger 2 rounds and he still would have lost his title. Setup but Guerra gave it away by apparently filling out his scorecard the night before.
That raises some questions as well as the referee giving Leonard the green light to foul the shi! out of the champion without a point deduction or a serious warning. The expectations and the perception were all working in RL's favor that night.
Had Hagler gotten rough back and committed the same fouls Leonard committed he would have appeared the bully. Would Steele have been as forgiving? Marvin should have found out. I fault him for not reciprocating at least to even things out.
Leonard did put on a good show. He was fast, his flurries were eye catching, he moved quite a bit smartly. Even some of his fouls were flashy. A bolo punch to the nuts or left hook to the chops on the break never hurt anyone. It was downright cute. The powers that be needed Leonard to win that night.
Though I always respected him I was never a big fan of Hagler's but that is a fight that sits in my gut like a broken bottle. That is one bout I vowed never to watch it again.

 

Iḿ sure about it and Im not a huge Leonard fan. Hagler fought a horrible fight giving up the first 3-4 rounds fighting orthodox, why on Earth they thought that was smart is beyond me. Ive watched it many times and Leonard took it by 3-4 points. It wasnt 118-110 but Ray won, and if I was one of these Hagler fans I would ask why he-Marvin fought such a horrible fight and not hate on Leonard like they do.

 

In fact if Leonard had loss to Hagler in a close fight, it may have enhanced his stock a tad the way it did for Duran, especially considering the circumstances.
At the least some of the angry ass Hagler fans on this site wouldn't be as spiteful and venomous towards Leonard lol.
At least I would hope.