Chavez vs Hagler P4P

you dont seem to be able to separate reality from fact

I'm not interested in your opinion or what you WiSH could be reality, it's who actually did the most scoring that counts and you're stuck with it

BTW, what is welterweight like Leonard doing getting his clock cleaned by a featherweight like Camacho?

we are not talking the beneficiary of a bad decision; we are talking about a smaller man KNOCKING out the bigger man

Dont try to lie your way out of it, we all saw it

 

I agree 100 % that Taylor at 140 was NOTICEABLY better than Hearns at 160 ....
and its not even close

 

Hearns peaked in the early 80's at 154 ... he was never a great fighter at middleweight or above ... he was a very dangerous guy, a very game guy and still capable of beating many world class fighters but as the Hagler fight and later the Barkley, the Kitchen and even the Roldan fight's showed , his stamina and chin were vulnerable at 160 and up .. Taylor at 140 was a great talent in his own prime ... Chavez simply outlasted him. Bad stoppage possibly. Unfortunate storage for sure but look at the condition Taylor was in. He was beat up. This is a fight Julio hung in, came from behind showing a ton of moxie, overcame a terrifically talented , younger champion in that champion's prime at that champion's weight to come back to win. Even if you don't like the stoppage, look at the condition of the two men at the end ... it was a huge victory.

 

I disagree. Mayweather didn't accomplish much at lightweight. We still know he could beat just about anybody. In fact, Chavez is in the same boat there. What did Pacquiao do at 140? Very little, I'd still make him a favourite over many all time greats there.

A great fighters entire career is more important.

 

Yep, Leonard had not fought in three years, and during the first comeback was knocked on his arse by a clubfighter. Hagler should have came out like a maniac possessed as he did with Hearns, instead he gave the first few rounds away which only added to Leonard's confidence. Marvin Hagler had no one to blame but himself. Even his behavior before, during, and after the fight was different.

He behaved like he was on SRL's stage when it should have been his show all the way. I hover between 8-4 and 7-5 in rounds for Leonard.

 

If they were just slaps in the clinches, then why did Leonard's head keep popping up?

maybe you dont watch the action closely enough, and that's why you missed the fact that Leonard lost most of the rounds

About all you have going for you is that "Ray Leonard had the better ring generalship"

or that "Ray had the crowd on his side"

But using every legal tactic allowed in the sport of boxing, Hagler won most of the rounds and outscored Ray Leonard

It wasnt as convincing as Norris Leonard, but Marvin won fair and square. The video settles the debate once and for all

Why not accept it?

Also, you shouldnt be griping about the way Leonard was knocked out by Camacho

Ray stood 5 - 10 to Hector's 5 - 7 and had a natural 20 pound advantage over him as well as a 7 inch reach advantage

Leonard picked a fight with Hector because he knew Hector was a relic from the 1980s at least six years past his prime.

Ask Greg hauger

Ask JC Chavez

ask Tito Trinidad

so it evens out, okay?

 

why not go for the obvious explanation; Hagler was well over the hill, the reason Ray called him out after five years of flat out refusal

 

see, it's just as I told you; trying to find excuses for the plain fact he was outpointed

The video cannott lie and doesnt offer excuses

numbers dont lie

hagler won the rounds

and excuses such as "Hagler fought scared" are irrelevant

"got outclassed" nothing more than rantings from an outraged, emotional fanboy

but take heart; Leonard lost only to the best including Hagler, Norris, Camacho, washed up Hearns, and a pretty good lightweight named Duran

 

Ha ha Macho Camacho. Only man to beat both Leonard an Duran

 

He was also almost stopped by Roldan and Kitchen .. he looked so bad against Kitchen that Leonard actually finally gave him a rematch ..I am one of the few that only consider Hearns a borderline great ... he was a warrior , exciting as hell, dramatic , all of that in an Aplus way but he was deeply flawed between his chin and his stamina ... his welter career was very brief and to me , terrific but inconclusive .. apart from the Leonard loss he looked puzzled and a bit shaky vs Harold Weston and less than stellar vs Shields ... he was in fairness extremely young ... at 154 he peaked and may have been great for those two or three years ... at 160 his fragile right hand, his chin and his stamina made him a super exciting guy but I would not say great ..