I think the 2nd Leonard fight and the rematch vs Barkley were good displays of durability from Hearns, he was hurt multiple times by Leonard an even ready to go a few times and managed to survive. Against Barkley he was floored heavily and had his nose broken, but still survived 12 rounds of Barkley wailing away at him to make it a close competitive fight.
The span of his career at middleweight , 85 to 89, ages of 26 - 30 was his middleweight career and that's what we have to gage him by ... that fact that he kept jumping back and forth between divisions may have added to his physical issues as he bounced from 160 to 154 to 168 to 175 ... he was still a dangerous fighter straight up to 175 where he defeated two champions but it was based on the caliber of the fighter ... if you look at the seven fights between Hagler and the Leonard rematch , Hearns struggled badly in three of them (Kitchen, Roldan and Barkley) His stamina and chin were concerns. I remember hearing Manny say he walked into the dressing room before the Hagler fight and saw one of Tommy's team massaging his legs and knew the bout was over before it started ... as far as his legs / stamina and chin, they were what they were as much as his speed, reach, heart and power were assets. Post Hagler he had two physically draining fights in his entire career and took little punishment .. Like all fighter's he was the sum of his parts ...
you sound like a self appointed expert except that you play dumb when the opportunity calls for it I told him it was rounds 5, 9. didnt you see the fight? If that doesnt satisfy you, watch the Norris fight or even better, the Camacho fight
Troll, show the exact points ... back your claim up with fact ... where and when in each round did he stagger Leonard ? If he staggered him then they should be 10-8 rounds ... back it up Troll .. go to YouTube, cut and paste and show it or blow it
My point was Hagler faced a better middleweight Hearns than Roldan, Kinchen and Barkley. Hearns was always going to struggle badly at higher weights against stylistic nuisances while on the wane. It's very likely he would have struggled less at an earlier point i.e. pre Hagler.
its on the video stupid. why ask me to "back it up" when it's a matter of pubic record speaking of trolls, if you're a boxing historian, back it up and show us all the best sellers you've written LOL! and if you dont prepare for ridicule you havent experienced since your first hard on in public school you'll be hanging your head for a week!
The only rounds Hagler won were the rounds Leonard took off cause he was tired. He hurt Leonard in round 5 after losing the first 4. He won round 12 cause Leonard didn't do anything for most of the round. He also won round 7 and could've gotten the 9th. Just thoroughly out boxed
that's not what the evidence shows. You're basically doubling down on your mistakes, hoping that your opinion counts more than evidence but when presented with evidence, the question comes to mind why should I take another man at his word when he shows clear bias? In fact, the evidence shows it was Hagler who nearly swept the first four rounds, with Leonard actually winning only one you cant just GIVE Leonard the rounds because they looked close. In that case, why not just split them? BUT, thanks to the evidence we see, we can now allot the rounds to the rightful man - Hagler Which is why the video is so effective, because it throws out the bias and settles the dispute so we can forget all the ignorant comments inspired by media and ignore such excuses "Leonard out boxed Hagler', "Leonard showed better ring generalship", "Leonard made a fool out of Hagler", and so on its SCORING punches that counts and since Clancy, who was seated ringside, calling the fight, said Hagler was landing the harder shots, you no longer have to worry about the quality of Hagler's vs Leonard's hagler had both superior quality AND quantity was it as thorough and convincing as Norris' victory? Nothing could top that, but we know that Hagler won with rom to spare Cheer up though; Leonard lost only to the best
Hearns was hanging on for his life against Leonard in the final round. If it had been a fifteen round bout it sure looked like it would have been a repeat of the first fight .. that aside, Leonard was no more a natural middleweight than Hearns .. as far as the Barkley rematch, Iran flattened Hearns in either the third or fourth round but Tommy showed his incredible heart by getting up and making a terrific fight of it , losing but leaving it all on the table .. that said , at 160/168 Iran Barkley, a very good but limited fighter, twice beat Hearns and no one is calling Barkley a great fighter.
So you won't show it because you're a hack. If he "wobbled" Leonard twice then both the rounds should be 10-8 and none were by any of the judges .. just as I thought, all keyboard mouth .. LOL.
All time delusion. Leonard landed the cleaner, harder more effective punches. Haglers little taps in the clinch don't count for much. The moment was too big for Hagler. Same thing that happened when he fought Duran
It's possible ... Hearns is a bit hard to factor because he kept going back and forth between 154 to 168 in a very short span so there is an argument that it was wear and tear on the body plus the Hagler bout may have somewhat impacted his confidence ... who knows ?