Hagler vs Duran

A rematch would not have ended well for Duran.

 

I agree...except for De Jesus, Duran really wasnt a rematch type of fighter.

Muhammad Ali, Carlos Monzon, Sugar Ray Robinson and Joe Louis, on the other hand.....

 

I'm not thinking of it from Duran's angle..........take a deep dive into Hagler's rematch record.............Monzon's pales in comparison. SRR has splotches in his. Hagler significantly improved quite a bit to dramatically in every rematch except Seales off the top of my head. In their third bout he whooped him in 86 seconds. Antuofermo was carved up like a thanksgiving turkey, as was Hamsho. Monroe got beaten worse with each subsequent bout. Bobby Watts paid for a bad decision years later. Many of these one can chalk up to Hagler on a steep improvement curve.

I've always said adaptability was never his strongest point, in fact it may have been his weakest. Give him time to think between matches tho and he's firing on all cylinders - just like Joe Louis.

Hagler was a teeny bit starstruck in his very first superfight and was too laidback at times he should have been taking full advantage of his size and Duran's age and heaping pressure on the little man. He caught himself in time as he came on strong in the last two rounds to nullify the chance of a bad decision. He also got a bit too cautious over his cut which was part of why he held back a bit too much until the finish line was in sight.

He would have heaps the pressure on Duran in the rematch and i'd be shocked if he didn't wear him down.

 

I had Hagler up by 1 point. I thought he pulled it out in the last round.

 

Agreed John. I wonder if Hagler's initial strategy may have been predicated on fighting Duran the legend, rather than Duran the fighter on his own merits as he was on that night at MW.

Hagler boxed Duran to begin with, rather than engage him, as if concerned Duran would have the upper hand on the inside.

By the end of the fight Hagler was in no doubt he was the stronger man and would come out on top in a war of attrition. Doubtless he'd take that knowledge into a rematch and adjust his approach from the outset accordingly.

Still, a remarkable performance from Duran. A fighter who ranks highest at LW taking a prime (albeit perhaps ever so marginally past absolute peak) top 3 ATG career MW that close, is astonishing.

 

I thought Duran wasn't keeping it quite as tight as Hagler in the later rounds, they were both game for 20 rounds, and in that case I think Hagler secures a much more dominant win, possible KO

 

Yeah, my score was something similar. Duran put up a great effort, but it wasn't close to me.

 

I was just thinking that before I got to this post. I thought it was boring, watching it one week later on tape. I think I might like to watch it again very soon, though.

 

I think it was an excellent fight between two highly skilled fighters.

It was a very calculated fight from both sides but since Hagler and Duran never were runners/huggers/spoilers it was an entertaining boxing match, MUCH more interesting than Pac vs Floyd or Tito vs Oscar.

I actually enjoy these type of fights more than non-stop action between two less skilled boxers.

 

The fight was supposed to be a coming out party for Hagler, and the absolute last Harrah for Duran.
Most of the boxing publications of the era thought Hagler would ruin Duran and do it early.
It was the fight I truly began to see how multifaceted Duran was.
I saw he wasn't just the ultimate brawler, but a fighter that could fight behind the jab, and counter with the best of them.
The tactics Duran used completely threw Hagler off his game early. Made him think, instead of instinctive, and reluctant to let his hands go.
If Hagler wasn't the natural bigger and stronger fighter, which he began to take advantage of as the fight progressed, he definitely could've lost.
But to his credit, he did take advantage of his physical advantages, and won the fight , Rightfully so.
It wasn't close at the end of it.
But it did exposed some holes in Haglers game.
Holes that Ray Leonard at the urging of Duran would fully take advantage of.
Hearns , Sibson , Mugabi, Hart, Roldan, Minter, Briscoe, Hamsho, Lee, some of the hardest punchers and hardest men in the history of middleweights boxing demonstrated the futility of trying to bomb Hagler out the ring.
But he could be out thought, and made reluctant. Duran showed the way for Leonard's win.

 

Marvin didnt seem to eager to give him one other than saying right after the fight hed get him out next time. What about this time?

This is simllar to the Leonard fought Durans fight myth that was circulated after the Montreal fight. The fact is Hagler being the middleweight should have walked over Duran just as so many so-called experts predicted and the same for the Leonard fight where people thought that Ray being naturally bigger would be the puncher etc. It didnt work out in either case as that fact is Duran was overall simply better than Leonard and Hagler and had he been their size would have given both of them a sever beating if not kod them.

 

I agree Duran was p4p, prime for prime, the best fighter of the 3, and have argued as much (at least relative to SRL) pretty extensively on this forum.

I believe Hagler would have had more success had he fought, rather than boxed, Duran, as evidenced by the final 2 rounds in their fight.

The above two paragraphs are not mutually exclusive.

 

If it wasn't it soon was i think Greg as he saw firsthand how canny Duran was. It's funny, the area where Duran was expected to perform his best (inside) was where Hagler actually excelled. Absolutely he'd be far more aggressive and i do think the cut saw him overcompensate and get way too timid. He admitted later he was quite concerned Duran would nail that cut.

Hagler's late surge IMO was due to either, or both, thinking he was past the point of danger with the cut and starting to panic he'd get robbed. He still had some PTSD over the Antuofermo draw going on lol

But yes it was a great effort from Duran no doubt at all. The big publications deemed tho Hagler won Duran was the true winner as he redeemed himself and Hagler's standing lost quite a bit of ground.

 

I don't recall any clamoring at all for a rematch. Virtually everyone accepted Hagler was a bit poor that night but still won handily. I don't recall seeing any really close cards let alone draws or cards for Duran. On top of this Duran fought Hearns very next fight and got himself assassinated.

I gave my opinion on this time, Hagler was disappointing, Duran excellent with Hagler still winning comfortably even if somewhat unimpressively. Hagler as i said, IMO, wasn't as good as a lot of other ATG's at adapting in the ring as needed. I don't think he had the smartest corner as well to be fair.

To be fair history is littered with what about this time performances. Louis was a king of it. Azumah Nelson also did it multiple times. There's dozens of them and hundreds of individual examples.

I think it would have been a much closer fight if Leonard did move tho it was already close. Duran won his rounds much cleaner than Leonard but under the scoring system that fact wasn't recognised so we have very close fight even tho Duran had the better of it.

Many of the so called experts actually picked Duran to beat Leonard. Of 30 sportswriters polled more than half picked Duran to not only win but to knockout Leonard.

• In a UPI poll of 30 sportswriters, 16 picked Duran to win by knockout and one picked him to win by decision. Of the 13 who went with Leonard, eight thought he would stop Duran.

I have said before on here if Duran was born a middleweight he would have beaten Hagler, absolutely. I in no way think he'd knock him out tho nore Leonard for that matter. Duran was one helluva fighter.

 

Hagler talked about a rematch right after the fight saying he would take Duran out next time, Hagler wasnt big on rematches unless he knew it was someone he could beat like Hamsho who he fought next. He never rematched Duran or Hearns but cried about a rematch after the Leonard fight.