Hagler vs Duran

Not surprised they looked closer in size than expected. Hagler was never a big middleweight like a Carlos Monzon or a Bernard Hopkins for example.

 

Hagler was extremely wary, probably too wary, of the dirty tricks Duran put over Moore and in particular the closing of his eye. Even as early as the first round Hagler was claiming Duran was trying to get his thumb into his eye which he may well have been. I think this was a fair part of his being a little overcautious at times especially when his eye started to show some damage later on.

 

The best way to describe this fight is competitive but not close IMO. I don't see where Hagler was really in any danger of losing. I think this is more of the underdog being competitive and performing far better than anyone expected.

Hagler was what...........7 or 8 ko victory defenses into his reign and Roberto had some luster off but had been rejuvenated by beating up D. Moore but I don't think anyone was thinking it was gonna be competitive and it was. That to me is the story of the fight. Hagler was never in danger of losing that fight.

 

I agree. Which is why how he went at Tommy was so surprising. Sometimes I think the prefight anger was more of a factor with Tommy than a tactic, although it worked out well for him. He has a great legacy but without the Hearns fight it would not be nearly what it is now, especially how he lost to Ray in his final fight. Talking about that Ray fight since I like to ramble about that era. As for Marvin's legacy and the loss to Ray, I think Ray knew he was not going to fight Marvin again also and Marvin knew a rematch would not happen.

 

I agree there was genuine animosity between them by the time the fight kicked off. I also think Hagler knew his best bet was to smother Hearns and take away his punching room. No-one ever outboxed Hearns from the outside and Hagler at this stage of his career was well aware he had some scar tissue building up around his eyes. He stated after Hearns - Benitez they put no pressure on each other and it wouldn't be like that with him or words to that effect.

Agree with the rest too. Hearns is his signature win and Ray wasn't going to fight him again. It would match previous trends. I'm partial to it tho as this was Leonards Mount Everest and once he'd climbed it the hunger to do the same was not remotely as strong.

 

Marvin saying it would be different is why I think Tommy pulling out of that fight was a good decision. McCallum always made fun of the pinkie comment, but who knows why he pulled out. Tommy is lucky to have avoided Marvin in 1982 since he was not as big when the first fight was scheduled, and had he lost it might have changed his whole career. No Benitez or Duran fight. I always wonder if there was anyway for Marvin (without Ray) to rectify or take back that loss to Ray-disputed or not. Had he come back and won the middleweight title against Hearns after Tommy beat Roldan, and then maybe defended against Tate or Nunn. At that point I think Nunn or Kalambay and Hearns would have been tough for him.

 

Hearns wasn't really ready at that time, for sure.

I think Hagler was on a steep down especially given his motivation was waning. I think he would have struggled.

 

Yeah Marvin was looking a lot slower with Leonard than he had before.
I remember Leonard saying after Tommy beat Roldan that Hagler fighting a Hearns rematch (I think they talked about April of 1988) after Hearns beat Roldan was a mistake because Marvin wanted to fight Leonard in a rematch, so if he fought Hearns after Roldan he wouldn't be motivated which would put him in the possibility of losing. And you are right, Tommy was not ready for Marvin at middleweight at that time. I am not sure what they thought. I am surprised Manny Steward almost went along with it. It was almost a reverse situation had Hagler scheduled to fight Hearns in 1988. Both times Hagler and Hearns possibly (one actually scheduled) scheduling fights to make up for fighting Leonard.