Is Sugar Ray Leonard the complete boxer?

Exactly. He was spent after round one for all intents and purposes. Steward blamed a leg massage, Hearns blamed nothing and most like yourself simply look at the tremendous punishment both and and the incredible pace allied to Hearns average stamina.

 

Exactly.

 

Indeed, which makes for a pretty imposing all around game.

 

I think Duran won mainly because Ray fought the wrong fight and brawled with Duran, and even then the fight wasn't a wipe out. Leonard showed in the rematch that when he stuck to his game, he could beat Duran and he could have done that in the first fight. You couldn't find a more different Leonard in the rematch. He countered beautifully, he spun Duran, threw flurries( and got back out) and controlled the temp. Lets not think for a minute that Duran was more technically sounder than Leonard at any point. :yep

 

Let's not confuse speed and mobility with technical superiority.

 

Hagler needed to force that pace and Hearns obliged. If Hearns conceded before the fight that Hagler's durability and heavy hands could prove to dangerous for Hearns to mix it up and Hearns decided to box and move behind those long straight shots from outside... it's a different fight.

 

Stonehands, to reiterate, if you watch the video Hearns started to move from the one minute mark. The toe to toe ended at that point until Hagler had him against the ropes in the final minute which he achieved by walking Hearns down. If one minute of brawling could take away Hearns' strength then I would say 5-6 rounds of cautious boxing with Hagler would have the same effect. Hagler's combination of skills, determination, durability and strength, not to mention the southpaw style which takes away the jab, would be Hearns' undoing every time.

To say that Hearns voluntarily stood toe to toe with Hagler for the first round is absolutely wrong. One minute my friend, one minute. Then he boxed until Hagler forced him to the ropes. The movie doesn't lie !

 

Perfectly put.

 

Let's not think for a minute that you know now or have ever known what you were talking about on any subject.:yep

 

It would've been interesting to see how Hearns' balance would have held up had he boxed and increased distance on Hagler from the get-go. His balance wasn't too good after the 1st round. I seem to recall him stumbling backwards at one point during the 2nd round. Was this strictly bad balance or did Hagler's punches throughout the first round send a shock wave through Hearns which also played a role as well?

Hagler certainly never caught him with any meaningful shots seconds prior to the stumbling occuring. It could well have been Hagler's accumulation more than anything else. With Hearns' overall effectiveness in his shots (speed and snap) having evoprated after the 1st round, perhaps the legs went along with the arms.

While Hearns' chin was surprisingly concrete throughout the first round, maybe it took a couple of minutes for the punches to sink-in and take effect. Adrenaline and the sheer pace of the first round got him through. The pace dropped during patches of the 2nd round, and maybe thats when the punches he recieved during the 1st round began to take their toll. Delayed effects so to speak, combined with the shots he recieved during the 2nd as well of course.

 

Hearns began the fight with the clear intention of going toe-to-toe with Hagler. He warred...but got caught with several debilitating shots -there were about 2-3 short left hooks and then a right before he held on just before he started moving. The referee broke it. Then Hearns got wheels for about 35 seconds. Why? Because he was a bit hurt and decided to go to plan B. That's it, and then Hagler found him and went to work. Hearns was then fighting more out of desperation. So, while you have the general picture right, I think that you misunderstand what is happening.

Had Hearns a different fight plan, he would not have been caught with about 6 or 7 hard, flush shots to the head and several to the body in the first round. Hagler may not be a one-punch KO artist, but his hands are heavy and those shots he landed tend to linger. Hagler was really cracking Hearns. Why? Because Hearns was (a) in range and (b) concentrating on landing his lightening -not on defense. Had Hearns come out behind a jab and stayed mobile and outside, it is just as likely that he'd have Hagler reaching and been able to counter him... and perhaps stun him without the cost. The likelihood that he'd cut him is there too, obviously.

Hagler would have to take risks everytime he closed the distance. If Hearns is turning him and staying mobile, 1985 Hagler would have had to chase him down and then land. The moments of truth may not have happened until Hagler slowed down a bit later. Remember also that Hearns was rubbery in round 2 and 3 because he was hit repeatedely in round 1 and when Hagler hit you that much and with that much aggression you tended to stay hit.

No one outboxes Hearns... and a rampaging Hagler was hoping, no he was praying that Hearns would oblige long enough for Hagler to do damage. You assume that a rampaging Hagler would have broken prime Hearns down a few rounds later. I'm just not so sure about that... it would be a different fight; Hagler the bull would not have been dealing with a physically weaker bull who played into his strength, he would be facing a very capable matador -with horns of his own. And Hearns' horns are sharper, faster, and longer.

And that's a different fight.

 

I tip my cap. Tho i think Hearns would still be the obvious underdog your post has me feeling that Hearns maybe would have had some sort of chance. Certainly an interesting scenario. You should be writing for the press or in the big mags mate.

 

Lets not think for a minute that you now know or even knew anything about Leonard or Duran, especially since Duran was as you say ''weight drained'' (which is everyone's excuse when their favorite fighter loses) even though the fight was exactly 5 months later. :yep Keep going. IN REALITY, Duran lost to Leonard because Leonard fought a technical brilliant fight in the rematch, not because Duran gained weight in 5 months which was never even proven, and only brought up by blind fans.

 

Where was that technical superiority in the rematch when Leonard use his advantages and boxed? Ray fights the wrong fight in their first fight and Duran is now a better boxer than Leonard, but when Leonard fights the right fight in the rematch and wins convincingly, Duran is all of a sudden weight drained and not the same fighter he was five months prior. I see a pattern. Duran was known for blowing up after fights, though it is almost impossible for him to become overweight in only 5 months when he knew that a rematch was immediately after. Not only that but that was when Duran was still in his prime, had only previously lost once( which at lightweight years before) so why wouldn't he be motivated?

 

No misunderstanding SH, just a difference of a opinion. You don't have a monopoly on understanding the analysis of a fight, my friend, despite your fanbase here. Hagler's early heavy shots definitely helped him walk Hearns down and trap him against the ropes. If a few heavy hooks achieved this this easily, then a few heavy hooks over the duration of a few rounds would have the same effect over a the course of a few rounds. Hearns just doesn't have the physical strength to keep Hagler off him for 12 rounds. When Hearns stood still in the fight he got hit. He doesn't have the footspeed or the stamina to outbox Hagler over the course of the fight. Outboxing Leonard is a different thing. Leonard wasn't that aggressive, choosing to jab with Hearns most of the time, and just doesn't have comparable strength.

The only way Hearns would beat Hagler, would be to KO him inside 5. Hagler presents too many offensive skills for Hearns' weaknesses to handle over a distance fight. As for Hagler getting cut, I think we make too much of this. Yes the man got cut now and again, but he was no Henry Cooper! The man was never stopped on cuts, only taken to the ringside doctor once in 67 fights and faced big hitting MUgabe and sharp shooter LEonard in his last two fights and was not cut. Leonard got his eye swelled almost shut against Hearns and suffered a shocker of a cut against Duran but these issues don't come into any analysis of a Leonard match up. I think it's very harsh to bring that up in a theoretical match up when the man was NEVER stopped on cuts in 67 fights.