Hagler vs Leonard

Hagler was visibly shot against Roldan and Mugabi.All you have to do is look at those fights and you'll see Marvin couldn't defend anymore.How slowpoke Roldan hit him is irrefutable evidence of his decline.At least Mugabi had good handspeed.

 

Was he shot for the Hearns fight as well or was he shot, then ok, then shot again?

 

He fought a different kind of fight against Hearns.He mauled Tommy,never trying to outbox him.Marvin's ability to defend never came into play because he really didn't try to.He attacked and attacked some more.He didn't try to avoid punches,just pushed through Tommy's defence.Against Roldan and Mugabi,he fought a different fight.He boxed more,but it was clear that he simply couldn't get out of the way of punches effectively anymore.His reflexes were definitely shot.How the **** could a slowpoke like Roldan hit him with so many shots if his reflexes weren't utterly diminished?His punch resistance wasn't gone,just his ability to get out of the way of punches was.

 

completely agree. hagler was shot.
consider my perspective as a reference point. when i first got into boxing, one of the first fights i ever watched were hagler/ leonard and hagler/hearns. because of this, for a long time i thought hagler was a frazier type slugger who got hit 3 times to get in 1 shot.
so when i saw his earlier fights (minter, antuofermo, hamsho 1) i was like :yikes. this bald-headed monster is actually quite slick!

my take on hagler-leonard is: subsequent viewings i give it to hagler by 1 or 2 points. he was langind good body shots and some head shots and was pressing the fight.
but i don't begrudge the judges. on first viewing, i thought leonard won it big because those flurries of his, even if they didn't hurt hagler one bit, certainly befuddled him. and hagler looked completely slow. i can't imagine what impression it would've made on the judges minds seeing stuff like hagler missing 7-8 shots on leonard's BODY as he leaned back against the ropes.

 

:good:good:good

 

He`s still a baby in 2009 & on & on & on & on til death saves him from his own pain probably.

 

Normally your head is up your ass but I agree with this.

 

Good points, those that try to discredit what Leonard did vs Hagler should hang their head IMO, that was a great performance by a true ATG fighter rising to the occassion against all odds in his biggest fight vs a fellow ATG, a bigger man & p4p no1 in Marvin Hagler.

 

It's very easy to discredit Leonard.He waited to fight Marvin until he knew Marvin was shot.If Marvin wasn't as shot as he was,that fight NEVER would have happened.Hang my head?No,I'm just writing the truth.Against all odds Leonard won?That's untrue.He was fighting a shot fighter and knew it better than anyone else.If Leonard had wanted that fight so badly when Marvin was still great,he would have seriously called Marvin out long before he did.The truth is Leonard ducked Marvin even as he continuously called for the possibility of that fight.Illusion as well as smoke and mirrors:talking about fighting Marvin whilst all along ducking him.Leonard was shameless in his manipulation and called all the shots because he was the moneyman.And he knew it better than anyone else.

 

And I think I addressed the shot issue concerning the Hearns,Roldan and Mugabi fights quite clearly.Look at the fights themselves and write that it was false that Marvin couldn't get out of the way of punches anymore.See if you could get away with that one.That's the real issue here concerning Marvin's abilities.I guess sportwriters of Michael Katz's integrity don't know what they're talking about.You tell everyone on this site that Marvin was still a good defensive fighter in his efforts against those 3 and wasn't slow and was still great and you would be wrong.And you know it.And so does everyone else.

 

Ah man, I love this place.

 

:rofl

Rat-like cunning?


Seriously for a second... part of me wants to stick up for the man now. You'd swear Hagler had to give his cane and dentures to Goody Petronelli before getting into the ring the way some of you are carrying on.

 

I've come to the conclusion most people don't know a shot fighter from a bar of soap.

Hagler wasn't shot. Old, past his best? Yes. Shot? No.

 

Good point. Thus, what is the difference between "shot" and "past his prime"? How to know? :think

I understand that Hagler was past his prime when he fought Leonard, but my impression is that saying that he was "shot" is overreaching.

Screw this. I don't like admitting this, but Leonard fought smart and won. Hagler screwed himself royally. He can whine all he wants now, but he is not getting those wasted rounds back :verysad

 

Well then, it looks like you are one ov those clever sort ov chaps who invested everything he had in the SRL/Bernie Madoff ponzi scheme they were both jointly running in the 80's as i heard it promised 2 pay a sizeable return in fistic knowledge over a lifetime:nut Lucky You:rofl