Most people here at Eastside dont want to answer that. and the one person who did tried to sugarcoat it. No pun intended
People like to act like Leonard just came off the street laced em' up and pulled a marvelous performance out of his ass. What he did was wait for Hagler to go through hell with Mugabi and THEN find the balls to challenge him - and then he spent months sparring his ass off against contenders. Then came up with a gameplan that looks good on paper but doesn't really win fights, unless you're SRL and the judges want to lick your nuts at any chance possible. Hagler fought and SRL sparred, stealing rounds where he tapped the **** out of Hagler but never hurt him. When Hagler did catch him, we saw why Leonard hit the backpedal often in the fight.
I dont know if I want to tell you my thoughts. You're only going to try turning things around. I told you I felt Hagler was shot. I backed it up with an article out of Ko magazine. Once again, you ignored it as I thought. I told you I watched Hagler in sparring. It went over your head just like I said and you come back with "If the fight had happened last year then yes, I could understand the bitterness, but 22 years on" So I know where you're coming from. You cant even engage me point by point! You just pass over the things you dont want to discuss and focus on the traditional "get over it" The thread is about Hagler-Leonard remember? Am I supposed to stay away from the topic because my opinions might offend someone? You want me to just fall into line, have no opinion of my own and be politically correct like the rest of you-is that it? Because homey dont play that! You told me just this morning that Hagler couldnt have been shot beccuz Ray Leonard would have killed him, even after 5 years. But what hadnt occured to you is that you overstimated Leonard and underestimated Hagler. In my view, Hagler would have played with him before putting him out of his misery-similar to Hagler-Demmings.
Leonard has two great wins over Hearns and Binetez, the "wins" over Duran and Hagler were more a case of cunning and timeing, then being a better fighter.
I entered the thread just to see if there was something new or relevant worth reading, but unfortunately it's the same tired old crap rehashed again and again. Oh well. I'll know better next time.
I know the issue in question. I used to own it. But I always find it strange how people always seem so much more informed post facto. Hagler was the betting favorite, was he not? The majority of the experts were picking him to win, not so? But I guess you were the only one who saw that sparring session, or any other he had. Nothing's gone over my head. You watching Hagler in sparring is only partly relevant here. We ALL saw the part that really mattered - the fight. You say he was shot. I think shot is too strong a word. What more is there to say on the matter? It's a difference of opinion, although I do agree Hagler was definitely not the Hagler of his earlier days. You want to to engage you point for point? No problem. However I know that nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing that I or anyone else says, is going to change your mind about what happened, is it? I mean, not even a little. You can only look at this topic in one way. So really, what's the use? Because you won't budge a fraction of an inch either way. Hey, who said anything about people staying away from the thread? This is an internet forum where opinions differ all the time. If I was so easily offended I wouldn't be here to begin with. Where I started to object was when it became apparent that this wasn't a discussion about the fight so much as it became a whine-fest about how poor, old, toothless Hagler was picked on by that evil schemer Leonard. As for being 'politically correct'...what are you on about?? I honestly didn't know that disagreeing with you or anyone else on this matter was being 'politically correct', or lacking an independent thought process. Yeesh. Cool. What I find so unbelieveable about all this is that you seem to think that 95% of us are all Leonard lovers with some sort of agenda, that we're all in some vegetable state and cannot think for ourselves. You paint yourself as some sort of vigilante of justice trying to uncover "the truth", and us evil, diabolical Leonard lovers try to dash your noble quest at every turn. Yeah, we're trying to hide "the truth" because that would mean us having to admit Leonard was just an overrated media creation who picked on a Hagler with both feet already in the grave, and probably bought off the judges just to be sure. We'd be crushed! We cannot allow that! "The truth" must never be known! ...:nut But carry on. I'll just have a laugh from afar from now on.
Check the part in bold. I'm not so sure he was ready to hang them up. I read in an article published after the fight that the Hagler camp were about to enter negotiations with Hearns for a rematch before he lost he Leonard. I don't know the specifics, but that's what I read. Anyway, you're entirely correct in saying that Leonard was a very crafty guy who was very much aware of the strengths, weaknesses and condition of guys on his radar. He had watched Hagler and no doubt many others for years. Ray most likely did duck Hagler for much of Marvin's career. I can believe that. I also don't doubt for a minute that he did fight Hagler at a conveniently opportune time. Leonard during the latter part of his career did take fights where he thought the other guy was either a) Not that hot to begin with (Lalonde) b) Not the force they once were (Hagler, Hearns in the rematch) so in a way, yeah, he manipulated the situation to suit himself. He also on a few occasions set conditions for opponents to suit himself. Whether they acepted these terms isn't the point. Fighters shouldn't be manipulating the situation like that at the negotiating table. Still, like Robbi said earlier, he didn't have a crystal ball. Fair enough, he may have gambled on Hagler, Hearns or whomever not being the same guy based on his observations, but he was out for a long time and coming up in weight. He himself wasn't the same guy he was either. Maybe the layoff did Leonard good. Maybe not. Who knows for sure? Fighting is an odd business though...you just don't know when your time is up, and when that night is just not your night. Preparing for the fight in secret and preparing for the fight officially is not the same thing as getting in there and actually fighting the man for real. Fighters get old overnight. Neither Leonard nor Marvin were youngsters, but at least Hagler had been active. He had been in the fight groove, whereas Ray had been out of the loop. How did he know the occasion would not be too much for him? How did he know how hard Hagler hit, how accurately or how often he punched? Watching these things from a commentator's seat and actually experiencing it for yourself are completely different things. Completely different. Ray deserves at least some credit for the win...crikey. If Leonard stole rounds by flurrying at the end, then that's because Hagler allowed it. Why didn't Hagler do it? Why didn't Hagler get in his face and rough him up? There were times in the fight Hagler just followed Leonard around the ring like a puppy on a leash instead of cutting off the ring. No matter how 'shot' he was, he fought like a muppet for much of the fight. Leonard fought smart. Hagler fought dumb. People cannot blame the passage of time or Leonard for Hagler fighting a tactically brainless fight. Only Hagler and his corner can field the blame there. The irony of this whole thing is that I'm not even a Leonard fan. Never have been really. I wanted Hagler to win. But fair is fair. There has to be a sense of balance. To completely discredit Ray's achievement and blame the loss on anything and everything other than the man who deserves a good deal of the blame for his own downfall is bull****. I'm not saying that's the case with you specifically - at least you give Ray his due as a great fighter - but others here are trying to do just that.
Great balanced post FOF. I am a new fan to boxing and I have started collecting fight's and I am a bit cut that fighters like Leonard, Jones Jr and Mayweather have chosen to take fights that do not challenge their skills later in their career's that they have a very good chance of winning, as us the fans are the ones that miss out in the long run.
its really simple. leonard fought hagler because he believed he could beat him after seeing him stuggled with mugabi, he even said it with his own mouth. but even that version of hagler was still dangerous, he did after all ko mugabi. leonard knew he couldnt beat a prime hagler, he was too good, too strong. but around that time, he knew he had a good chance to pull it off. but remember, leonard wasnt in his prime as well. so it was a well calcualted risk on the part of leonard. still deserves credit. and plus, that still dosent change that fact that hagler was bullshitting in the first 4 rds of the fight.
I gotta agree with this. Discussing how smart and cunning Leonard was putting stipulations and choosing the right time to face Hagler is very interesting. Same with discussing how "worn out", "past his prime" or "shot" Hagler was. Truly, both are important issues, but they are not the main issues.... well at least not for me :think Even more important than what happened before the fight, is what happened during the fight. Shot or not shot, I believe that Hagler could still have won, but he messed it up badly. Wrong strategy, wrong timing, wrong attitude. Leonard had nothing to do with that unless he was a master hypnotist
Welcome to Classic, Gesta. Boxing needs new fans, so it's always good to chat with folks getting into the sweet science. Unfortunately, boxing is as much a business as a sport, and sometimes (if not often) the best matchups are not made when they should be. But when they are, it's usually well worth waiting for. :smoke
Of course the "experts" were picking Marvin to win.Despite the fact he was only fighting once a year for the previous year,he was still middleweight champion,no matter how inactive he was.Funny though because Michael Katz,who was friendlier with Marvin than Leonard,saw how slow Marvin had become in leading up to the fight,even 2 years before it. Please look at the Mugabi fight once more and tell me Marvin wasn't shot.And that was a full year before he and Leonard had fought.And tell me why 20something Mugabi was knocked out in his next fight in the 3rd round only 9 months after Marvin by juniormiddleweight Duane Thomas. I don't know about RedRooster,but there is no way that I'll ever budge on it because the evidence is just too strong. Neither RedRooster nor I claimed that evil scheming Leonard picked on poor toothless Marvin.What both of us correctly claimed was that Leonard wanted NOTHING to do with Marvin throughout the majority of his career and ducked him until it was obvious that Marvin was shot.Even you allude to it in your own contri. And nowhere on any of the contris in this thread did anyone claim that Leonard was an overrated media creation.I don't know where that came from.He was,however,the media's and public's darling and golden boy,and nobody attempting to be honest can deny that. Just checked Marantz's book and there wasn't any Hearns rematch with Marvin mentioned once the Leonard offered to fight him.According to that book,it took Marvin 3 1/2 months to decide to fight Leonard-maybe Marvin wanted Leonard to wait(dose of his own medicine).Maybe Marvin wasn't sure he could be motivated anymore.Maybe Maybe realized the end was arriving.Nobody knows for sure.