Does anyone rate Hearns greater than Duran, Hagler and SRL?

It's 2010 now. In 2050, boxing historians will STILL be debating this decision.

Take a poll of 100 people, and it'll probably be some **** like 45 Hagler, 45 Leonard, 10 Draws.

 

Close fights are controversial?

 

Yeah.

You can't get a more evenly debated decision than Leonard-Hagler.

 

I would say the following

1. Leonard
2. Duran
3. Hearns
4. Hagler

Now if they fought each other I bet they would have been in some amazing fights!!

 

Hearns was the most effective boxer for me, by a mile, durability issues aside.

Duran is probably the greatest in terms of achievements.

Hagler is not on the same level as any of them, he lived off fighting smaller legends, right place, right time.


P4P Best:

Hearns
Leonard
Duran

Hagler



Greatness:

Duran
Leonard
Hearns

Hagler

 

Duran
Leonard

Hagler

Hearns

 

My favourite was Duran (best lightweight ever IMO) but I think SRL just pips him.

For me Hearns is actually last on the list, although I hold all four in the highest regard.

SRL
Duran
Hagler
Hearns

Top two for me are interchangeable, as are the bottom two. But Leonard or Duran should be number 1, and Hagler or Hearns should be number 4

 

It is hard to call Hearns the greatest of all 4 because he did lose 2 prime v prime matches vs Leonard & Hagler... but I do think all 4 men are on a similar level & if Hearns had the inner core toughness & chin of the other 3 then I think he spanks them 3-0, he could outbox any of them from distance & hold his own inside long enough to get distance again.
Hearns generally finishes bottom of the group in votes but to me all 4 are on a similar level of greatnes with SRL & Duran perhaps having a slight edge over Hearns & Hagler.

 

Your right actually, Norris & Camacho were both better than Barkely.

(I like Hearns but lets call it fair)

 

Nice post, Hearns was a true great.

(Duran was a 4 weight champ tho, not 3 :good)

 

But the point is.... a close fight (that the majority actually scored for Leonard from all Ive seen & read) should not be an issue, its Hagler`s annoyance with himself for not getting the job done vs the man he wanted to beat most thats blown this **** to embarassing levels, a close fight is no robbery no matter who you score it for.

 

Very good post , to this day I dont know how leonard got a draw in that second fight , and if Im not mistaken Ray made the fight at a catchweight?? I think it was 160 for the supermiddle title , i maybe wrong. But Ray was dropped twice , out thought and out fought , I gave him four rounds max.

Ray was always the smartest business man out of the 4 , hearns and duran were born fighters and Hagler worked the hardest as I would say he had the least natural talent , but was the most determined.

 

Controversial fights are controversial. Close fights are close fights. Those things aren't mutually exclusive. Pointless to base a debate on semantics.

Of course Hagler-Leonard is controversial, one of the most controversial in boxing history.