Bigger achievement - Ali/Foreman or Leonard/Hagler

Great post.

 

Ali beating Foreman was a better performance and a better win, but Leonard beating Hagler was probably the better achievement.

I know that sounds paradoxical, but for me the circumstances of the Leonard-Hagler fight is what makes it special, though I personally don't view it as a great performance.

That SRL came off such a long lay-off, moved up in weight, and went 12 close rounds with a dominant champion is remarkable. Those circumstances are what ensure SRL-Hagler is an ATG win.

However, as a performance it is not comparable to Ali's dominant and brilliant display vs Foreman. Also, Foreman was peak whereas Hagler was a bit past-prime.

 

This is my feeling too :happy

 

Clearly it's Ali v Foreman. Ali actually won his fight. And, if you really believe Leonard won, Foreman was a much greater threat at the time than Hagler. Foreman was a young destroyer. Hagler was way passed his prime. In fact, the situation is flipped. Leonard was young and fresh and Ali was the aging veteran.

 

Saying hagler was faded is simply stating an objective fact. Everybody who isn't a Leonard fanboy knows that wasn't the same Hagler in there. Saying he wasn't faded is trying to find some way to make Leonard's win more significant. You give your bias away when you say we shouldn't insult Leonard. How does Hagler being faded insult Leonard unless you aim is to build up Leonard.

See, this is the typical swinging from Leonard's nutsack that we see around here and elsewhere. Try to be more subtle in the future.

 

Ali over Foreman. At the time I didn't think Ali had a chance. When leonard fought Hagler I thought Leonard would win if he had anything left. He did. He was a better fighter then Hagler. He would have won whenever they fought.

 

Very hard to compare these two. Both were great. The question is who was better at the time they fought Leonard and Ali. Foreman or Hagler? I do know Hagler had been relatively inactive since he fought Hearns 2 years before. Hard to decide on this one.

 

Good question this is really hard to decide, so let's break it down:

Opponent
Hagler was a greater MW than Foreman was a HW, but Foreman was at the peak of his powers while Hagler was at least four years past his prime. But the fact that Hagler was one weight class bigger (even if the size difference in both cases were quite equal) makes him the more formidable obstacle I'd say.

Version of Ali/Leonard
Ali was older, but Leonard came straight out of retirement while Ali had been back for several years. Since this version of Ali was superior to the 28-year old one who faced Quarry in Atlanta I'd have to say he was closer to his prime than Leonard.

Manner of win
I think Leonard's gets sold way short by some. It was one of the best combinations of tactics, ring generalship and skill I've ever seen in a ring against a physically superior opponent. But so was Ali's, and there was nothing to dispute about his victory. He took some bombs, but dominated his opponent in every way (especially mentally) and became the only man to ever knock him out. Clear advantage Ali here.

Summary
Leonard wins two categories with a quite narrow margin, while Ali wins one clearly. My initial reaction was that the answer was Leonard's victory, but this is really to close to call IMO.

 

I agree.

Consider this... we talk about Pac and him possibly being on riods. SRL admitting he used riods to help him for this fight. Should we discredit himself for this? Should it matter? He barely edged out a victory in a fight where you could argue he lost.

Ali beat a young Foreman. Hagler was definitely deteriorating a little.

In terms of the way it happened, Ali's was more impressive. But considering the context I guess I have to still give SRL the edge. Although it is close, but SRL came off a 3 year layoff to compete with an elite MW. That's what it boils down to.

 

Ali shook the world that night, the fight build up, the use of the rope-a-dope, and knocked out the guy who seemed unbeatable. Leonard's win was truely great, but Ali's was epic.

 

Hagler was shopworn and shot and Leonard knew it.That's why he challenged Marvin when he did.If not,why did he wait so long to challenge Marvin after talking about fighting Marvin for years.I mean,he retired for the second time against Howard because he was disappointed in his own performance,but then magically decides that he could beat one of the greatest middleweights ever 3 years later?C'mom.

 

Yep, the one thing that constantly amazes me is when people suggest that Hagler wasn't old and past his best. Leonard himself said this before the fight, immediately after the fight in the ring, and later. There really shouldn't be any controvery here. Ali fought a man at the peak of his power and destroyed him. Much bigger achievment.

 

There are a number of factors that could be considered in weighing these victories.

But these are rendered moot, IMO, by one huge factor,the margin of victory.

Ali outpointed Foreman over seven rounds and KOd him in the eighth.

Leonard won a highly controversial split decision over 12 rounds.

(Personally I have scored it for both at one time or another and have finally settled on a draw in rounds. If I was forced to pick, it would be for Hagler.)

But the fact that so many unbiased observers doubt the result, renders Leonard's acheivement less decisive.


Other factors include the stage in careers of the four combatants.

Allowing that Ali and Leonard were at approximately the same stages, Hagler was at the end, and Foreman was prime.

While both were underdogs, Ali was moreso with some fearing for his health, even life.

All things considered, IMO Ali's reclaiming of the title was the greater achievement by a clear measure.

 

Well said,my Celtic brother.

 

ali over foreman