Did The SRL Loss, Hurt Hagler s Legacy?

Ray was a dirty fighter, which is what Hagler held against him. The odd thing is that Marvin had more animosity toward Hearns prior to their fight and later on became friendly with Tommy. With Ray the opposite happened.

 

I think he expected some running and holding. The perception of Hagler being made of iron worked against him here. Fighting a smaller guy who was in danger (in theory). I guess he was just supposed to brush off a Bolo punch to the jewels, the challenger loading up punches after the bell, on the break, holding and hitting, hitting low etc. It was sickening how the public didn't even raise the question except regarding the 118-110 card.

 

You could argue it both ways with equal justification and conviction.

Even though Marv was well beyond his physical best - which he couldn’t help, he still made some intellectual pre fight choices and choices during the fight that contributed to his loss. Choices that had nothing to do with Hags being past his salad days.

Of those choices and not being the least fatal, Marv’s election to open orthodox and give away up to the first 4 rounds was foolish.

An election that was meant to show that Marv could outbox Ray before knocking him out at Hags whim. So, if successful, an election that was meant to feed greatly into Hags legacy.

Well, as we know it backfired on Marv in a HUGE way.

Ray’s successes during the fight also echoed the surprising successes of Duran v Marv, some 4 years prior when Hags was that much better off physically.

So, though two ATGs in their own right, Duran and Leonard were fighting above their natural weights - Duran more so - and while Ray met a more worn torn Hags, at least from a physical standpoint, the scales were swung back a bit in Hags favour given Leonard’s own age and inactivity - which showed at least in Ray’s own diminishing stamina in the 2nd half of the fight.

But I KNOW, Marv was a great ATG MW with outstanding, lengthy and all encompassing resume but there are these anomalies on his slate otherwise.

However, I can understand the Leonard loss being dismissed almost entirely due to he how much less Marv was from prime - it showed against Mugabi and that much more so v Ray, as rapid declines do.

The fight is mainly assessed in relative terms - with concessions being made for the inactive Leonard also - but it is true, the competitive nature of the fight does not necessarily speak for a prime v prime match - which I think would see Hags stop Ray mid to late ….but then I might’ve guessed the same fate for Duran, particularly over 15 rounds - but there Roberto was, still competitive and still standing over the long haul.

However, Hags was still a clear winner v Duran in my book and perhaps the scoring against Duran was also a forecast of Hags ongoing uphill battle with judges.

Ray might’ve wisely contrived several of his comeback forays to best advantage but he still had willing dance partners who fell in with Ray’s dictatorial ways - of course $$$ talks but they were still free to call their own shots if legacy meant more to them.

 

JoJoGuerra. I somehow remember his name. Petronelli made a powerful statement about him.. That might not fly today but in those years comments like that were dismissed. The thing is that Ray was bigger than I thought he would look against Hagler, regardless of Ray's nonsense comment about Quincy Taylor.

 

I give my opinion on this thread and many will disagree with me and that is their own prerogative. I do think that it hurt Marvelous Marvin Hagler's legacy. During his title reign the subject of he and retired World Middleweight Champion Carlos Monzon's name came up, it was a constant comparison as both were consistent winners as champion. Following Hagler's hard fought victory over John The Beast Mugabi, leading up to the proposed title bout with retired Sugar Ray Leonard, in a fight that was talked about for years, Hagler at that point in time had 13 title defenses. From my recollection, it was mentioned by the boxing media that if Hagler was victorious, and many assumed that he would be, he would tie the record of 14 title defenses held by Monzon who retired as champion in August 1977. After defeating Leonard, he would need just one more title defense to break the record, cementing his place in history as the greatest middleweight champion in history. Sometimes any champion will look beyond the current fight at hand causing him to lose focus. I know the Leonard bout was mostly about the monetary reward for both combatants, but in truth it really was not necessary as Leonard had been retired and there were some very talented deserving challengers available. I heard the bout over the air on a local radio station and Marvelous came in too light for the bout. I am not qualified to be licensed official to judge a bout, but what I did see when the bout was televised was that Hagler had some opportunities to end the bout and did not follow through, allowing Ray to steal the rounds with quick flurries. Those quick flurries do impress judges at ringside. Also the fact that the other alphabet organizations refused to sanction the bout, it was only sanctioned by the WBC. Had Hagler stopped Leonard on the other hand, many would have said that the victory was cheap because he beat a fighter that had been retired. So either way the fight was a Catch 22, either way any result was not any good. Sometimes greed and paying too much attention to the opinion's of others can be disastrous. This loss brought down the legacy that Hagler had built. This is my own honest opinion.

 

Both Hagler and Ray Leonard's relevance ended that night. Hagler retired and Ray wasn't Ray anymore after.

 

Escuedo, I could have not said it any better. Neither were relevant, you are right. The sporting public likes winners in any sport. Losers are forgotten.

 

Fergy, Sugar Ray Leonard went on after Hagler, he won the World Light Heavyweight Title by beating Donny La Londe in 1988.

 

I am the one that is supposed to have an old brain, I am 63 years old. Lol.

 

It's almost as if I'm a professional writer...

 

I think it did, slightly. The only thing some might say is he was at the end when it happened. Others would say he allowed someone to come right out of retirement and beat him. It certainly raised Leonard up by beating Hagler because he was a big underdog going in. Regardless of whether you think the fight was close and could have gone either way, (I personally think Hagler created that sentiment and acted like a crybaby about the loss), he should have come out of that corner like a possessed madman and tore into Leonard with everything he had. Beating SRL on the other hand might have had people saying Leonard was shot and didn't deserve the fight, but it would have been better than losing.