i agree. Leonard was a more complete fighter than the erratic Norris but yet when it came to Leonard, Norris beats him every time. So does Camacho It's no coincidence that both of his conquerors were speed demons and like they say, styles
Of course it affected his legacy, and at the same time enhanced that of the coward SRL. Hagler won that fight and would be ranked way higher in boxing history had he been awarded the decision, which he clearly deserved.
Hagler had a few decisions that should of gone his way. He clearly beat Watts and Antofurmo in their first fight. I think he eked out a victory over SRL. If the stars all aliened he would of finished his career with a 65-1-1 record
No disrespect but why do people keep saying this ? Hagler didn't clearly win anything. Whether your a fan of Leonard or not that statement is just not true, Leonard clearly won the first 4 rounds. Because Hagler decided to foolishly try and play mind games, and box with Leonard fighting right handed, he gave away them early rounds and was already in a 4 point deficit. A 4 point deficit is quite a mountain to climb in a 12 round fight with no knockdowns, for Hagler to have "clearly" won the fight. He would of had to have won the remaining 8 rounds, and that certainly didn't happen. There's debatable rounds in 6th, 10th, 11th, 12th. Last time i watched the fight years ago i had it a draw, but neither man won the fight "clearly". There was no robbery or clear decisive winner, at most Hagler won by 2 rounds, at most Leonard by 2 rounds, possibly a bit more if you score the close rounds for Leonard or any even rounds. But i think 2 point winner for either man is the fairest score or a draw. I think people let their hate for Leonard cloud their judgment, i wouldn't say i'm the biggest fan of SRL either but i call it as i see it. It's a close fight either way you see it.
yeah they beat him everytime in 1991 at 154 for Norris and in 1997 for Camacho.. But not when Ray was prime. Hearns would have demolished Camacho with the straight right, and Norris could not have handled Hearns right hand. This is big overrating of fighters.
I don't know. People believe what they want and head to head is different than anything else, but Ray in 1991 at 154 and in 1997 is not the great Ray Leonard.. Ray had been so inactive and not great in over a decade and a half.
Hagler deserved to win the third round on clean, hard punching. Shoeshining isn’t really a conventional scoring criterion.
We don’t have to hang on the technicality of a decision in a very close fight. Say Marv got the nod by the same slim margin (barring the third judge). There would be at least equal and opposite outcry that Ray should’ve won. The fight was that close. But it wasn’t supposed to be close let alone that close. The context before the fight had Ray very much at the short end - Marv was expected to steam roll Leonard - and based on all the available evidence - that was a very reasonable forecast. Marv blew the early rounds - via his own misguided election. Note also - Marv often complained about judges, particularly after the fact on this occasion, adding that he knew such a bad call against him was even more likely in Vegas. So, when you don’t trust the judges, you don’t f*ck around, you take your man out and remove the call from the judges hands. Marv was well accustomed to the potential perils here. Did Marv allow himself the best chance to do same - no, far from it, yet he moaned about a dodgy decision. So, even if the official decision had been alternatively Marv eking it out or a draw, it was a super close fight no matter how you sliced it. And just for that fact, it would always be a legacy enchancing “victory” of sorts for Ray with some tarnish to Hags own resume when viewed in its entirety. Lastly, I’ve been one to subscribe to the theory that Marv lacked complete confidence and conviction at times. However, Marv had every reason to be confident of an emphatic victory over Ray and ironically, that confidence was borne out in his overly indulgent early rounds folly. Rather than wholly attribute it to confidence issues - we might have to also accept that some fighters of certain styles and accents gave Hags issues and that he also didn’t always display the most ideal boxing IQ when confronted by same.
So on one hand we've got an ATG boxer most rate #10-20 in history. An ex welter that came out of retirement to fight (1 fight in half a decade and none for years) an ATG middleweight that hadn't been beaten in 11 years and almost 40 fights. A guy that was considered P4P the best fighter in the world. Leonard was a 4-1 underdog against a guy who was considered, tho starting to fade, more than a little bit of a monster really. This welter also came back from the brink to stop an overwhelming physical freak that was 32-0 with 30 KO's and considered by many to be the most fearsome punching welter ever in a fight where he was busted up and most likely suffered a detached retina. In a unification battle. He also took his lumps when the magic was suddenly gone in a fight where he was thoroughly outclassed and hurt multiple times yet never stopped hanging in there trying to set traps. A fight where, when blatantly banged while already on the canvas, got up anf fought on when he could have absolutely laid down and won the fight on disqualification (as another opponent two fights in a row did against the same guy) and then simply retired. On the other hand we have the self monikered White Bomber, sitting on his arse at home labeling said ATG a "coward". You wouldn't be dead for quids
Round wise it was close, scored it 7-5 and Hagler could have had a more convincing victory if he didn’t lose the first two rounds fighting orthodox. Riding out into the sun without avenging that loss (a lot of the blame is on Leonard though for being wishy washy about a rematch) does hurt him in rankings, but he is already highly rated anyway.
You cannot make an assumption on Norris vs. Leonard on a 1991 fight where Ray moved down in weight to the Norris weight and a younger fighter.
