People just seem to write it off as him being past his prime and using the wrong tactics. But he lost to a Welterweight who had 3 years out of the ring? How much does this hurt the legacy of Marvin?
I would raise him a few places had he gotten the decision over Leonard, but I also would've dropped Leonard a few Beating all other Fab 4 members is no small feat. Hagler would've gone unbeaten against them theoretically
He should have been expected to beat all of them especially since he was the only natural middleweight and the other 3 started at welterweight and lightweight and moved up to middleweight to fight him.
Not massively. Why let a close decision that was probably wrong alter the view on him? So, the same fight happens, he gets the decision (correctly) and he’s much higher up?
Yes. He got outsmarted and outboxed by an aging former welterweight whose only fight in the past 5 YEARS had been an underwhelming performance against Kevin Howard.
In terms of fans perceptions of his career, yes. But the fact is that the only reason Lenny challenged Marvin when he did is because he knew Marvin had no quickness or reflexes left and that is the ONLY reason Lenny challenged Marv when he did. It mystifies me when people write that Leonard came back after a long layoff but completely ignore the facts that Marv was older than Lenny, had almost twice as many fights as Lenny and was only fighting once a year himself at that point. Ridiculous
And how did Leonard's reflexes, quickness, and overall abilities compare to when he was in his 147lb prime, 7 years prior? It's not a good loss for Hagler. He didn't lose because of his quickness and reflexes, he lost because he fought a dumb fight, wasn't good at adapting on the fly, and possibly let the big fight hype get to him psychologically.
Not at all. Proof is in the result as Hagler IS RATED as top 1,2 or 3 best Middleweight ever. Hagler looked in slow motion vs Leonard but then again few could match his speed.
Not much. Leonard was arguably the best fighter he ever faced and it was close. Also, he was 35 so most know it wasn't peak Hagler.
Yet Hagler was four years older and had been fighting pro on a regular basis since 1972. One could argue that Leonard fighting so little had preserved hin - he was a young 31. Also, there are countless examples where fighters have looked underwhelming, like Leonard did against Howard, then performed much better when more focussed and better motivated against a better opponent, like Leonard against Hagler.
No need to argue it .. SRL wanted nothing to due with Hagler until the very last possible minute of Hagler's career. He didn't fight him in Prime like Duran or in 85 like Tommy , he waited till 87 because he knew he couldn't beat him. He did the same thing with Tommy, making him wait 8 years because he knew he couldn't beat him, and he lost
Wow. Who would have known that when Hagler stepped into the ring against a past-prime welterweight who'd been semi-retired for 5 years on that fateful day in 1987, he was actually in a no-lose situation?