Does Hagler losing to Leonard hurt his legacy?

It doesn't matter what I think. The record is what endures.

I had Leonard beating Hagler and while it was a close fight, I think the judges ultimately got it right.

And for what it's worth, I had Holmes beating Norton in a close but not-my-mind controversial decision.

I had Holmes winning the second fight with Spinks but even if I think Spinks didn't deserve it, the official result still stands and it impacts on the fighters' legacies.

Whether that's right, I don't know. But that's the way it is.

 

Not at all - I understood perfectly.

 

My point is the shocking ease at which Mugabi was stopped post Hagler, including his very next fight shows he wasn't very hard to stop. Hagler didn't ruin Mugabi, Mugabi didn't take a good punch, and moved down a weight class partly because of it. My answer is Mugabi was packing some glass, he just wasn't hit clearly enough for the world to know it. The Norris fight, which happened at age 30 for Mugabi certified it.

Hagler had a top chin, no one says he didn't, but his technical defense was never the impressive and he was being out boxed early. While Hagler came on late to stop Mugabi, it's another case of him giving an opponent too much respect. The same thing happened int he Duran fight, Duran was just too small to win it, and also happened in the Leonard fight and it cost him the decision. I see a pattern here.

As for Leonard, being out of the ring for nearly 3 years trumps Hagler ring rust being out of the ring for nearly 1 year. 1 year is normal for a tenured champion. 3 years, that's a very hard come back.

Will look for the Marantz book.

 

Hagler didn't give Mugabi the respect he gave Duran. Against Duran Marvin was tentative. He wasn't that tentative against Mugabi and was hit easily and often by John. He was getting outboxed by John early because he was far slower than he had ever been before, reflexes, hand and foot. He eventually out toughed John by making it a slugfest rather than trying to outbox John. Btw, are you inferring that Mugabi was a better boxer than Hagler? Or that the opponents that stopped Mugabi were better than Hagler? You are proving my point. Hagler was done mentally and and physically and that's why Leonard chose to challenge him then. The Marantz book is quite revealing.

 

As far as comparing the inactivity, Lenny was so diminished that after Hagler, he knocked LaLonde out a year and a half after the Hagler fight. Then he drew(although I thought Tommy won) with Hearns even after that. No way Leonard was anywhere near as done as Hagler was

 

The Leonard fight lowers Hagler in my estimation as far as his ability to make strategic decisions and make adjustments. He did neither well in this fight.

The Duran performance underscores this to a large degree.

In assessing Hagler’s standing all-time among middles and across weight classes I take this into consideration.

 

Hagler is my #3 middleweight, only Robinson, and Hopkins I have ahead of him. As far as the Leonard fight, Marvin wasn't really quite there is all I can say. He didn't seem to have the aggression or urgency until the late rounds. Which is strange because against a deadly puncher like Hearns he went after him from the opening bell. Leonard did shoeshine his way too victory quite a bit. Throwing bolo punches, making faces, doing the Ali shuffle, making Marvin miss badly at times. Now people say yeah but that's not landing punches, but Marvin couldn't put a stop to it, and was telling Leonard "fight you little *****!", and Ray would just smile at him. Hagler got so frustrated he couldn't even cut the ring off, and just followed Ray around the ring. Leonard did quite a psyche job on him.

 

I found that book extremely one sided Clint.

 

I'm saying Mugabi wasn't durable ( which was proven ), and moved down from Middle weight. Hagler did not ruin him.

Hagler should have realized he wasn't outboxing Mugabi and got down to business sooner. Mugabi was shorter with less reach, Hagler was 31 years old for this fight. Even if he had slowed down a little, Hagler had far more experience and technical ability. If Hagler was done mentally and physically he would not come back to win this tough fight.

My point is is Hagler took a while to change gears and fight the way he needed to. Maybe his closed eye sent the signal.

Hagler was chasing Leonard for a match for a while. While I agree Leonard waited for the right time, you have to look at both sides of the coin. Leonard was out of the right for three years, and the smaller man moving up. What happened when they got in the ring? Hagler started slow again, only to up his ante too late.

Maybe Hagler just wasn't a smart fighter or as I suggested wasn't the toughest metally speaking. There is a pattern here. It's one or the other, perhaps a bit of both.

 

I agree with the last paragraph. He wasn't the smartest fighter and someone like Lenny got in his head, no question. But he was slow against both Roldan and Mugabi in reflexes, footspeed and handspeed. He had to change tactics against Mugabi and rough him up because he hadn't the boxing ability he had had say when he fought someone like Sibson. The Marvin that fought Sibbo had good handspeed, good movement and the ability to block and slip punches. By the time he fought Roldan and Mugabi, the evidence is there for all of us to see that that Hagler did not exist anymore. And we all know it because it's in front of our 2 eyes. Hagler got up into Mugabi's face because he knew he couldn't outslick someone like Mugabi anymore and was getting hit regularly anyway. I'm curious, do you believe that Mugabi could possibly outbox the Hagler of the Sibson fight? As far as the timing of the Lenny fight is concerned, at that stage Hagler was mentally spent and getting ready to retire. When you read Marantz's book, you will see that Lenny, whom Hagler thought was a friend, invited Marvin to the opening of his restaurant in Maryland. Hagler told him he'd had enough of preparing and was seriously contemplating retirement. That, coupled with Hagler's poor performance against Mugabi, gave Lenny the motivation to challenge Marvin when he did. His gauging of Marvin at his restaurant opening was successful because he knew Hagler was ready for the taking at that stage.

 

John, all of the events he wrote about in the book actually happened, and I know this because I remembered them as I read the book. Lenny had a (self-serving, egotistical, look at me) "will he stay or retire" retirement party at one of the arenas in Maryland to which he invited Hagler to when he first retired. Leonard DID invite Hagler to his restaurant opening years later to gauge his mindset, and then he challenged him after the encounter. I know these things happened because they were news in the boxing world. If anyone can disprove anything Marantz wrote I would be more than willing to listen. I have been wrong many times before and will be wrong many times again(hopefully if I live long enough lol).

 

Exactly. And let's not try and forget to admire what a skill that is. The ability to look at certain fighters and correctly assess what they could do in the ring with that style. Foreman did a wonderful job with this years later.

But that was something Ray could do. And he certainly saw the punches Mugabi was landing. The difference was that Ray was never ever going to continue to walk in and throw more power shots and try knocking Hagler out. Nope. never happen. Land and move. step to the side. The other big factor was both Leonard and Dundee thought there was going to be a wear and tear factor of Hagler in his next bout. Didn't matter who he fought, but after Hearns and Mugabi in 2 tough fights on an aging fighter, they were looking for Marvin's B game. And got it.

 

As much as I can't stand him, Leonard was brilliant both ability wise and tactics wise.

 

Excellent post

 

If you were around when Hagler first won the title, you saw that his age was listed as 28 and his year of birth as 1952. A few years later this changed to 1954 but few bought it.