Judges respected Duran's style. Hagler was throwing a lot but had trouble landing significant blows. Duran picked his spots and was more accurate.
That's the thing though.. Hagler really didn't land significant blows that lead us to believe it was a wide decision for Hagler. In fact, it was the complete opposite, he struggled to land significant blows.
I think this is the significant point. Muricans think if a Murican fighter " throws " shots he should be given credit, whether they land or not. Conversely if a NON Murican throws treble the amount of shots than the Murican fighter, they demand the " foreign " fighters punches have to land, to score. Hagler landed very few " scoring " punches against Duran in the first 12 rounds, after that he took over, no doubt.
Errmm, how the f^^k is it possible to give half of an odd number?:roll::roll: Even if you score 7 rounds each, you must score the 15th round EVEN, not ODD.:rofl:rofl
Yeah, yeah, yeah. Which specific 6 rounds did you think Duran won so clearly that no reasonable person could disagree?
I didn't say I GAVE Duran 6 rounds AT ALL you MORON. I was saying I could UNDERSTAND why some folks DID. I gave him more. Start from round 1, and work your way up to round 10, and watch the way Roberto nails him with right hand counters. Try to ignore the idiot Murican commentators, and try to make allowances for Hagler's iron chin. It is not the effect the punches have on the guy that matters, it is the fact that they land, and score that counts. Otherwise Oliver McCall would have won every fight he ever fought, due to the fact no one ever dropped him. You being typically stupid you, thinks because Duran moved his head to roll with Haglers shots, and some moronic Yank commentator screamed " and Hagler with the right " was more effective than Hagler getting nailed with counter shots, and taking them with full force without flinching somehow proves Marvin was the " better " fighter is laughable.
Where did I say that you gave him only 6 rounds?? Work on your reading skills, slick. But even though you allegedly gave him more than 6 rounds, I had not even a scintilla of a doubt that you would be completely unable to answer my question. Just more of your typical huffing and puffing. Why don't you leave threads like this to people who actually watch and remember fights and score rounds? Spare us your generic fanboy/hater rants. :hi:
Another gross generalization Foxy. You are grossly underestimating the boxing knowledge of a whole group of people in one sweeping, simplistic generalization. Nice work. I have to admit it is entertaining reading your myriad emotional implosions in some of these Duran, Lewis and Calzaghe (Your holy triumvirate) threads, though.
You are so hypocritical it is beyond funny. When it suits one of your childish conspiracy theories you claim that " Vegas judges " are notoriously crooked, but then whinge like a schoolgirl about generalisations. I'll take any paid judges scores over the likes of you, and any other idiot fanboys like you every day of the week and twice on Sundays. Whether you, or any other nonentity disagrees with the 3 judges, 2 of which had Duran ahead after 13 rounds whilst the 3rd judge had it even is of no consequence to me at all. You don't matter, and they do. It's as easy as that. Your problem is you are so up yourself you honestly think official judges should give a toss what nobodies like you think. Trust me, they don't.
Good post. Nothing close about this fight whatsoever imo. I give Duran props for a very good and smart performance, though, seeing how physically outmatched he was.
Yeah but he only has to do better than Duran in a round to win that round. A lot of us see him doing better than Duran in about 10 of the rounds.
And thankfully, the " lot of you " that think that way are of little or no consequence whatsoever. The day ANY of you get paid to decide who won or lost world title fights, will be the day other folks might take your opinions seriously.:yep