Hagler vs Briscoe. Impressions?

Manassa makes no excuses when they aren't necessary. I find him to be an astute student of the sport. To Ray's credit, the layoff didn't affect him. As Clancy noted in their fight "Ray's legs are moving beuutifully". His speed and skills were intact, a testimony to his preparation. However, with Hagler it's obvious he had nothing left. It could not be more obvious and Ray himself said he was counting on the slowness of Hagler because he lost a lot of speed.

How do you explain that? It came from ray's mouth so if I were you I'd stop pretending there was nothing wrong with Marvin. After all, it was his last fight.

 

Yes hagler had lost speed,but ray was not the fighter from 82 and had also lost speed,he was also fighting 13 pounds over his prime weight and had only had one fight in five years and it was unknown whether he could come back at somewhere near the fighter he was ,hardly ideal against hagler....
Being past prime and shot are different things in my book,before the fight hagler was a big favourite,and after the fight nobody talked of hagler being shot,except you.....
ps; gil clancy also said ray was the 'miracle man',as a comeback after one fight in five years to beat a champ like hagler had never been done in boxing history.....He also said hagler looked like a 'beaten fighter' by the end of the bout....

 

maybe that's because everybody else didn't get to see Hagler spar two weeks before his last fight where he had much the same problem with the weaver tripletts. Not that that would mean anything to you because yo're concerned only with what's well publicized,

As for 1987 Leonard, that was Ray at his best throughout his career. He was much better than in the Kalule fight or the Hearns fight (at least this time he didn't fall way behind with his own trainer telling him he's blowing it) or the Duran fight (which he lost) or the Benitez fight (in which Wilfred put up no resistance) or the Geraldo fight (where leaonrd went stumbling across the ring backwards from a penny ante right hand) or better than the Howard fight (a blown up welter who put him on the canvas and retired him) when he was a jr middle and just 27 years old.

But Ray admitted that Hagler lost a lot of speed and that he was counting on the slowness of Hagler.

that came straight from Ray himself. And speaking of Gil Clancy, Gil was the one who brought up the subject. You could hear him mention it at least twice on the tape you're talking about so being a miracle man after 3 years is not so miraculous against a shot fighter with no reflexes, no legs, no speed.

Which is probably why he waited five years even though he could have held his comeback much sooner which in fact he did after watching Duran take hagler the distance thinking it was safe to come out. But no one heard a anything out of him after Marvin destroyed the hitman in 3.

If he were really so miraculous a fighter, he should have not lost in the manner he did in a fight with Terry Norris. Did you know Ray Leonard was a 3-1 favorite and nobody was talking about Leonard being shot. Steve Farhood was congradulating Ray in his last fight with Duran saying Ray fought the perfect fight and we all know shot fighters never fight a perfect fight.

So Leonard really has no excuses-Hagler does. Great fighters don't get their heads bashed in by 3-1 underdogs especially not versatile artists like Sugar Ray leonard. And Leonard really was a beaten fighter well before the ending of the bout.

 

I'll be more than happy to take it from here.

 

Rooster,myself and others have been through this a thousand times...
Did anyone who witnessed the 'mythical' sparring sessions you were privy to not publicise or even make the excuse for hagler AFTER the fight that hagler was shot? No one of note in history says that hagler was shot in this bout,not even manassa.....
Where you the only witness to this sparring session? Maybe marvin had a cold on that day,so what you was seeing was a subpar sparring session?
Anyway,the fact is a one fight in five years welterweight beat the ATG undisputed reigning middleweight champion,past prime yes but leonard was past prime and had many more disadvantages than hagler...
Can you imagine marvin retiring in 87,coming back briefly to fight pat lawlor at super middle,then retiring again and then finally challenging
and beating an active mike mccallum at lt heavy? Or better still an ageing bob foster?
You and manassa belittle marvin hagler by your posts on this topic...
Leonard is also the better fighter p4p,and has miles more quality on his resume,finally i will emphasise leonards prime weight and era----Welter:79-82.....End of chat..............................

 

That's all, 1979-1982? And he still has a loss on his record??

miles more quality wins? Which wins are those and in your mind how much is a mile or is that also an exaggeration? Are you talking about those wins resulting from those "mythical" five championships?? Oh I forgot you were a leonard supporter which tend to exagerrate sugar's accomplishments.

But you also mentioned a specific time frame 1979-1982. So basically what you have here is a two and a half year prime with 32 wins and two belts. It's too bad I learned how to count isn't it?

You know how many titlists since that time have duplicated that feat (as a minimum) in order to gain any notoriety. But this same accomplishment somehow makes him better than Hagler with 12 defenses and twice the number of fights? It doesn't add up.

I think Hagler is the one with miles more quality wins. You're just talking more publicized wins but I'm talking quality wins not publicized wins. And this includes only wins before winning a title.

After all, you can't really bring up Wilfred Benitez because he did no actual fighting so that is not a quality win at all. Duran two was a good win but was tainted because he got Duran out of shape and rushed him to take the fight when he was forty plus pounds overweight.

We saw what actually happened when Duran was in shape,, W 15.

So all of this talk you've given me is nothing more than a front to cover up for the fact that Leonard waited five years to take on a shell when he could have accepted that fight years before when asked. God knows he turned down the fight enough times but I suppose you don't care to bring that up. And never mind the comments made by Clancy and Ryan in the 6th round. You know the one but I suppose you aren't very eager to elaborate on it.

By the way, why are you in such a rush to end this discussion? I thought you wanted to take Manassa on and were insulted because he wanted to end it yesterday.

 

You call 1979-1982....an era?

 

I almost forgot. It should read November 30, 1979 through June 1980 which is one era. Then from November 1980 through Feb. 1982 is another era with a whopping three defenses to his credit.

Like that's never been done before.

 

What you have is a prime period stunted by retirement due to not wanting to risk ones eyesight. This was overturned later (twicce) when the urge simply proved to be too hard to ignore. Of course Leonard came back and showed Hagler what pure boxing was all about, even if over the hill. As for the loss, well it was immediately revenged via pure embarrassment.

Unlucky really

:good

 

The risk that went up as he became older and still took 7 more fights? He's still risking his eyesight and I still saw him climbing in with an opponent.

Of course the urge that was too hard to ignore was all but forgotten when Terry Norris showed up to show Ray and all his fans what pure boxing was all about. As for the loss, well I don't think Leonard would care to have a repeat of what happened to him.

Pretty smart really. :good

 

I'm still wondering about some of those "quality wins". I suppose he might be referring to that punching bag kalule, stepping stone for any one wanting a top ten ranking.

 

I clearly stated it as an "urge". The urge overcame the risk. Sorry if "urge" is too big a word for you to comprehend. Not surprising really.

I think in your deepest and darkest you see him climbing in with yourself to be honest atsch

You are dead right. Getting beaten by a chinless opponent who couldn't have held a candle to him years earlier sure told him it was time. Ray couldn't even get close enough with his punches to create a decent gust of wind to Norris' chin, which would of course have taken him out. Yes, defintely time to retire.

Pity you don't show the same intelligence regarding your numerous thrashings on ESB. But no, just like the punchdrunk fighter you just don't know when to give it up

:hi:

 

He had nothing left, yet he won the fight in your opinion. And you continually claim Leonard was as good as ever when he fought Hagler. Doesn't add up.

 

This has always tickled me about the Hagler arse lickers. I don't mind them saying "he lost because he was washed up" or "he won and still had a bit left". But all this "he was robbed...robbed...robbed, he was shot, it should have been 15 rounds and a bigger ring" just doesn't wash with me either.

 

FACT: Leonard was much closer to his prime (and probably still in it) than Hagler was at the time they fought. Mugabi was supposed to be Hagler's last fight, and now I just wish it was; he looked terribly slow and cumbersome, not a patch on his '80-'82 self.

You have to laugh at people who protest about Leonard's layoff. While he was keeping himself in shape, training casually and looking after his body, Hagler was fighting real bruisers like Tony Sibson and Mustafa Hamsho - the wear and tear on his body took its toll. Most fighters retire when they've already seen their best days and that's why they are shot to bits by the time they make a comeback; they had their prime, they passed it, then they lost it - it's hard for old men to get back into shape. Leonard, however, retired at the peak of his career (a career not really worth boasting about, but still). It was easy for him to get into shape because his brain and body hadn't taken a whole lot of punishment - he'd barely fought thirty bouts. Granted, though, in those thirty fights he was staggered a hell of a lot because his chin wasn't very good.

But anyway, it's not like Leonard won the fight. Hagler won at least seven rounds.