Just how bad was Haglar robbed if at all against SRL?

You must excuse Rooster. He's a good man, I like having him around and think every forum needs a redrooster-type, but he is well known in these parts for playing up a hatred for Leonard that is..........let's call it entertainingly single-minded. To the point, frankly, that it can't be taken terribly seriously. If Leonard gave a million dollars to charity, Rooster would claim that he stole the money from Hagler.

 

maybe u dont want to admit it openly and that's the real problem cuz if u did, it would take away from Leonard's accomplishment


how do u explain the exclamation on leonard's part "I can beat him!" following Hagler Mugaib?

leonard could have made the same statement following the first Hamsho fight but instead he preferred not to make waves lest he get the chance to prove it

obviously u cant tell the difference between one performance and the next

can u tell the difference between 1966 Ali & 1980 versions? becuz that's pretty much what we're looking at here

besides, Hagler's decline thru out 1984 is well documented; extended by Duran, hit repeatedly by cyclops Roldan, almost lost, etc

 

I still feel Hagler won this fight, just 115-113, but it's not a robbery. Hagler came on strong because Ray ran out gas, probably due to his inactivity and questionable lifestyle outside of the ring. This was a close decision that could have gone either way, and I give Ray full credit for the win (even though I scored to Hagler), genius strategy

 

imo Sugar Ray was the clear winner of that fight. 7-4-1 on my scorecard

 

You probably think the lunar landing in '69 was fake, 911 was an "inside job", the Sandy Hook shootings were fake, and that the Ravens and the 49ers in the Super Bowl was prearranged.

'66 Ali was clearly better than '80 Ali but a case can be made that an early to mid-70's Ali (he should have retired in 1975) was as good or even better than '66 Ali. I'll explain. Yes, Ali wasn't as fast or flashy but he was smarter, bigger, and stronger. He was more experienced and proven vs. better competition. He know had faced Frazier x3, Norton x2, Foreman, and others. Sure, he was still a bit rusty vs. Frazier in their first fight and lost but he still fought great vs. another great. He clearly won their 2nd fight and managed to win their rubber match after going thru hell. He came in a little lazy vs. Norton and lost by decision. He beat Norton in their rematch. Norton should have won in '76 but I'm not going past '75. He was older and sometimes came to fight at less than 100% but he was still great and sometimes as good as he once was.

 

Fair enough.:good

I'll look at the 11th and 12th again.

Round 11 starts at 4:56. I'm not gonna do a break down as detailed as the other one (calling notable landed/missed shots).

[yt]cIStvfe9WiI[/yt]

I agree with you, round 11 was Leonard's. The first half of the round was even, but Leonard took it in the 2nd half.

Round 12 starts at 1:11

[yt]4wBPzG7h9OM[/yt]

I also agree with you, Hagler's round.

Good call on those 2 rounds, I've now switched them but still come out with 7-5 for Hagler.

 

I asked why Leonard didnt make known his revelation that he could beat Hagler until after scraping by Mugabi. Why not declare it during the first Hamsho fight? In fact, Ray said he wanted Hagler then but by fight's end had already chickened out. He chickened out of it becuz he knew the only possible outcome would be himself lying facefirst, courtesy of a Hagler fight hook


Fact is, he was no more interested in Hagler then than he was in Micheal Nunn after witnessing the decapitation of Kalambay from ringside, or an immediate rematch with Norris

 

The Rooster also thinks that on the same night. Terry Norris beats both