Leonard-Hagler 2

hagler would have started faster, hearns style. ray had a good chin, but depending on how hagler would have attacked him he could have been out of there.

we'll never know

 

I have thought about this fight a lot. Had this fight happened in say November of 1986 it would have favored Marvin since Marvin would have been more sharp at that point compared to the previous first fight in April. Marvin would have come out southpaw and won the earlier rounds and won the fight on a close UD. It could have gone the way Spinks/Holmes did where Marvin seems to have won and Ray gets the decision like Spinks did in the rematch- when most people thought Holmes did enough to win. As for the Hagler fight, had it been a year later in April of 1988 I favor Ray to win. The extra months would have made Hagler softer, and he was worn out after the Hearns and Mugabi wars. Those two fights especially Hearns took the fight out of Marvin I think, and that is why Ray fought him. Marvin was not the same after Hearns, and the Mugabi fight hurt him a lot since Marvin was rusty when he fought Mugabi and John really banged him up. Two wars in a row.. Then he fights Ray over a year after Mugabi. Ray knew how to pick fights.

 

Hagler by close decision. Leonard would n't be able to reach the level of focus and intensity that he did the first time,and Hagler would n't underestimate him.

 

great post and i agree

hagler was only going to get slower (and older) from that point on. Perfect fight by leonard and none of the advantages that ray held and used would change

hagler would come out harder I just don't think it'd be enough. however, like you, 2 years earlier and hagler wins by knockout

 

"Ray knew how to pick fights" is a massive understatement considering Leonard spoke about fighting Hagler for years,teasing EVERYONE in the boxing world with talk about such a fight,only to challenge Marvin when it was painfully obvious(especially to a con man like Leonard) how far gone Marvin actually was.Truth be told,Marvin was looking extraordinarily hittable with highly diminshed reflexes when he fought "Martillo" Roldan.Leonard knew Hagler would have beaten Lenny when Leonard began talking about such a proposed fight.That's the reason he wanted no part of Marvin until Marvin was shot.

 

I would n't say that Marvin was shot when he fought Leonard. Was signifigantly passed his best,though. He still had enough left to beat quite a few other contenders.

 

Hagler comes out like he did against Hearns, instead of giving away the first 4 rounds. Leonard is older so can't run, dodge, or connect as much with his great speed like he used to. It ends kinda like Leonard Norris.

Ageing will count against Leonard - a fighter reliant on speed and reflexes - far more than it would against Hagler, a fighter more reliant on technique than blazing speed, and with greater size/chin/power. Speedy slicksters like Leonard, Roy Jones, Ali etc always suffer greatly once they get past about 30-32. Sound technical boxers with less flash, like Hopkins, Moore, Hagler etc are still competitive when they get older.

Hagler's main weakness was being to cautious and showing too much respect to his top opponents e.g. Duran, Leonard, trying to show he is as good a pure boxer as they are. If he had tried to bomb everyone out like he did vs Hearns (he did so because he knew Hearns was genuinely dangerous), he would have done far better. No way Duran and Leonard last the distance vs an angry, aggressive head-hunting Hagler.

 

I think,hearns apart,it it not marvins style to blast away. Marvin was always a boxer,who threw the bombs when he had a guy worn down,or when he needed to.
I feel starting out very quickly against duran or leonard runs the big risk of hagler getting extremely tired late on. (ala vito first fight.)
I watched hagler duran yesterday. Many berate hagler for his supposedly cautious showing,as if he could have stopped duran if he wanted to.
Well,firstly i think hagler fought extremely well,outboxed a wily old great clearly. Second,just going toe to toe with duran would have been exactly the way to lose against a rejuvenated duran,or at the very least make it too close for comfort.
Duran and leonard arent just guys you can go in and bomb,they are far too clever for that. So i gave hagler kudos for both fights.

 

Examining the Myths

Myth 1 'leonard was a ***** for picking a slightly past prime Hagler', PP says 'Hagler was a ***** for picking on a past it blown up WW when real MWs like McCallum, Kalambay and Graham were begging for their shot at the title. Then going crying like a ***** in denial and running away from the sport like a kid taking his bat and ball home'

Myth 2 'Hagler started slow', PP says 'No Leonard started fast and Hagler could only compete when the past it Leonard slowed and gassed'

Myth 3 'Prime Hagler wins by KO', PP says 'Prime Leonard shuts out hagler'

Myth 4 'Hagler would do better in a rematch', PP says 'maybe but dont you think an inncactive fighter will do better in his second fight back

 

MYTH 5.
***** puncher knows what he is talking about...

 

I can't see anything but another razor close fight. IMO noway does Hagler come out like vs Hearns because he knows he won't get Leonard out of there and he knows it could well cost him later when he doesn't. He will however force a better pace early and not fukk around as well as fighting southpaw. Leonard's no fool and will have his own counter plan. Very tight one.

 

He looked shot to me. it's obvious, I dont know why people keep pretending

 

No he wouldnt PP. Ray has neither the chin to withstand this kind of assault, something he's never before experience, nor can he keep pace with marvin. One way or another this fight will end in disaster for Ray. Good businessman tho