Marvelous Marvin Hagler speaks out about the Sugar Ray Leonard fight ~ Listen In

Is that in a rulebook somewhere?:huh
Either way its absolute twaddle. You give close rounds to who you thought won it (or score it even) not on who's the champ or challenger!
Otherwise whatsthe point in haveing judges??
A champion dosen't have a right to win close rounds/fights, he has to defend his right to be the champ.

 

It was a close fight and I understand how people score it for Hagler (and certainly how Hagler thinks he won) but those "champion gets the close rounds" and "you have to take a champions title" lines are BS.

Both men are equal when they step into the ring, the only concession to the champion is that he keeps his title in the event of a draw (maybe thats the form "taking the title" takes?)

 

Yes but if there is a few close rounds you can't score them for the one fighter?.

 

Yes you can. If you thought the same fighter won those close rounds then he should be awarded them all. A round should be scored in isolation and on its own merits, not with one eye on who you gave the last close round to.

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again :
Rounds that you can see "could go either way" should be scored even. And that will go some way in making fights that "could go either way" result in a DRAW - the fairest result.

Champions dont have a right to get the win in close fights, but it's not fair to move the title in a fight that "could go either way". That's like saying, "yeah, maybe you're right, I cant say you were beaten, but you lose the title anyway, the title you won undisputedly by a stoppage" .
Sure, that's boxing, but I think we shouldn't defend the injustice of it.

It's compounded in this case by the 118-110 score for Leonard. That was an indefensible score (whereas the other two weren't), therefore the split decision win for Leonard is not even based on "fair" or decent scoring.

Having said all that, I think Leonard's refusal to rematch and immediate (temporary) retirement are what really makes the debate and unease linger.

 

I'm not avocating finding a winner of a round just for the hell of it but having won a title by KO doesn't give the champion any advantage when judging the rounds in his title defences.

A lot of people will find a winner for a round no matter what and criticize judges for scoring even rounds. I understand that some rounds are very close and there shouldn't be an element of finding a winner at all costs but the other side to the argument is that how many rounds are truely even where a winner can't be found? I guess its where you draw the line in the sand.

I can see both sides TBH.

 

Well if a round is close but one fighter clearly wins the round, ok, but if there is a few rounds that could go either way and the judges give all of them to one fighter it is not fair, as the other fighter might win some rounds clearly and all the close rounds go against him?.

Fighter "a" might win 5 rounds clearly and fighter "b" wins 1 clearly and 6 rounds could go either way, fighter "b" could still win, 'cause he gets all the close rounds?.

 

Yep, thats how its supposed to work. Its just tough luck I'm afraid....

 

I don't think the question is whether you give a close fight to the champion. I think the point is that you don't take away a title in a fight a challenger doesn't win.

If it was indecisive that's what rematches are for.

 

Like democracy its a terrible system but its the best one we have.

 

A lot of people had the challenger winning that fight, are you saying he should have had to win a rematch as well before he got the title off Hagler?

You might not agree with, or like, the decision (or the fact that there was no rematch) but that was the decision that was given and the champion lost his title. To just say "the challenger didn't win, the champ should still have his title" isn't really much of an argument when discussing how title fights should be scored, its just a comment on how you personally scored the fight.

 

The ONLY advantage a champion should have is the fact that they will retain their title in the event of a draw. That is it. Each round should be scored individually without bias. A round should only be called even if the judge can not separate the fighters in that round. If a judge believes that one fighter just did a little bit more in a round than that fighter should be awarded the round even if every round is like that.

 

What really happened is that Leonard refused to give a rematch and used Marvin's relocating to Italy as an excuse for later. he thinks people dont remember what happened

 

Even if the latter were true, say Hagler moved to Italy right after the loss, so Leonard isn't allowed to fight anybody who lives in Italy? This isn't a global sport? That's possibly the most stupid argument I have ever heard from a boxer. Did Leonard really say this?