The best I`ve faced: Hagler (the ring magazine)

Mugabi was stopped with a damaged orbital bone caused by a thumb,by two hitters in Norris and Mclellan and 2 light heavyweights when he was 38 and nearly 39.

 

It clears it up - thanks.

However - I do not think Marvin himself thought that Leonard would be a walk in the park and I doubt very much that he would have been any more encouraged by Leonard's close decision loss to Duran and KO victory over Hearns. Let's not forget that Hagler had faced both and knew how good they were - so, he really only had the long layoff to weigh-up and offset against his own creaking condition, at that stage.


Also, bear in mind that it took weeks to get Hagler to even think about taking the fight and he was keen to see Leonard in action against some of the other current fighters around, before considering it (I believe Leonard/Curry might well have been mentioned by Hagler, as a fight he'd like to have seen first). I believe this was rooted in his suspicion of Leonard's challenge.

At Arum's first presser, regarding the bout, Hagler stated he had not made his mind up, at that point, and wanting to do other things. I think, in all, it was over three months before he accepted the challenge, after much convincing. It really was not an easy fight to get on the table, let alone make, and this does not speak to a guy, who was chomping at the bit.

Hagler's heart wasn't in it and he was genuinely on the cusp of retirement and, for a while, leaning way more towards hanging them up than fighting again. His dilemma was that, once the challenge had been laid down, the consequences of not facing Leonard were almost as unattractive as going through the dull motions of training and fighting again. Had Hagler turned it down, I can imagine the furore, lasting to this day and then some.

Also, bear in mind there were a few people around him, who stood to make a few dollars more out of the bout and so convincing Marvin to take the fight was very much in the interests of his closest allies - this is not to say they didn't have Marvin's best interests at heart - but the prospect of a good earner can sometimes warp perspectives and influence word and deed. I've no doubt Hagler was being constantly told the task would be easier than he thought.


In short, I don't think Hagler took the fight because he thought it would be an easy night. I think he was well aware that he'd come to the end of the road and that any fighter out there would have been a very tough challenge for him. I also find it hard to imagine that Marvin would not have been extremely skeptical about Leonard's motives.

I do agree to a small extent with your allusion to fighters, at times, not being honest with themselves. But, in this case, I think there was a lot more at stake, combined with a weight of external influence, to have Hagler convincing himself that he had just enough left.

All of that said - in my opinion, Hagler DID DO just enough to prove that he'd been justified in taking it on.

 

Those who scored it a draw didn't think Leonard won either. That makes it 13 for Leonard winning and 12 who didn't think he won. Harry Gibbs, who was originally going to be one of the judges, said he scored it for Hagler. Eddie Futch and Hugh McIlvaney are not on your list and they thought Hagler won too.

People go on about Leonard's inactivity (leaving aside the several behind closed doors real fights that he claims to have had in preparation), but never acknowledge that Hagler had twice as much mileage as Leonard, 14 years of continuous fighting. Do you think three years of inactivity took more out of Leonard than 14 rounds of being punched by Thomas Hearns and John Mugabi did out of Hagler?

 

That criteria also makes for 6 that thought Hagler won and 19 that thought he didn't.

 

But he's arguing for a clear consensus for a Leonard win when clearly there wasn't.

 

I just gave it to Leonard, but it was far too close to argue about imo.

 

It’s not always about being a fan or a hater...and while I scored the fight for Hagler I readily admit he fought the wrong fight (as well as giving away ring size that impacted him more than he thought). I am not sure one is a Hagler fan or Leonard hater for scoring the fight for Marv.... not do I think one has to be a Leonard fan or Hagler hater to score for Ray. There are several who fall on both sides of that. Ray fought a smart fight, Marv was to conservative....does not mean I can’t score it for Hagler. I don’t find it a robbery and Hagler can blame the judges but he could have done more....he didn’t. It was a close fight and every close fight is called a robbery by the losing side.

 

I think Hearns took the fight out of both Leonard and Hagler, and you might think that is big talk but after Leonard in the first fight, Ray lost a lot of motivation to fight for awhile, and Hagler did not fight for a year after Hearns and never fought with that same enthusiasm or was as active after that. I think Hearns hit Hagler much more clean with that one punch which hurt Hagler than he ever did Leonard in the first fight. Leonard took some great Hearns punches in the rematch.

 

Counter point.

Those who picked a winner had it 13-6 for Leonard. A 2 to 1 margin. Actually a bit more than that. If your saying draw, okay. Otherwise, Hagler scorecards are in the minority across the board by a 2/3 majority against.

The further the cards that had Hagler winning, the more suspect they are. Like I said he didn't win the early rounds, you'd have to give him every or almost every close round, even the rounds he was out landed in to make Hagler the winner. And by flipping the majority of close ones Hagler's way, well that goes against the odds. I've seen many Hagler fans score this one, and there is one common theme. They give him all the close rounds.

I think Leonard's inactivity for 3 years and just 1 fight in the last five years was clearly in Hagler's favor. Don't believe me, name the people that took 3 years off jumped a weight class and won their fight vs, another ATG in his prime?

The Hearns fight was short, I don't think it took much away from Hagler.

 

I agree. To me the Hearns fight was the pinnacle for Hagler just because he never thought Ray would fight him. Ray knew when to fight Hagler after Marvin was inactive a year and looked rusty against Mugabi and sort of older and tired. Ray knew at that point he could beat him. Drag it out another year and make it 12 rounds and who knew Marvin would come out right handed to give Ray momentum.

 

That Hearns fight was hard on Marvin more than any of the others. The punches he took especially first one was a lights out punch and it would have leveled most guys landing so clean. And if you look at round 3 Hagler was arm weary and tired but Hearns was even more exhausted. Had Hearns had something left to go a few more rounds I think he could have stopped Hagler. I know it sounds crazy.

 

I saw a lot of Sibson live, he could really crack with his left.

 

Weren't they based on cuts though ?