Until you factored in how slanted the negotiations for the fight wereAmbling Alp wrote:His name escapes me, but there was a welterweight who had 1 fight in 5 years becasue of eye problems and then beat one of the greatest middleweights of all-time in a fight that he was not supposed to have very little chance of winning. Granted the guy he beat was no Davey Moore or Samuel Peter, but still it was pretty impressive.
DOh right. The ring size, amount of rounds, the gloves. Funny how those things are never used as as an excuse in any other fight that is discussed here. Funny how little was said about these things before the fight.Goodnight, Irene wrote:Until you factored in how slanted the negotiations for the fight wereAmbling Alp wrote:His name escapes me, but there was a welterweight who had 1 fight in 5 years becasue of eye problems and then beat one of the greatest middleweights of all-time in a fight that he was not supposed to have very little chance of winning. Granted the guy he beat was no Davey Moore or Samuel Peter, but still it was pretty impressive.
Not much to come back from, though...it was a sucky first part to his careersimon fox wrote:Frank Bruno didn't do bad either
I would have thought our recent PM exchange on this matter would have you in on the fact my post was in jestAmbling Alp wrote:Oh right. The ring size, amount of rounds, the gloves. Funny how those things are never used as as an excuse in any other fight that is discussed here. Funny how little was said about these things before the fight.Goodnight, Irene wrote:Until you factored in how slanted the negotiations for the fight wereAmbling Alp wrote:His name escapes me, but there was a welterweight who had 1 fight in 5 years becasue of eye problems and then beat one of the greatest middleweights of all-time in a fight that he was not supposed to have very little chance of winning. Granted the guy he beat was no Davey Moore or Samuel Peter, but still it was pretty impressive.
Poor Marvin. Obviously someone put a gun to his head. What huge disadvantages he faced. Against a guy who had never fought at that weight before and had 1 fight in the last three years.
I was watching Hagler-Mugabi the other day and Hagler turned southpaw in the first round or 2 agaist him as well.man wrote:marvin hagler lost to marvin hagler. giving first two away by
insisting not to box southpaw ... weird idea. he did get leonard
under his skin ... as simple as that ...
Sorry, no I didn't realize that you were kidding. I guess maybe that I am so tired of people not giving Leonard his due and finding BS excuse for his opponents that I don't realize when people are joking. Notice that with the other fighter's comebacks people don't say that the other guy beat himself. However with Leonard's opponents it's always something. The other guy's tummy hurt, the other guy had a cut from an accidential headbutt that tainted the fight even though the cut did not affect his vision, and Hagler had all these disadvantages or he beat himself or whatever.Goodnight, Irene wrote:I would have thought our recent PM exchange on this matter would have you in on the fact my post was in jestAmbling Alp wrote:Oh right. The ring size, amount of rounds, the gloves. Funny how those things are never used as as an excuse in any other fight that is discussed here. Funny how little was said about these things before the fight.Goodnight, Irene wrote: Until you factored in how slanted the negotiations for the fight were
Poor Marvin. Obviously someone put a gun to his head. What huge disadvantages he faced. Against a guy who had never fought at that weight before and had 1 fight in the last three years.
wow! what happened? somebody told him tothehero55 wrote:How bout Quirino Garcia?
http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer
Not a bad comeback for a guy who started 0-18
I'll say it, "wow, for a welterweight who had been off for so long, it's hard to believe that he fought such a great fight." However, I still think Hagler should have gotten the decision. But, that said, it was an amazing fight by Leonard under the circumstances. I expected Hagler to bomb him out in about 5 rounds.Ambling Alp wrote:Sorry, no I didn't realize that you were kidding. I guess maybe that I am so tired of people not giving Leonard his due and finding BS excuse for his opponents that I don't realize when people are joking. Notice that with the other fighter's comebacks people don't say that the other guy beat himself. However with Leonard's opponents it's always something. The other guy's tummy hurt, the other guy had a cut from an accidential headbutt that tainted the fight even though the cut did not affect his vision, and Hagler had all these disadvantages or he beat himself or whatever.Goodnight, Irene wrote:I would have thought our recent PM exchange on this matter would have you in on the fact my post was in jestAmbling Alp wrote: Oh right. The ring size, amount of rounds, the gloves. Funny how those things are never used as as an excuse in any other fight that is discussed here. Funny how little was said about these things before the fight.
Poor Marvin. Obviously someone put a gun to his head. What huge disadvantages he faced. Against a guy who had never fought at that weight before and had 1 fight in the last three years.
People just can't say something like "wow, for a welterweight who had been off for so long, it's hard to believe that he fought such a great fight". The hatred for Leonard on this forum seems to know no bounds.
No one else in the well more than 100 years of boxing did something this amazing, and all many people can do is come up with BS reasons that attempt to take away Leonard's achievement.