Why did Hagler fight Leonard the way he did?

[Robinson]

Im confused....
so the Howard fight was a good tune up ?

[Elton John]

Im confused....
so the Howard fight was a good tune up ?

You'd have to ask leonard that. I'm assuming he wasplanning more than one tuneup to help sharpen him and shake the rust off, something he felt he didn't need 3 years later. He was curiously very confident in those days, (1986-87) something he didnt have years earlier (1982-85). Could it be he was more confident in Hagler's deterioration?

I think so. There was absolutely no sign of fight in him following the 3 round knockout of Hearns.

I watched Leonard alongside Dave Hartman interview marvin the morning after Marvins brilliant victory and when talk turned to leonard facing Marvin he just stood there saying nothing than "He beat Tommy Hearns". Obviously, he knew he was still grossly overmatched and the thought of certain death didn't appeal to him.

[Elton John]

Yeh...that is what he was, a fraud.

Obviously you have no answer to someone who can lay out so damaging an accusation against him. Alp also has this same trouble and has done one better than you-he doesn't reply at all which is smart for him I think.

[Robinson]

So Hagler by fighting regularly was deterioting ?
Though Leonard who made one come back fight, post 1982 looked terrible against
Howard and to make a return again some years later was in tip top condition
and still in his peak...?

[Elton John]

So Hagler by fighting regularly was deterioting ?
Though Leonard who made one come back fight, post 1982 looked terrible against
Howard and to make a return again some years later was in tip top condition
and still in his peak...?

This is not that unusual. Ali looked terrible against Oscar Bonavena in 70 but still prevailed. He prevailed against Quarry as well. Then he took the big fight with Frazier but he certainly never stalled as leonard had because his target opponent looked to strong for him. Leonard simply didn't have the heart that Ali had.

As for Marvin Hagler, it was well known he was deteriorating for some time. The experts had tracked his progress throughout, from the first Hamsho fight which is where where he really took off and reached peak form.

From that point you would have to say Marvin was far and away the best fighter p4p. However he did not start recieving the coveted p4p award until 3 years later following the Sibson fight. In those days he won matches in effortless fashion against fighters none but he himself could hope to win. Leonard knew this and began his hybernation. As of May 1983 the reports on Hagler read "The best is getting better".

Then came the Duran fight. At first, I thought like everyone else the man was just overrated but in his next fight, the Roldan fight he was in as they said "The fight of his life" and was often beaten to the punch and missing quite badly throughout.

Of course then that Leonard made his move but then Howard broke his spirit for fighting as he slapped leonard to the canvas.

So the big match that was made was the Hearns fight. Of course, Thomas was better than he had ever been. Now in his prime and no longer the frail, inexperienced welter, Thomas was expected to be the one to end Marvin's reign.

Though marvin won, he was no longer close to the fighter who dominated the contenders of his weight class. The Mugabi fight showed how little he had left and as Leonard told former challenger Juan Roldan days before the big fight, "Thanks for softening him up for me buddy". Or if you wish, just go to round 6 of the fight and listen to commentator Ryan's comments "leonard said marvin had lost a lot of speed and was counting on the slowness of Hagler" as added proof

hence he was only interested in the one middleweight fight and perish the thought of even defending it against a Micheal Nunn.

[Robinson]

Well alot of people at the time had Hagler has the big favourite.

Leonard did take a big risk, and it paid off. He beat Hagler and while it was close
it was still a pretty decent accomplishment.

Love him or hate him you have to aknowledge that.

[Elton John]

Well alot of people at the time had Hagler has the big favourite.

Leonard did take a big risk, and it paid off. He beat Hagler and while it was close
it was still a pretty decent accomplishment.

Love him or hate him you have to aknowledge that.

I also remember a lot of people saying Leonard would win including Tommy Hearns. How do you explain that?

I don't understand why people are talking about the risks. he took a risk fighting Lalonde and Norris, rematches with Hearns and Duran all which came after the Hagler fight. He took those too didn't he? So why take those risks so late in his career unless it was a calculated risk knowing the opposition had softened which obviously, anyone could see it was.

I can't give him credit for taking the Hagler fight this late in Marvin's career as it was on the very edge of retirement. Where is the glory in that? I give Ray more credit in taking the Norris fight as he was a much more capable opponent at the time of their meeting. Still, there's not much glory in taking a fight with a 3-1 underdog like Norris just so he could get his head bashed in.

[ringsider]

Now back to hanging on the Norris nuts.......

[Elton John]

Speaking of nuts, Ray leonard couldn't carry Norris' jock strap.

[ringsider]

Speaking of nuts, Ray leonard couldn't carry Norris' jock strap.

And now you are stealing material from Larry Holmes....how pathetic you are.

[Robinson]

Thanks for all of that Elton

Can I now ask... what Princess Di was really like?

[My2Sense]

Hagler choked.

That's all there is to it IMO. This was the biggest fight of his life to him. He'd been calling for it for ages, and when it finally came, instead of stepping up his game to meet the challenge, he did the opposite (contrary to most people's expectations).

It's not the first time we've seen Hagler underperform when the spotlight was on him. He let Antuofermo steal a draw from him, and he very nearly let Duran do the same thing. Although I agree that he probably should've won the Antuofermo fight, and the Leonard fight at the very least could've gone either way, those were both fights that Hagler was heavily favored to win decisively (and I'll bet that both fights made The Ring's "Upset of the Year").

Leonard mentally owned Hagler in that fight. Leonard was quicker, hit harder (yes, he did mix in some good blows in there), and even stronger (notice how he pushed Hagler back a couple of times) than Hagler expected, and Hagler was too slow to adjust (mentally and physically) to that. I don't know the exact, precise reason that Hagler chose to fight orthadox, but it was indicative of his confusion and lack of confidence that he showed the whole fight. By late in the fight, Leonard was even out-"man"ing Hagler. He was showboating, winding up and hitting him with bolo punches, and punching after the bell, and all Hagler did was cover up and take it all.

And Hagler wasn't confident about the decision at the end, either. He looked so phoney, pretending to dance, like he was so certain that he'd dominated the fight. Since when does Hagler dance after dominating a fight??

[elmersalsa]

And I still believe, that NO MATTER WHAT ANYBODY SAYS, that that fight should have been 4 or 5 years earlier, like in 1982 or 1983, when BOTH WERE AT THEIR PEAK OF THEIR PRIMES

[My2Sense]

And I still believe, that NO MATTER WHAT ANYBODY SAYS, that that fight should have been 4 or 5 years earlier, like in 1982 or 1983, when BOTH WERE AT THEIR PEAK OF THEIR PRIMES

To quote a line from South Park...

"It would've been much more practical, but much less magical."

[Elton John]

And I still believe, that NO MATTER WHAT ANYBODY SAYS, that that fight should have been 4 or 5 years earlier, like in 1982 or 1983, when BOTH WERE AT THEIR PEAK OF THEIR PRIMES

To quote a line from South Park...

"It would've been much more practical, but much less magical."

Why would that be M2S? Do you predict a quick blowout in Hagler's favor?

[Robinson]

He predicts that you would have less hatred to 7up Leonard.

[My2Sense]

And I still believe, that NO MATTER WHAT ANYBODY SAYS, that that fight should have been 4 or 5 years earlier, like in 1982 or 1983, when BOTH WERE AT THEIR PEAK OF THEIR PRIMES

To quote a line from South Park...

"It would've been much more practical, but much less magical."

Why would that be M2S? Do you predict a quick blowout in Hagler's favor?

No, I just think that any result in their primes would lack the drama of Leonard's miracle resurrection.

[Robinson]

Here Here

[BoxBuzz]

I watched this last night.....I have always said that Leonard won this...but I believe now that I am not correct.

Hagler lost this. But lose it he did. It did not have to happen that way, and Ray was lucky to have Hagler coming in so overconfident. This fight could not have been won by Ray...(at least the way it played out) if Hagler had not given away the first two rounds....if he simply would have come in serious as a judge, I don't see how Ray could have put the numbers together later when the rounds became very very competitive. Still would have been respectable show by Ray....but not a win.

Hagler owns the outcome....and the outcome is/was legit. But it appears to me that it was Hagler's to lose, and he made a go of that aspect. I can see why Hagler fans complain so much....but I don't see how they can look at the fight the way it actually played out, and think it was anything more than a very competitive fight that ended up going one way rather than the other.....it was close to a draw...thus the split decision.

But my older eyes now tell me that it did not have to be that way. Hagler may well be comfortable in the knowledge that he COULD have won, but he can't look back at that fight and think he DID win.

That outcome is all on Marvin....

[Ambling Alp II]

Maybe Hagler could have won had he not given away the first 4 rounds. However, had he gone all out early maybe he would have tired late.

He was overconfident; he didn't think Leonard would fight anywhere near that level after being off for so long. It's wasn't Leonard's best fight, but it was his most surprising.

Could Hagler have gone a hard 12 rounds? Maybe. However took off rounds against Duran and Antuofermo as well.

However, Hagler's performance really wasn't the story of the fight. Even if he had fought a hard 12 rounds, if he would have won it, would have still been very close. The real story isn't about who won. The real story is that Leonard was able to fight as well as he did after being off for so long.

[BoxBuzz]

I agree completely. And yes he might have gassed....but that's what I was sort of looking for.....and it appeared...though I can not know, that Hagler was not as gassed as Ray......and those who pine for a re-do on that very night at 15, may be on to something.

However....I am not changing my long held position that Ray actually won it.....and on my card he did. I only am second guessing that Marvin thought he could take a "Ray" attitude into the fight and somehow come out with a "Marvin" outcome......if you get my meaning.

His "plan" to confuse Ray.....seemed to backfire as completely as any bad poor plan in boxing ever has.


And yep, either way, the story will always be Ray's remarkable comeback, and on that night Marvin just gave him another foundational dynamic to his well deserved reputation.

[Syntax Error]

I mentioned this in a post I did previously, asking if the victory over Hagler "made" Leonard's career - I have never seen an explanation of why Hagler started the fight in the orthodox stance and was not agressive. Thus giving away the first 2 or 3 rounds and giving Leonard confidence.

Yesterday, I am sure from a link here on Boxrec.com, I read an interview with Gil Clancy. He called the Hagler corner work the worst he had ever seen and said Hagler would have won if he didn't give away the first 3 rounds by boxing orthodox.

Anyway, does anyone know why this happened? Was this a strategy? I agree with Gil Clancy in the conclusion that Hagler essentially gave away the fight and would have won if he had not come out orthodox.

But, I still have never seen an explanation of why he did.

As I have said in other posts, I really dislike SRL and I liked Hagler. I realy dislike that SRL won (even putting aside that he dictated ring size, etc). But, I also think that Hagler has no one to blame but himself.

Does anyone know how this happened - that Hagler came out orthodox and not sufficiently agressive?

The one main reason why Hagler fought the way he did was arrogance.

He felt he was the star & that he would win whatever he did.

The other reason was, he had no choice.

By 1987, Hagler was slower than an arthritic snail & this loss of speed would have meant a total readjustment of his style.

Hagler would have been fine if Leonard did a Hearns & try to take Hagler's head off, but Leonard was never going to do that, even though he said in his recent book that he planned to slug it with Hagler until getting rocked in sparring; something I just don't believe.

By 1987, Hagler was always going to look like plodder against a faster opponent who is not going to slug it out with him.

[man]

hagler badly wanted a fight with this guy, to whom
all came so easily. fame, glory, public love. he
probably already found it unbelievably cocky on
leonard's part to not even bother with a tune up.
i guess deep down he thought: 'did you see what
i did to your buddy tommy?'.

so he was totally confident this was an easy night.
and that made him do a "morales" on ray. (btw was
it not just two rounds he fought orthodox?)

all the talk of trying to confuse ray seems so non-
hagler. if he thought he could confuse ray with
orthodox he would have gone for south paw ...
hagler was as bitter as larry holmes about public
love. ray was to him what ali was to larry.

[Seamus]

And if they had fought again in 5 months time, I'd pick Leonard to win again because Hagler wasn't going to be any faster.

[man]

And if they had fought again in 5 months time, I'd pick Leonard to win again because Hagler wasn't going to be any faster.

it was a childish and terrible move of hagler
to rather retire than go for the rematch. i for
one think he would have won by close decision,
simply because judges would not be so much
impressed by ray's little tricks this time around
and marvellous would not opt for a pretty stupid
way of opening the fight.

the third would have gone down in history as an
epic battle.