Who won? Hagler or Leonard?

[Flump]

I scored 115-113 for Leonard at the time and rescored it about 15 years later and still came up with the same score, Hagler just started too slow. It's a shame because I wanted him to bust Sugar Ray up but it wasn't to be.

[Ezzard]

No doubt that Leonard was gone at the end. I didn't think he'd make it out of the 12th. Hagler was in control at the end and looked to be walking him down. He ran out of time. Hagler should have insisted on 15 but if my memory serves me correctly wasn't the Mugabi fight scheduled for 12 too???

For a fight that has been talked about endlessly terence has brought an interesting and fresh view on Marvin's performance.

However you score the fight I still think it was ana chievement for Leonard to go the ditance with Hagler.

Yeah, no doubt that you have to give Leonard credit for lasting the fight, although I think he got bonus points for standing!

I became an avid fan in 1983. I used to get The Ring, KO, World Boxing, Boxing News... and would read them over and over. Leonard cast a spectre over the whole decade. The media loved him and those magazines were constantly looing for the next Ray Leonard or talking up fantasy fights. When he came back nobody believed he would win but it was obvious that just about every publication desperately did want him to win.

[Ambling Alp]

In all honesty I think there is a case for either winning. My only question would be about the judges decisions based on events. For instance do we know that the judges that were obviously impressed by with SRL's flurries of pitty pat arm punches, were consistent in all fights they judged, or only when Leonard used that tactic?

Leonard stopped a number of people with those "pitty pat arm punches." Leonard wasn't the type of fighter who threw punches just to score. He threw them to hurt, either by the punches themselves, or by using the flurries to create openings for bigger shots.

Yes, but in the fight vs Hagler, they were nothing but scoring punches. Sugar danced from after the 4th until the last thrity in every round and let off some combos that landed on forearms and elbows. The crowd was insanely pro-Leonard that they went nuts for everything he did. The fact that they were counted as scoring punches was totally BS.

I don't care what side of the fence you stand on, 118-110 is definitely someone watching a different fight than everyone else saw. Definitely a plant.

I've watched this fight probably 50 times in my life, and the way I've scored it is 1-4 and 6 for Leonard, 5 7-12 for Hagler.

Listen to the crowd before the fight started. It was not a pro-=Leonard crowd. Hagler got at least as many cheers. However, Leonard gave his fans more to cheer about because he was doing more than Hagler.

You have watched the fight 50 times and you gave Hagler the last 6 rounds? Wow. It's hard to believe that even the most anti Leonard or pro Hagler person could do that.
Of course you have to do that becasue it's the only scenario in which you can have Hagler winning more rounds than Leonard. Hagler blew the first four rounds by doing almost nothing.
It's always interesting to find out exactly which rounds the people that say Hagler won scored for Hagler. They always have to come up with at least two that are a reach to justify giving Hagler the fight.
Just watch the fight, and score each individual round as accurately and honestly as you can. There is no way that Hagler won more than 5 rounds.

[Seamus]

I don't know how many times I've heard it said that Leonard was pretty much finished in the 12th round, but all you have to do is watch how fast he backpeddled, then suddenly stopped, threw 4 punches and then backpeddled again, to see, his legs were still very steady(I don't think I have to be Angelo Dundee to state that that is not the sign of a fighter who's ready to go). Again I just see it as more grasping at straws to try and explain what happened. Realistically there were 4 main reasons Leonard beat Hagler. 1.Superior handspeed 2.Superior Head Movement 3. Superior foot movement 4. The often overlooked fact that Ray could take a hell of a punch. If anything, I truly believe Ray would have beaten Hagler more decisively in a rematch, since it's pretty much a certainty Hagler wasn't going to become faster 4 months later.

[Ezzard]

I don't know how many times I've heard it said that Leonard was pretty much finished in the 12th round, but all you have to do is watch how fast he backpeddled, then suddenly stopped, threw 4 punches and then backpeddled again, to see, his legs were still very steady(I don't think I have to be Angelo Dundee to state that that is not the sign of a fighter who's ready to go). Again I just see it as more grasping at straws to try and explain what happened. Realistically there were 4 main reasons Leonard beat Hagler. 1.Superior handspeed 2.Superior Head Movement 3. Superior foot movement 4. The often overlooked fact that Ray could take a hell of a punch. If anything, I truly believe Ray would have beaten Hagler more decisively in a rematch, since it's pretty much a certainty Hagler wasn't going to become faster 4 months later.

I don't agree, but I haven't seen it for over 10 years. As I remember Leonard is exhausted. His legs are there but he is open mouthed quite a bit and is really digging deep to keep Hagler off him. He doesn't care if hagler is blocking the hsots or not he's just trying to kill time and get to the final bell. Leonard could not have done too much more and is utterly fatigued.

[TheOneIsHere2008]

Leonard

He won the first six rounds , tired out, and almost lost the next six rounds but not by a large enough margin to undo his early work...

Plus, that wasn't a gift...Leonard had to fight toe to toe with the stronger Hagler when he could no longer run...He could take a punch...

And his detatched retina and subsequent retirement prior to that fight was no joke...My uncle was a professional fighter,had a detached retina, and they could never get it right...

[ringsider]

Leonard made him look like the stumbling plodder he was. Leonard won by 2-3 rounds easily......of course Hagler gave him those rounds by trying to show he could box......that in itself is funny, Hagler and boxing skills!!

[Robinson]

I think Leonard did in a close fight.
Hagler gave away to many rounds early.

[prettygoldenboy]

i believe hagler won for his body work and aggressive fighting but i can see why leonard got the nod as his stealling of the rounds was very effective it was close but i rate this a very good superfight

[squiggy]

I am not a fan of the way he did it, but I think Sugar Ray won it.
Others summed up his tactics well (particularly the comment about wringing every advantage out of a situation rather than really challenging guys mano a mano to see who was the better man). True, much of his punches were slapping flurries, calculated to steal rounds. But in several of those mid to late rounds, he kept Hagler from doing anything of note. So which do you give the nod to: the guy who rode his bike and landed mostly inconsequential punches, or the guy who pursued but never really accomplished anything?
Not to say that Hagler never accomplished anything in *any* round, but I watched this fight with full sympathy for Hagler, wanting to score rounds for him, but I just couldn't find any more than five rounds to give him.
Also, in close rounds, it could give Ray an edge that he landed so many right-hand leads while Hagler was walking in. And made Marvelous Marvin miss so much, and so dramatically.
It was an interesting post someone made about the overuse of the mantra "he gave away the early rounds" and the fact that Hagler lasted better than Leonard--which I agree he did--but it's just a matter of mathematics. Got to be something like 7-5 Leonard (or as I think I actually scored it, 7-4-1, with one round that I wimped out and couldn't choose), with 4 of the first 5 going to Sugar Ray.
Another point, I'm not sure if it's come up, but the ref (wasn't it Richard Steele?) could certainly have docked Ray for all the hitting after the bell. Or, if you don't think that was intentional, for the bolo bunch way below the belt, or for grabbing the ropes early in the fight, or for all of the holding or punching on the break, or probably a couple other things I'm forgetting. But he didn't see fit to do so (or even warn him about any of it, that I recall). C'est la vie, especially la vie of a superstar.

[I Feel Fine]

118-110 was a bad scorecard, but the right guy won, and that's all that matters.

Agreed.

That judge was a joke.

I don't know how he scored it that wide for Sugar.

Sugar won IMO, but only just.

According to Al Bernstein that judge was selected by Hagler's camp, which is ironic. But, yes, terrible score.

I agree that Leonard won, but barely. I think the notion that you can't win a title by using your legs and out boxing your opponent flies in the face of boxing history. What style you employ in beating your opponent matters little; what matters is who wins rounds.

But I do think a younger Hagler would beat Leonard. And I do think Hagler might have won a 15 rounder.

[bollox]

A lot of you guys will remember the massive buildup to the fight I'm sure. One of the boxing mags did a 'round by round' before the fight and transposed pictures of both Leonard and Hagler from other fights to provide a pictorial of the fight. Most had Hagler overwhelming Leonard by about round 8

[TheOneIsHere2008]

Here's the twelfth round that y'all seem to be discussing:




http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJXJbCTH7Ck

[TheOneIsHere2008]

A lot of you guys will remember the massive buildup to the fight I'm sure. One of the boxing mags did a 'round by round' before the fight and transposed pictures of both Leonard and Hagler from other fights to provide a pictorial of the fight. Most had Hagler overwhelming Leonard by about round 8

My pre-fight show has a McDonald's advert featuring both men and their own personalised soft drinks cups. Drink out of Leonard's and you feel all dizzy and lose sense of perspective. Drink out of Hagler's and you only taste bitterness and rage.

Gil Clancy made the fair point that Hagler himself would suffer from ring rust as he had been fairly active before slowing down. Leonard was used to that scenario.

I scored the fight for Hagler. I've yet to kill anyone for scoring it the other way.

It was a great fight... You are a Hagler fan so I will leave it at that... I saw another thread where they were unfairly comparing Hagler unfavorably to some of the old timers... I am far from a boxing expert but I do believe I know a bit about sports in general and have a bit of common sense...

Records in every other sport are being smashed every day because today's athlete is bigger, stronger, smarter, and better trained...I know boxing is different but is that different?

I think Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Leonard, Hagler, Jones, Hopkins, et cetera would acquit themselves well against the old timers...

I do think most of the current heavyweights suck...I attribute that as does Larry Holmes to the dearth of blacks entering the sport... An athletic African American kid is going to choose basketball or football before he chooses a sport where he gets his brains beat in...

[TheOneIsHere2008]

People get a kind of misty-eyed mysticism for fighters they have either never seen (because no footage exists) or they have barely seen, but they like the idea of the fighter/s in question.

Fans are mindless entities incapable of criticism. I have a lot of respect for Hagler and think he is underrated. Some think he is massively overrated. Such is life.

I liked Hagler a lot...He would be in my top ten favorites...

I don't think John Mugabi thinks he's overrated...That fight was as brutal as any Tyson early massacre...It was better because for a brief time The Beast fought back...