Why did Hagler fight Leonard the way he did?

TigerMoth · Post by **TigerMoth** » 19 Apr 2007, 01:45

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?

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 19 Apr 2007, 05:27

I don't think Hagler himself could explain why he chose to fight the way he did. First thing that comes to mind was that he wanted to give Leonard what he didn't expect, and fighting orthodox was his answer. He probably wouldn't admit it but he let Leonard get into his bonce

funso banjo baby · Post by **funso banjo baby** » 19 Apr 2007, 14:29

he was also past his prime which is why he never cameback

check out Hagler Hamsho 2 for the most awsome display at middleweight....no happy slaps in site

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 19 Apr 2007, 15:03

Hagler could fight effectively both as a southpaw and as an orthodox fighter. He started out the Mugabi fight fighting orthodox, which was the fight he had before Leonard. Obviously his doing it against Leonard gets more attention.

Why did he do it? Not sure. Maybe he thought he was so much better than Leonard that he could beat him orthodox... maybe he was trying to confuse Leonard... who knows. It was a bad idea, and even if he did it for one round he should not have done it for three.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 19 Apr 2007, 16:23

The way I heard it tell (right here on boxrec)....was that Hagler was a plodder of a southpaw who just couldnt cut the muster when faced with a flashy slapper of Ray's caliber.

Jaclem · Post by **Jaclem** » 19 Apr 2007, 20:29

..it's cut the MUSTARD buzzhead...not muster. for reference look for a hit redord made sometime in the late 40's ... a duet by rosemary clooney and marlene deitrich (i am not making this up)....about someone being "too old to cut the mustard any more"...

why did hagler fight that way....i think i read somewhere he said he thought he'd confuse leonard. makes no sense.....more likely..i think he was way over confidant that he could handle the candy ass one and thougt he'd catch him by the middle rounds. remember, leonard was coming off that long inactive spell and most authorities.....of which i was one....thought the same thing.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 19 Apr 2007, 21:46

muster...mustard I've used both...I like to celebrate diversity. Now as for that Plodder ever having a chance against Ray....I was one of those who thought that Ray would catch him napping. And I was right. Can't remember the odds on that fight but I know I made more than I laid out.

Elton John · Post by **Elton John** » 19 Apr 2007, 22:26

bollox wrote:I don't think Hagler himself could explain why he chose to fight the way he did. First thing that comes to mind was that he wanted to give Leonard what he didn't expect, and fighting orthodox was his answer. He probably wouldn't admit it but he let Leonard get into his bonce

I can't figure why Hagler would be so repectful of a fighter that had been out for 3 years, whose last performance failed to inspire fear from anyone, and who had never fought at 160.

But that's what is looked like judging how he reacted to leonard's first punch of the fight. He actually backed off as if he had something to fear. Can you imagine Hagler backing off from Hearns early in the fight?

He definitely was lacking his usual aggression in this one. Leonard fans will always deny it, hoping to claim that Leonard was actually responsible for Hagler's defeat but I have never bought into this story.

Why? Because of numerous fights I have seen Hagler in.

It was a totally different Hagler this time around. His head wasn't in the fight at all and his skills were terribly eroded after the last two fights.

As to his orthodox stance, that too is a mystery unless the rumours of him throwing the fight are true. Regardless, it was his last fight anyhow. Two of his three belts were already gone so he had nothing to lose by throwing the fight since he had no future anyways.

A side note: I found it interesting that Hagler was quite successful when he kept his right jab in the face of Leonard. Ray had absolutely no answer for it. but the only time Marvin employed this tactic was during the first minute or so of the 8th round.

The rest of the fight he slowly walked after Ray with his gloves up and allowed leonard to get off get off the combinations. That part certainly brought to mind a fix. So based on the questionable tactics used by Hagler and the way Leonard asked for so many concessions from opponents, it would not surprise me that this fight was not legitimate.

Jaclem · Post by **Jaclem** » 20 Apr 2007, 01:37

..buzzbomb...do you also sometimes say 2 plus 2 is 4 and at other times 2 plus 2 is 5 because you like variety...have you also "used both"?

bollox · Post by **bollox** » 20 Apr 2007, 03:36

BoxBuzz wrote:muster...mustard I've used both...I like to celebrate diversity. Now as for that Plodder ever having a chance against Ray....I was one of those who thought that Ray would catch him napping. And I was right. Can't remember the odds on that fight but I know I made more than I laid out.

It's mustard

For proof, download a song named The Cutter by Echo and the Bunnymen. He's clearly singing "couldn't cut the mustard"

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 20 Apr 2007, 06:55

I have often speculated on this. I have a few theories.

1) There was a lot of talk before the fight of how Hagler would win because of his physical advantages.

If Hagler had macrhed on in, as he did against Hearns, and overwhelmed Leonard there would have been little glory. The media would have said Ray wasn't in his prime, was smaller and that it proved nothing. Hagler wanted to show Ray and the world that he was a better fighter. He held back a little and went out orthadox to make a point.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 20 Apr 2007, 07:04

2) Hagler feared embarrassment.

He was older and had lost a beat or two in speed and reflexes. I think everyone knew that Ray would have to move all night, avoid engagement on Hagler's terms, look to make Marvin lead, and miss with that lead. Ray's game plan was really no secret. I think Hagler feared being made to miss and the Leonard clowning that would come with it. He didn't want to be made to look foolish. There was a germ of self-doubt in Hagler's head and the memory of the night when Leonard clowned with Duran was at the front of his mind. This slight hesitation was all Leonard needed.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 20 Apr 2007, 07:09

3) It was a game plan designed to get to Leonard when Hagler was in the ascent.

Most people thought that Hagler would come from behind, eventually force the issue and essentially be able to take more from Leonard than Leonard could take from Hagler. The early rounds would be Leonard's. Hagler would hunt him down later on.

So, perhaps switching to southpaw, and upping the tempo after the first few rounds had gone, were planned as a double whammy to get to Leonard just as the spring was leaving his step. Ray would be physically pushed by the increased pressure and mentally pushed by the style switch.

All of thse theories are just speculation on my part. I have no inside knowledge whatsoever and all of my theories have holes in them but this is something I've often pondered.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 20 Apr 2007, 08:47

Jaclem wrote:..buzzbomb...do you also sometimes say 2 plus 2 is 4 and at other times 2 plus 2 is 5 because you like variety...have you also "used both"?

Only in certain multidimensional quasi-quantum physic theoreticals where it would be appropriate, required (or perceived as profound) to do so.

Seamus · Post by **Seamus** » 20 Apr 2007, 10:09

For those outside the USA or too young to remember. A couple weeks after the fight, ABC had an in studio Saturday afternoon recap of the fight with Sugar Ray Leonard. Marvin Hagler was also asked to appear but declined the offer. I suppose everyone will say that naturally SRL handpicked his highlights to be shown nationwide, but anyway you look at, you still have to make those highlights by performing well against one of the greatest Middleweights ever. There were alot of maybe 10 second clips shown at halfspeed, and it was plainly obvious that SRL's hands were clearly faster and his punches much more accurate. There was also a clip of a near altercation at the end of a round in the second half of the fight where Hagler landed a hard body shot at the bell. When Leonard was asked about it he replied something like "He hit me with his best shot and saw he couldn't hurt me, and I smiled at him, and he got mad". The final analysis of the recap was exactly the same as the way I've always viewed the fight. SRL won with superior hand, head and footspeed, along with the fact that he proved he could take Hagler's best punches when they did land. Ironically, it was also one of the few fights I know of where Hagler actually engaged in trash talking. I remember his quote where referring to Leonard he said "I like fighting those pretty boys, so I can bust up there pretty faces". In the end Hagler ended up more plainly frustrated than he ever had been in any of his previous bouts.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 20 Apr 2007, 10:36

By the 10th Leonard was breathing hard. It looked like one accurate shot would unravel him, that, or, as he was just running on fumes, it looked like his legs would go from under him at any moment. The flurries would keep Hagler off once he got into range. I struggle to remember Hagler throwing a combination in the fight.

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 20 Apr 2007, 15:31

Leonard beat him in the head game. Hagler has the mind of an ant. Leonard played with his pea brain......That is the major reason he won. The first example is Hagler fighting orthodox trying to show the world he could box. He was a fool,. He could not box, never could box, and never will be able to box. Goofy southpaw.....as Gil Clancy said many times in fight broadcasts....."you dance with who brought you to the dance." Hagler abondoned everything that got him there.

Being an off balance plodding southpaw who could bang was to his advantage. His only advantage, and he gave it away trying to show the world he was some sort of ring virtoso.

Leonard made him pay for his stupidity.

dr_devious · Post by **dr_devious** » 20 Apr 2007, 16:02

Thats something you have in common with Marvelous Marvin, cos youve got the mind of an ant as well, Ringstinger

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 21 Apr 2007, 00:44

It really bothers you that your hero was made to look a fool doesn't it dr_devious?

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 21 Apr 2007, 01:26

And Decagon is dr.devious's twin brother.....just great.

I Feel Fine · Post by **I Feel Fine** » 21 Apr 2007, 02:32

Hagler was no Leonard in the boxing department, but he could box, and in fact he probably won more of his defenses boxing than he did brawling... which is why I find it hypocritical of him to attack Leonard for boxing.

But I thought Hagler beat Leonard, and I think its wrong to attack Hagler's abilities as a fighter or to criticize him for being upset about a decision... aren't most fighters who wind up on the losing end of a close decision usually upset about it?

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 21 Apr 2007, 02:52

I Feel Fine what did you just say?

ringsider · Post by **ringsider** » 21 Apr 2007, 03:20

Well then you tell me what he just said.

Syntax Error · Post by **Syntax Error** » 21 Apr 2007, 13:35

Simple answer is that Hagler got out-psyched by Leonard.

He wanted to prove that he was the big man that was not going to be outboxed by Sugar Ray, so he thought he mess around by switching stances, to prove that he could fight Sugar any way he chose.

Unfortunately for him, he was far too slow to cause Leonard any real problems & pratically gave away the first four rounds.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 14 May 2008, 23:59

Jaclem wrote:..buzzbomb...do you also sometimes say 2 plus 2 is 4 and at other times 2 plus 2 is 5 because you like variety...have you also "used both"?

You know i've been thinking about this...and I'm not sure that was called for.