hagler/hearns/leonard/duran: who was truly the best?
Posted: 02 Jul 2002, 14:45
as far as im concerned, its leonard, who only lost to duran, but destroyed his ass in the rematch
BoxRec
hagler/hearns/leonard/duran: who was truly the best?
Page 1 of 9
Posted: 03 Jul 2002, 08:56
Well, Duran didn't fight any of these fighters at his own weight; lightweight. Pound for pound, it's Duran.
Posted: 03 Jul 2002, 11:17
that might be true, but leonard beat duran at welterweight, hagler at middleweight, and hearns at super middle, so the overall greatest of the four is probably leonard
Posted: 03 Jul 2002, 11:25
Tou have to keep in mind that Duran was a natural lightweight, and he fought all the other guys you named at THEIR natural weight.... so him being competitive with them and even beating Leonard in their first does nothing but underline what an amazing fighter Duran used to be!
By the way, I don't remember Leonard beating Hearns at super middleweight, I do however remember him being floored twice and given a draw by the judges in his 1989 fight with Hearns.
By the way, I don't remember Leonard beating Hearns at super middleweight, I do however remember him being floored twice and given a draw by the judges in his 1989 fight with Hearns.
Posted: 03 Jul 2002, 12:07
competitive, not entirely. he quit against leonard, yeah thats right quit, showing how big his, well, you know, are, and he got demolished by hearns in the second in their light middleweight fight. he was competitive against hagler, but he lost, so that makes him 1-3 being demolished twice against and by the other big 3.
Posted: 03 Jul 2002, 14:42
Tossup between Hagler and Duran as to the best of four.
Posted: 06 Jul 2002, 02:49
P4P is Duran
and Hagler was the best Middle ever im my view.
and Hagler was the best Middle ever im my view.
Posted: 12 Jul 2002, 00:26
I'd have to say this one is no contest. Duran was easily the best of the four. You can throw out his fights against all of the other three; each came when he was well past his prime and very much over his best fighting weight. Watch his dismantling of DeJesus and see complete ring mastery. In his first seventy two fights, Duran was almost as good as a fighter can possibly be.
Posted: 12 Jul 2002, 10:22
hagler was the best middle ever ????
robinson would have slashed him to pieces !
Posted: 05 Nov 2007, 00:39
duran for me he dominated lightweight for so long and then went to welter weight to beat leonard if he had of fought for a light wlter title he may have beaten hearns and leonard to the 5 weight world champion
Posted: 05 Nov 2007, 00:45
Just what I was going to say, but you beat me to it. If these guys were the same size, Duran would beat them all, & that includes Leonard. Pound-for-pound, Duran.wouter wrote:Well, Duran didn't fight any of these fighters at his own weight; lightweight. Pound for pound, it's Duran.
Posted: 05 Nov 2007, 07:50
Leonard had the fewest fights of that group but he had the best quality kills.
Posted: 05 Nov 2007, 11:43
Beat you to it by a good 5 yearsGoodnight, Irene wrote:Just what I was going to say, but you beat me to it.wouter wrote:Well, Duran didn't fight any of these fighters at his own weight; lightweight. Pound for pound, it's Duran.
Posted: 05 Nov 2007, 11:58
Between fights, even at LW, Duran was the heaviest of the four.
Posted: 05 Nov 2007, 12:26
P4P?
1 Duran
2 Leonard
3 Hagler
4 Hearns
1 Duran
2 Leonard
3 Hagler
4 Hearns
Posted: 05 Nov 2007, 12:33
1. Leonard
2. Duran
3. Hagler
4. Hearns
2. Duran
3. Hagler
4. Hearns
Posted: 05 Nov 2007, 19:47
hi all
great forum!
as to those stars of the past,yes i remember seeing them them all and this is a debate my friends and i have all the time!
hearns- awsome puncher, vicious attacks- glass chin....
leonard- wonderful boxer-showman- big puncher- too much inactivity...
hagler- brutal fighter-wonderful record- old style tough guy...
duran- as per hagler....
so who was the best? so difficult
all those 4-way fights were legendary but the one that stands out for me was an over the hill duran of 32 coming up two FULL weights and giving hagler the fright of his life. remember that at the time, no-one had gone the distance with him since he had become champion and he had destroyed some big names...
as a further thought, do forum members wonder if a 28 year old duran would come up one half a weight and compete with the likes of ricky hatton, or perhaps a prime hagler come up a half weight and mix it with our joe calzaghe? these are questions that rage in our pub!
the general consensus is that the old tough guys would win
great forum!
as to those stars of the past,yes i remember seeing them them all and this is a debate my friends and i have all the time!
hearns- awsome puncher, vicious attacks- glass chin....
leonard- wonderful boxer-showman- big puncher- too much inactivity...
hagler- brutal fighter-wonderful record- old style tough guy...
duran- as per hagler....
so who was the best? so difficult
all those 4-way fights were legendary but the one that stands out for me was an over the hill duran of 32 coming up two FULL weights and giving hagler the fright of his life. remember that at the time, no-one had gone the distance with him since he had become champion and he had destroyed some big names...as a further thought, do forum members wonder if a 28 year old duran would come up one half a weight and compete with the likes of ricky hatton, or perhaps a prime hagler come up a half weight and mix it with our joe calzaghe? these are questions that rage in our pub!
the general consensus is that the old tough guys would win
Posted: 05 Nov 2007, 21:39
Don't even mention Joe Calzaghe in the same breath with Duran,Leonard,Hearns, or Hagler. 
Posted: 05 Nov 2007, 22:56
Tough Choice I happen to choose Duran.
Posted: 05 Nov 2007, 23:41
Back in the 80s, I used to think it was Leonard because he beat all those 3 guys. But when I see the fight in Montreal between Leonard and Duran, I cannot believe how extraordinary Duran whupped him in every facet of boxing. Some people say that that fight was CLOSE, but if you look at that fight again, DURAN WHUPPED HIM BY AT LEAST 4 POINTS. And that's because Leonard was holding Duran the whole fight like a sissy. FIGHT!
DURAN IS THE GREATEST FIGHTER THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN...PERIOD!!!
DURAN IS THE GREATEST FIGHTER THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN...PERIOD!!!
Posted: 06 Nov 2007, 00:21
i remember when i first watched Duran - Leonard I, i was amazed ay how close the scorecards were, at least 4 or 5 points man, i agreeelmersalsa wrote:Back in the 80s, I used to think it was Leonard because he beat all those 3 guys. But when I see the fight in Montreal between Leonard and Duran, I cannot believe how extraordinary Duran whupped him in every facet of boxing. Some people say that that fight was CLOSE, but if you look at that fight again, DURAN WHUPPED HIM BY AT LEAST 4 POINTS. And that's because Leonard was holding Duran the whole fight like a sissy. FIGHT!
DURAN IS THE GREATEST FIGHTER THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN...PERIOD!!!
Posted: 06 Nov 2007, 15:51
You have said previously that Duran (who you like a lot more than Leonard) won by only 3 points, even in your own biased view. 3 points is pretty close in a 15 round fight.elmersalsa wrote:Back in the 80s, I used to think it was Leonard because he beat all those 3 guys. But when I see the fight in Montreal between Leonard and Duran, I cannot believe how extraordinary Duran whupped him in every facet of boxing. Some people say that that fight was CLOSE, but if you look at that fight again, DURAN WHUPPED HIM BY AT LEAST 4 POINTS. And that's because Leonard was holding Duran the whole fight like a sissy. FIGHT!
DURAN IS THE GREATEST FIGHTER THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN...PERIOD!!!
Let me get this straight, Leonard is a sissy in losing a close decision?
What does that make Duran for quitting in the rematch?
Posted: 07 Nov 2007, 14:56
He beat Tommy when they both were in their primes' back in 1981 at Welterweight.wouter wrote:Tou have to keep in mind that Duran was a natural lightweight, and he fought all the other guys you named at THEIR natural weight.... so him being competitive with them and even beating Leonard in their first does nothing but underline what an amazing fighter Duran used to be!
By the way, I don't remember Leonard beating Hearns at super middleweight, I do however remember him being floored twice and given a draw by the judges in his 1989 fight with Hearns.
However - you make it sound like Sugar got a pass with the draw. Yes he did get knocked down twice, but he also in 2 specific rounds knocked the s h i t out of Hearns and had everything going for a 10-8 round (even less a knockdown) in that fight.
I still say to this day that the draw was a good call, and yet even Sugar himself gives it to Tommy.
By far the best of the 4 during that era, and a total gentlemen to boot.
Posted: 08 Nov 2007, 05:20
Leonard and Hearns were dangerous fighters at 160 and 168 but both could be dropped and hurt at the weight. Both were also past their primes by the time they got to the division and neither could sustain a hard pace anymore. I'd give Calzaghe a good chance of beating them.Decagon wrote:I apologize for breaking your hideous run-on sentence into three paragraphs, but I thought it would be easier this way.That one doesn't really float my boat. It was a boring fight, but Hagler clearly won. People say that Hagler didn't do much in the early rounds, but Duran didn't do much throughout the fight. The fact that a couple of the judges had him ahead after twelve just shows how much credit they gave to Duran's legacy rather than what he did in the ring. This would resurface in Duran's fight with Iran Barkley.electricman wrote:the one that stands out for me was an over the hill duran of 32 coming up two FULL weights and giving hagler the fright of his life. remember that at the time, no-one had gone the distance with him since he had become champion and he had destroyed some big names...
Uh, you're just all fucked up. Duran had his last fight below 140 when he was 27, in the DeJesus rubber match. By the time he turned 28, he had already given up the World Lightweight Championship, and he would never again fight even at 145. The Duran of the DeJesus rubber match would rape Ricky Hatton, literally knock him out, jump on top of him, pull down Ricky's shorts and sodomize him, while the crowd cheered him on and laughed.electricman wrote:as a further thought, do forum members wonder if a 28 year old duran would come up one half a weight and compete with the likes of ricky hatton,
It would be like fighting a battleship with a blow gun. Calzaghe's punches would have no effect on him. If Hagler could walk through Hearns swarming him, he could easily walk down Calzaghe. I don't think Calzaghe could beat Leonard or Hearns at 168, let alone Marvin Hagler. Him and Duran would be a good matchup, though.electricman wrote:or perhaps a prime hagler come up a half weight and mix it with our joe calzaghe?
If someone says that Calzaghe could beat Hagler or Hatton would beat Duran, you definitely shouldn't let them drive home.electricman wrote:these are questions that rage in our pub!
the general consensus is that the old tough guys would win
Posted: 08 Nov 2007, 05:34
Based on achievement during primes, longevity and whether or not any of them demanded and received concessions before agreeing to fight (who da hell could I be talking about here? 
)
Duran
Hagler
Leonard
Hearns
)Duran
Hagler
Leonard
Hearns