BoxRec

How would you rate Leonard, Hagler, Hearns and Duran against each other.

Their records against each other:

Leonard: 4-1-1
Hagler: 2-1
Hearns: 1-2-1
Duran: 1-4

But is it as simple as that? Duran has the worst stats from the rivalry, but he did what Hagler and Hearns couldn't do by beating Leonard, who had the best stats. Hearns was the only one to legitimately stop Duran, and the only one to floor Leonard. Hagler had the greatest longevity at one weight, Hearns had success in the most divisions, while Duran had the greatest longevity overall.

And official verdicts aside, do you think Leonard did beat Hagler? Did he beat Hearns the second time. Did Duran deserve the verdict over Leonard the first time?

And so on. All these considerations are what make it so compelling. How do you rate them, 1 to 4?

Strange that, even without considering their records against each other, this is pretty much how I would rank them if someone were to ask me to do so off the top of my head. I think Duran's most dominant years were at lightweight, before he really fell into the mix with the other three-and that would be the biggest justification for rating him last--and the shelacking he took from Hearns was, to me, the most impressive win of Tommy's career.

oliverfennell wrote:How would you rate Leonard, Hagler, Hearns and Duran against each other.

Their records against each other:

Leonard: 4-1-1
Hagler: 2-1
Hearns: 1-2-1
Duran: 1-4

--- Key is in this time frame against each other, because Duran is head and shoulders careerwise over the rest.

1. Marv------nobody would rematch him and the only guy who beat him waited until he was at retirement age and could only secure one of the most hotly contested splits in history.

2. Hearns-------Leonard benefits from an arguable stoppage in a fight he's well behind in and ran from the rematch until Hearns was well softened up in many wars and then could only secure an arguable draw he was knocked down in. Hearns almost wins a cut stoppage over Marv and gave us a classic. Knocks Duran stone cold, the only man to accomplish the deed and shuts out Benitez completely.

3. Leonard-------brilliant but fragile talent that required all corporate network hands on deck to support as the new age Sugar substitute. Got the specious stoppage against Benitez with seconds left in the fight, well whupped by Duran who forces him into the first of a half dozen or more retirements, never really shows any class over Duran in the returns regardless of what the record shows, and could only secure a disputed split over Marv and "retired" the next week rather than rematch.

4. Duran--------near the end of his prime against Leonard and moving up 2 divisions did a classic on the golden boy. Had so little respect for Leonard that he actually dismisses him with the wave of his hand as not worthy in the 2nd fight, a move that cost him dearly as the rubber never happened until Duran was way north of lightweight and just south of 40 yrs of age. Outclassed by Benitez, but well ducked by Benitez at 140/147 who waited until his eating disorder bloated him beyond original recognition. Gave Marv as much as he could handle and only really falls well short against Hearns, again, well above his best weight and past prime.

5. Benitez------overrated with no comprehensive masterclass type performance save a bloated Duran. Lazy talent. Good staredown of Leonard, but lack of offense and heart is why he's never mentioned in The Fab Five. More like the Fab Four and 1/2.

Let me put it this way --- if they were all the same size, & their careers peaked at the same time, Duran would be the man to rule the Fab Four. He was also, in reality, the most disadvantegd by time in the series.

All things being equal, Duran's the high water-mark.

I agree with all what was said above.

In my view, none of the four was the best in the rivalry....That's why they call them "The Fabulous Four"

i agree with GI

All things being equal, Duran's the high water-mark.

I like it.....it sounds like you are measuring on the side of a toilet bowl!!

For reasons pretty well articulated Duran should get the gold in this discussion. Pound for Pound.

However it if is prime vs prime Probably Marvin the Plodder would tend to beat the rest of them 2 out of 3, throwing weight out the window. Ringsider will disagree because Marvin is a southpaw. But he is a registered bigot when it comes to the left handed stance and thus we must disallow his opinion in 47 of the 54 states.

Hagler was ambidextrous and therefore had no problems fighting from a conventional stance. Maybe that makes a difference

BoxBuzz wrote:For reasons pretty well articulated Duran should get the gold in this discussion. Pound for Pound.

However it if is prime vs prime Probably Marvin the Plodder would tend to beat the rest of them 2 out of 3, throwing weight out the window. Ringsider will disagree because Marvin is a southpaw. But he is a registered bigot when it comes to the left handed stance and thus we must disallow his opinion in 47 of the 54 states.

54 states?

BoxBuzz wrote:For reasons pretty well articulated Duran should get the gold in this discussion. Pound for Pound.

However it if is prime vs prime Probably Marvin the Plodder would tend to beat the rest of them 2 out of 3, throwing weight out the window. Ringsider will disagree because Marvin is a southpaw. But he is a registered bigot when it comes to the left handed stance and thus we must disallow his opinion in 47 of the 54 states.

Hagler the plodder doesn't compete with any of them at a prime on prime level. He had all he could handle with Vito!!


I have nothing against lefties......as long as a guy doesn't fight southpaw. All the great trainers would never permit a decent fighter to fight southpaw. The real trainers would have converted them at the gym, or told them to find someone else.

Hagler proved he could not box. He tried it against Leonard and gave away the first 4 rounds.

By the way you might want to enroll in a US history/geography class.

ringsider wrote:

BoxBuzz wrote:For reasons pretty well articulated Duran should get the gold in this discussion. Pound for Pound.

However it if is prime vs prime Probably Marvin the Plodder would tend to beat the rest of them 2 out of 3, throwing weight out the window. Ringsider will disagree because Marvin is a southpaw. But he is a registered bigot when it comes to the left handed stance and thus we must disallow his opinion in 47 of the 54 states.

Hagler the plodder doesn't compete with any of them at a prime on prime level. He had all he could handle with Vito!!


I have nothing against lefties......as long as a guy doesn't fight southpaw. All the great trainers would never permit a decent fighter to fight southpaw. The real trainers would have converted them at the gym, or told them to find someone else.

Hagler proved he could not box. He tried it against Leonard and gave away the first 4 rounds.

By the way you might want to enroll in a US history/geography class.

lol I knew it was coming you cant have a lefty discussion without ringsider.

oliverfennell wrote:How would you rate Leonard, Hagler, Hearns and Duran against each other.

Their records against each other:

Leonard: 4-1-1
Hagler: 2-1
Hearns: 1-2-1
Duran: 1-4

But is it as simple as that? Duran has the worst stats from the rivalry, but he did what Hagler and Hearns couldn't do by beating Leonard, who had the best stats. Hearns was the only one to legitimately stop Duran, and the only one to floor Leonard. Hagler had the greatest longevity at one weight, Hearns had success in the most divisions, while Duran had the greatest longevity overall.

And official verdicts aside, do you think Leonard did beat Hagler? Did he beat Hearns the second time. Did Duran deserve the verdict over Leonard the first time?

And so on. All these considerations are what make it so compelling. How do you rate them, 1 to 4?

Nicely put.

Duran rightly gets rated highest on p4p lists for his LW reign or terror.

Hearns is the nearly man, so close to stopping hagler on a cut.so close to outboxing leonard the first time 4 minutes from victory, robbed in a rematch with SRL , and beat Duran and Benitez

Leonard is the golden boy and assumed no 1. Fact is he didnt beat Hagler it was a draw, he lost to duran but than beat duran twice, he beat hearns in one of the greatest comebacks, and he was unlucky not to stop hearns the second time.

Hagler beat duran, beat hearns, and robbed of his title at MW and arguably never lost a fight in his career he didnt avenge.

i think all 4 are incredible and its impossible to seperate them

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Let me put it this way --- if they were all the same size, & their careers peaked at the same time, Duran would be the man to rule the Fab Four. He was also, in reality, the most disadvantegd by time in the series.

All things being equal, Duran's the high water-mark.

Extremely well put.

Hagler blah,blah,blah...... and robbed of his title at MW.....blah,blah,blah......

What a bunch of crap.

And here is some more.....

Leonard is the golden boy and assumed no 1. Fact is he didnt beat Hagler it was a draw....blah,blah, blah.....

Leonard made him look like a novice.

"lol I knew it was coming you cant have a lefty discussion without ringsider." - Grimm

Doesn't it just get funnier with each old trotting out, as well?

Ezzard wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Let me put it this way --- if they were all the same size, & their careers peaked at the same time, Duran would be the man to rule the Fab Four. He was also, in reality, the most disadvantegd by time in the series.

All things being equal, Duran's the high water-mark.

Extremely well put.

Thank you. Another question would be, all things equal, who fares the worst? That, to me, is less clear-cut.

54 states....I heard it from Obama. Was he in error? Say it aint so! Oops your right it's 57 states. Didn't Heinz have 57 states?

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washing ... ma-wa.html

"It is wonderful to be back in Oregon," Obama said. "Over the last 15 months, we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in 57 states?........."

That is what Obama said........So as usual those with the wrong political leaning try to spin it into Obama saying the USA has 54 or 57 states.

That is not what he said......nor what he meant.

ringsider wrote:

Hagler blah,blah,blah...... and robbed of his title at MW.....blah,blah,blah......

What a bunch of crap.

And here is some more.....

Leonard is the golden boy and assumed no 1. Fact is he didnt beat Hagler it was a draw....blah,blah, blah.....

Leonard made him look like a novice.

because he lost by such a huge margin

BoxBuzz wrote:54 states....I heard it from Obama. Was he in error? Say it aint so! Oops your right it's 57 states. Didn't Heinz have 57 states?

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washing ... ma-wa.html

Wow never heard anything like this.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:"lol I knew it was coming you cant have a lefty discussion without ringsider." - Grimm

Doesn't it just get funnier with each old trotting out, as well?

What exactly does this mean?

It means Ringsider goes to the same, tired old routine about southpaws any time one is brought up. To preserve the gag, he might give it a rest, once in a while. Alas, with no imagination, he can't produce other material. How many times now has he been voted BoxRec's Dolt or (unintentional) Court-Jester Of The Year? He is the poster-boy for the limp addage, "Everyone is entitled to an opinion" being a proven furphy.

BroughtonRulesRefuge wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:How would you rate Leonard, Hagler, Hearns and Duran against each other.

Their records against each other:

Leonard: 4-1-1
Hagler: 2-1
Hearns: 1-2-1
Duran: 1-4

--- Key is in this time frame against each other, because Duran is head and shoulders careerwise over the rest.

1. Marv------nobody would rematch him and the only guy who beat him waited until he was at retirement age and could only secure one of the most hotly contested splits in history.

2. Hearns-------Leonard benefits from an arguable stoppage in a fight he's well behind in and ran from the rematch until Hearns was well softened up in many wars and then could only secure an arguable draw he was knocked down in. Hearns almost wins a cut stoppage over Marv and gave us a classic. Knocks Duran stone cold, the only man to accomplish the deed and shuts out Benitez completely.

3. Leonard-------brilliant but fragile talent that required all corporate network hands on deck to support as the new age Sugar substitute. Got the specious stoppage against Benitez with seconds left in the fight, well whupped by Duran who forces him into the first of a half dozen or more retirements, never really shows any class over Duran in the returns regardless of what the record shows, and could only secure a disputed split over Marv and "retired" the next week rather than rematch.

4. Duran--------near the end of his prime against Leonard and moving up 2 divisions did a classic on the golden boy. Had so little respect for Leonard that he actually dismisses him with the wave of his hand as not worthy in the 2nd fight, a move that cost him dearly as the rubber never happened until Duran was way north of lightweight and just south of 40 yrs of age. Outclassed by Benitez, but well ducked by Benitez at 140/147 who waited until his eating disorder bloated him beyond original recognition. Gave Marv as much as he could handle and only really falls well short against Hearns, again, well above his best weight and past prime.

5. Benitez------overrated with no comprehensive masterclass type performance save a bloated Duran. Lazy talent. Good staredown of Leonard, but lack of offense and heart is why he's never mentioned in The Fab Five. More like the Fab Four and 1/2.

I think that's an excellent assessment, and I don't see anything I disagree with.
It's unfortunate for Duran that he wasn't able to achieve that level of lasting recognition for his achievements in the '70s.

I think Benitez is historically under-rated somewhat, though, rather than over-rated.