Re: Leonard vs Hagler: Who Really Won?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftHookToTheBody
Hagler won. Leonard fooled the judges (and the crowd) with meaningless flurries, most of which did not land, and when they did land he was slapping the punches and never came close to doing any damage to Hagler. Hagler started slow, granted, but in the middle rounds landed the hurting punches and took the fight to Leonard. He had him hurt at least three different times, and Leonard was saved by the bell each time.
That said, I wouldn't go so far as to call it a "robbery" because Hagler did not fight smart the first part of the fight. I'll never figure out why he came out in a conventional stance. He also had to know that Leonard would have the judges and the crowd in his pocket and that he couldn't fight a methodical, no frills fight and get the decision. Still, I saw it 7-5 for Hagler. Not a robbery, but Leonard was all style and little substance.
They wern't meaningless punches they were good solid combos them combos even sounded louder than Haglers punches when they connected.
Leonard's punches sounded louder because he was slapping Hagler with open gloved shots. That will make a louder sound than a solid, straight punch. Plus, a majority of the punches in those combos were blocked or didn't land cleanly. They just looked pretty. He never did any serious damage at all to Hagler. Like I said, though, Hagler did not fight as smart as he should have and that is what cost him the decision.
Re: Leonard vs Hagler: Who Really Won?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftHookToTheBody
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftHookToTheBody
Hagler won. Leonard fooled the judges (and the crowd) with meaningless flurries, most of which did not land, and when they did land he was slapping the punches and never came close to doing any damage to Hagler. Hagler started slow, granted, but in the middle rounds landed the hurting punches and took the fight to Leonard. He had him hurt at least three different times, and Leonard was saved by the bell each time.
That said, I wouldn't go so far as to call it a "robbery" because Hagler did not fight smart the first part of the fight. I'll never figure out why he came out in a conventional stance. He also had to know that Leonard would have the judges and the crowd in his pocket and that he couldn't fight a methodical, no frills fight and get the decision. Still, I saw it 7-5 for Hagler. Not a robbery, but Leonard was all style and little substance.
They wern't meaningless punches they were good solid combos them combos even sounded louder than Haglers punches when they connected.
Leonard's punches sounded louder because he was slapping him with open gloved shots. That will make a louder sound than a solid, straight punch. Plus, a majority of the punches in those combos were blocked or didn't land cleanly. They just looked pretty. He never did any serious damage at all to Hagler. Like I said, though, Hagler did not fight as smart as he should have and that is what cost him the decision.
I wouldn't call them slaps certainly didn't look that way when i watched it did you give Leonard 1st 4 rounds ?? and also i would love to see punchstats for this fight.
Re: Leonard vs Hagler: Who Really Won?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftHookToTheBody
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftHookToTheBody
Hagler won. Leonard fooled the judges (and the crowd) with meaningless flurries, most of which did not land, and when they did land he was slapping the punches and never came close to doing any damage to Hagler. Hagler started slow, granted, but in the middle rounds landed the hurting punches and took the fight to Leonard. He had him hurt at least three different times, and Leonard was saved by the bell each time.
That said, I wouldn't go so far as to call it a "robbery" because Hagler did not fight smart the first part of the fight. I'll never figure out why he came out in a conventional stance. He also had to know that Leonard would have the judges and the crowd in his pocket and that he couldn't fight a methodical, no frills fight and get the decision. Still, I saw it 7-5 for Hagler. Not a robbery, but Leonard was all style and little substance.
They wern't meaningless punches they were good solid combos them combos even sounded louder than Haglers punches when they connected.
Leonard's punches sounded louder because he was slapping him with open gloved shots. That will make a louder sound than a solid, straight punch. Plus, a majority of the punches in those combos were blocked or didn't land cleanly. They just looked pretty. He never did any serious damage at all to Hagler. Like I said, though, Hagler did not fight as smart as he should have and that is what cost him the decision.
I wouldn't call them slaps certainly didn't look that way when i watched it did you give Leonard 1st 4 rounds ?? and also i would love to see punchstats for this fight.
Well, like I said, I wouldn't call it a robbery, I guess it just depends on what you look for when you score. I gave Leonard 3 of the first 4 rounds (can't recall off the top of my head which I gave to Hagler--it's been about a year since I watched the fight). I gave Hagler 6 of the last 8 because I thought he was inflicting by far the most damage with his punches. If you were looking for more volume and combos then I could see some of those rounds going to Leonard. Like I said, Hagler should have fought it smarter. To anyones knowlege, has Hagler ever explained why he came out fighting in the conventional stance?
Re: Leonard vs Hagler: Who Really Won?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftHookToTheBody
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftHookToTheBody
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICE COLD BOXING
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeftHookToTheBody
Hagler won. Leonard fooled the judges (and the crowd) with meaningless flurries, most of which did not land, and when they did land he was slapping the punches and never came close to doing any damage to Hagler. Hagler started slow, granted, but in the middle rounds landed the hurting punches and took the fight to Leonard. He had him hurt at least three different times, and Leonard was saved by the bell each time.
That said, I wouldn't go so far as to call it a "robbery" because Hagler did not fight smart the first part of the fight. I'll never figure out why he came out in a conventional stance. He also had to know that Leonard would have the judges and the crowd in his pocket and that he couldn't fight a methodical, no frills fight and get the decision. Still, I saw it 7-5 for Hagler. Not a robbery, but Leonard was all style and little substance.
They wern't meaningless punches they were good solid combos them combos even sounded louder than Haglers punches when they connected.
Leonard's punches sounded louder because he was slapping him with open gloved shots. That will make a louder sound than a solid, straight punch. Plus, a majority of the punches in those combos were blocked or didn't land cleanly. They just looked pretty. He never did any serious damage at all to Hagler. Like I said, though, Hagler did not fight as smart as he should have and that is what cost him the decision.
I wouldn't call them slaps certainly didn't look that way when i watched it did you give Leonard 1st 4 rounds ?? and also i would love to see punchstats for this fight.
Well, like I said, I wouldn't call it a robbery, I guess it just depends on what you look for when you score. I gave Leonard 3 of the first 4 rounds (can't recall off the top of my head which I gave to Hagler--it's been about a year since I watched the fight). I gave Hagler 6 of the last 8 because I thought he was inflicting by far the most damage with his punches. If you were looking for more volume and combos then I could see some of those rounds going to Leonard. Like I said, Hagler should have fought it smarter. To anyones knowlege, has Hagler ever explained why he came out fighting in the conventional stance?
I gave Leonard first 4 rounds and to answer the last bit of your question i believe it was because Hagler wanted to show Leonard that he could outbox Leonard and Hagler got too cocky and he payed the price in the end for that fatal error in the early going.
Re: Leonard vs Hagler: Who Really Won?
In those days, the term 'to outbox' wasn't still much in vogue so naturally there was much controversy over the decision. But if it were Mayweather fighting exactly in the same way against Hagler today, he would've been praised for 'beautifully outboxing' him, accompanied with statements like 'what a masterful performance,' or worst, 'he schooled Hagler today!' Strangely, I had Hagler winning at that time (yes, I watched it live on the tube when I was just a toddler ;D), but now I clearly have Leonard winning that fight. I guess times change and criteria for scoring also change with it.
I downloaded two versions of the fight from one of the peer-to-peer 'sharing' (not stealing! but I wonder why they call it sharing when I don't usually share anything, LOL) website - limewire - which strangely were Japanese versions of the fight with original Japanese commentary. There were two commentators there, the one the regular host and the other, former world champion as a guest analyst. In the commentary, by the start of the last round, the ex-champ had Leonard clearly winning and said that 'Hagler clearly needed to knock Leonard to win.' So the verdict? he clearly outboxed Hagler, end of the story (but I'm pretty sure it ain't the end of this, I've said the same thing several times here already so I'm expecting to say it again and again in the future ^-^).
