Quote Originally Posted by pacfan
Coming out of 3-year lay-off and immediately fighting a guy who was supposed to be unbeatable and beating (outboxing) him - no way was Leonard over-rated. The controversy in Hagler fight was because in those days the term outboxing wasn't that much in vogue - you either had to clearly dominate a guy or knock him in order to win. (Ironically some of the Mayweather fans here are the ones who saw Hagler winning, but when the Pretty Boy did the same to his opponent, they say he 'masterfully outboxed' his opponent. So now I'm beginning to wonder, is 'outboxing' for real or have we been duped by some wily promoter to believe that their 'not too courageous' boxers' refusing come forward and fight was a 'masterful' performance, or 'highly skilled,' or a case of superb 'outboxing?' Dunno, just confused a bit.)

When he fought Hearns again, he was already on a downhill and I heard they were already very good friends by then, I mean real chummy chums. Could that have affected his performance? just asking.
Leonard didn't out box Hagler when you out box your opponent you have clearly won the fight. That wasn't the case with Leonard vs Hagler, im a Mayweather fan and i had the fight a draw if Hagler wouldn't have tried to have boxed with Leonard in the 1st 4 rounds giving them crucial rounds away. Hagler would have clearly won no doubt in my mind. And if the bout would of been 15 rounds like it would of been but Leonard demanded a 12 round fight, Leonard would of lost.

And as for Leonard vs Hearns 2 Leonard only had the rematch because he thought Hearns was a shot fighter after what Barkley done to Hearns. But he thought wrong and was out boxed for most of the fight and was floored x2, and Hearns was a clear winner but at least 3 rounds. And your actually trying to make excuses for Leonard's performance ?? because Hearns and Leonard were friends ?? they certainly didn't look like friends when Leonard hammered Hearns in the 5th and 12th rounds.