Ok, obviously neither guy was in his prime when they met.. so let's here how this fight goes p4p and both guys in their primes.

I couldn't even begin to pick a winner with any certainty. But I will say this-

12 rounds- edge to Leonard. 15 rounds- edge to Hagler.

I'm with ya prod. Longer the fight the more I favor Hagler.

I'm leaning towards Leonard because I think his handspeed would be the deciding factor. I've seen plenty of Hagler but I don't think I've seen enough of his prime to favor him in this one... although his southpaw stance would be a factor.

My thoughts exactly. While Marvin was an excellent boxer with fast hands a good legs, he's not quite Leonard in either department. But at the same time, you gotta think Marv being a lefty would fuck with Leonard at least a little bit in a boxing match where Hags isn't squared up and right in front of him. I see it as a cautious boxing match for about 6 or 7, with one or two punches deciding the rounds. And if the Marvellous One realizes or thinks he's getting slightly the worst of it (or at least appears to be..Leonard being the master showman/opportunist/psychologist), I see him saying 'fuck it' after awhile and turning into more of an attacker. And that 70's Hagler comes harder and sharper and crisper than the guy from 87.

It's a toss-up to me. Both guys can fight in and out, but it's obvious where each would/should prefer to be. Stamina is not a question for either guy, but I kinda figure that Ray will be working harder in the final half or third, and as a result may find Marvin closing in on him more than before, and this is where he could get touched up.

The one thing Hags has over Leonard is that Ray can't hurt him. While RL has a great chin and a proven ability to collect himself when in trouble, I think Hagler can sting him, and even drop him.

No matter how many times these two laced em up, they'd probably be close and controversial decisions, with Hagler thinking he won every one of them.


edit: And I don't give Leonard his due. Pssshhh.

It goes the same way: Leonard by semi-controversial split decision.

Although Hagler was a career Middleweight and Leonard was a Welterweight, the size difference is all but irrelevant here, as Hagler barely overcame an even smaller fighter than Leonard in Duran.

In '87 Hagler was on the slide, but Leonard was also..PLUS had been inactive for 3 years.

Leonard wins at any point in their careers.

Really, where is that? Ive always felt Ray to be a pretty adept mid range guy who could hold his own on the inside with anybody, let alone Marvin Hagler.. Hed outdo Marvin inside on the basis of handspeed and defense alone. If he moves on him (though I dont think that was particularly his style) hes always going to be a few steps ahead of him. Could Ray hurt Marvin? Well even a clearly past his best days and best weight Leonard got his respect and thatd be all he ever needed. Ray had a great chin and since Marvin was no great puncher, I see their chances near a wash.

Do you give him his duee? Ermm kinda, when you have to. Marvin is a full level below Leonard.

15 to Marvin? Cuz Leonard slowed down? I thought he showed the ability to go strong the whole time, even finishing a few guys late and digging deep in fights. Marvin faced nowhere near the caliber of prime great opponents, in fact he fought none and was embarrased by two past their prime little guys.

Can you say overrated?
















Marvin Holyfield.

















Much to his discredit. If you are suggesting they could have met in their primes Leonard could overcome the size difference, I agree. The reverse is not possible and p4p pleease.

leanord would probally find a a way to win he was great at that

you sure took offense to my post, eh?

all i can do is thank you for sharing your opinion with us.

thank you.

No thats pretty much Sponts typical reply. I think it means hes happy to have someone to argue with, i could be wrong.

I thought Hagler was robbed when they did fight, (im kinda biased) So i think a younger fresher Marvin just eats Leonard alive.

Well few intelligent or respectable observers felt it was a robbery, even while they may have Marvin won. Aside, Marvin showed a deal of respect (perhaps too much so) against other great fighters. To believe a young Marvin eats Leonard alive p4p is ridiculous. But aside, a younger "fresher" Marvin would be in a with a younger "fresher" and not rusty Leonard. Ive got no objections to somebody thinking that Marvin beats Leonard at their best as middleweights but its close either way. But p4p? PLease. Lolz.

Whats next?> Marvin eats Duran alive p4p? Whatever.

Hagler is highly overrated p4p. He beat which great middleweights? Hell, he damn near lost to two great former welter and lightweights respectively.

Srl would likely win a 15 rd UD vs Hagler.Srl did have the ablity to turn it on during crunch time he was faster and did not freeze as Hagler has vs other elites.

But he didnt lose. And who is this that overrates him so much p4p? Ive never seen a single thread here where someone said HAGLER DESTROYS ALLAH P4P or any other nonsense like that. Hagler is regarded as he should be, a workhorse of a champ that could war or box and had one of thee best chins ever.

You are right that he didn't lose to Duran but thats a pretty hollow victory. Could Hagler have moved up two official weight classes far past his prime and beaten a prime Duran? Lolz. Barely beating an aged far past his prime blown up lightweight is not the makings of a great p4p killer.

And when I start seeing people pretending that Leonard Hagler p4p is a wash, thats the beginning of the end. Or when people want to rate him highly on a p4p level when the guy was exposed by great fighters who weren't his size, thats when the line must be drawn.

Comparatively his opposition was soft, so dont insult Leonard. Bernard Hopkins soft though he may have even been his superior.

Leonard beats Hagler P4P. I don't think there's any question about that. Picture Duran/Leonard II, except of course Hagler keeps pushing for all 15 rounds. He'll make Leonard work like hell, and might win a few rounds, but there's no way, that he's winning that fight. Leonard's too quick with his feet and his hands. Plus, he can punch.

But let's be serious about the actual fight. The ONLY reason that fight was even close, was because Hagler gave away the first few rounds. Leonard certainly didn't do much in any of them. He just did more than Hagler, because Hagler did nothing. From rounds 5-12, the fight wasn't close. Other than rounds 10 and 11, which were very close, Leonard didn't do shit, other than run and shoe-shine. Leonard stole that fight, because Hagler let him.

Leonard also may have been rusty, but Hagler was old. Some fighters just don't age well, and Hagler clearly slowed over the final few years of his career. Leonard still had the type of skills (legs, fast hands) that could take advantage of Hagler's decline.

At their very best, could Leonard at his very best have moved up and given Hagler the same kind of close fight. Probably, but I certainly don't think that's EVER a 50/50 fight.

But P4P, it's not very close. Leonard's just better.

I didn't know this was a "who is greater or who has done ore on a p4p basis". I thought it was a about a fight. No shit that Leonard has the greater standing p4p. Doesn't mean he dominates a guy who just ruled his weight class for years. And anyway a load of Leonard's p4p status comes from his decision over Hagler who was talking retirement for a couple of years.

If we're taking guys at their best, I think it's a real fight. If that's dissing Leonard, so be it.

OMG, lost on prod again. Who said Leonard was greater? I think the point was Leonard was better and he proved it. Hagler was worse and he proved that too.

Never said he would dominate him but its a pretty clear win for the guy. He fought and beat a better boxer, a better defender and couterpuncher and a better aggressive fighter. Leonard proved everything and anything youd need to know about a Hagler matchup. Hagler couldnt carry Duran's jockstrap.

As to the Hagler win, EVEN throwing that out disagree. Leonard wasnt already in retirement either and moving up. Im sure you do think itd be a real fight, I dont disagree but the outcome should never be in doubt. Marvin never beat other great fighters and showed his vunerabilities against smaller formerly great fighters. Where as Leonard was beating them in their prime, which I know means nothing.

#4#, Leonard wins this one whether it's 12 or 15 rounds. He had ALL the tools to take Hagler and I can't think of a single advantage that Hagler would have (other than maybe "chin" - but that shouldn't matter since Leonard could take a punch too). Leonard fights him from the outside and wins a unanimous decision

Marvin also has advantages over those guys you referenced, does he not? He's not gonna get stopped late. He's not gonna train for a week. He's not gonna scream "no mas". And the win Leonard has over Duran leaves something to be desired for me. I don't see it as this domination that others do. Duran's win means more and proved more to me.

Is Hagler as good as Hearns and Benitez? Better or worse? Those guys gave Leonard all he could handle and may have done better in rematches. That is not out of the question. Hagler should be able to hang with Ray. Hags doesn't have any wins over great fighters (other than Hearns, but it was at middle..a weight Tommy could carry easily), but most of his wins are domination or quite conclusive. I don't think Duran "embarassed" him either. I think I had it 10-5, which is still to Duran's credit as a great.

Look, I'm gonna drop it because there is no way it's gonna end up in an actual respectful conversation. You have a clear win for Leonard. I have close fights. Soo...we disagree by what? A few rounds? Hardly something to get excited about.

I consider Hagler & Monzon to be the two greatest Middleweights. At a p4p level neither of them beats Leonard imo. I get the basis of the matchup Prod. But Hagler was still considered the top p4p fighter in the world when a rusty Leonard beat him at an uncomfortable weight.

I don't see how Hagler does better taking away his size advantages against a prime Leonard.

10-5 Leonard

Comparing Hagler to Hearns, Benitez, or Duran really isn't a fair comparison. Hagler didn't have the physical attributes that Hearns had. It would be much easier for Leonard to fight Hagler from the outside than it was to fight Hearns on the outside. And Hagler really wasn't the elusive, defensive wizard that Benitez was. Nor was Hagler as fast, elusive, or aggressive as a prime (28 year old) Duran.

It's styles that makes the fight here, and #4#, Leonard was too quick and too skilled to get into a slugging match with Hagler. Why would he need to?

My point was that Leonard faced all styles and proved he could handle them all. Hell, he beat your boy aswell. Im sure you can find flaws with any fighter as could I but the point is listed above. Aside, I dont think Leonard dominated Duran but he did show his ability to fight a different fight in the rematch. Lets not pretend like Duran didnt have a huge experience advantage when they met. You dont think Duran from a similar point in his career was worse than later versions?

Is Hagler as good? No but I dont think thats the biggest deal in the world. Stylistically though hes simply not bringing something that Leonard hasnt seen and proven he could deal with. And Hearns wasnt a great middleweight, it doesnt matter if he could carry the weight or not. As to the outcome of his fights, any great fighter should handle the mediocre opp he was facing. I think it is embarrasing that Duran was leading through 12. Duran was 2x the fighter Marvin was.

As to the fight itself, straight up it could go either way. A fresher Hagler performs better one would assume but I still think that Hagler is prone to showing too much respect. But we all know that Leonard could be much better than the ring rusty slowed guy who met Marvin.

You always sell Leonard short, Marvin wasnt in his class. Im not trying to knock the guy and im sure im not the only one who sees Leonard's superiority here.

Edit: MBA said it much better than I did.

I give Leonard an advantage based on his hand and foot speed, and I think he'd be winning going into the championship rounds, but I also think he'd be working harder to do it. Not that his stamina is in question, but Hagler's conditioning is fantastic as well. I see him having more of a feel of urgency down the stretch to make it a close fight on the virtue of his upping the pace of the stalking and maybe outworking him a bit.

Honestly. Is it really this far out of the question?

Hell, if you guys are this sure about fights that will never happen, you should start betting on boxing. You're sure to make a fortune! Heh.

If you are talking about straight up then i agree with the above. The difference between picking fights with proven greats and unproven contenders or up and comers is leaps and bounds. Believe what you want but I still refuse to believe you are talking about p4p.

OMG, because Hearns was a better puncher and fighter at middleweight. The one thing that got Marvin through that fight was his beard, Hearns diminished power and his fightplan. If Hearns boxes Marvin, Hagler losses. So even if its a matter of styles, what does that have to do with Hagler?

A far past his best gave Hagler far more trouble than he should have. Leonard made him quit and he wasnt nearly as bad off.


You make a great point, Hagler would stop him in a mismatch. Because Hagler would have performed so much better than Duran and Hearns.


Diminished Leonard > Diminished Hagler

Prime Leonard => Prime Hagler

Prime Leonard p4p toys with Hagler at points.

Fred, once again I didn't make it past the second line of your dribble. Why don't you go back from where you came from?

What if I say I don't think Hearns was totally in his prime when he fought Leonard? It works for Leonard with Duran...why not the other way?

And while I don't think it's set in stone that Tommy wins if he boxes Hagler (it's not...c'mon..), I do believe he would have had a much better chance. Same if he boxes Leonard again in the rematch at 147 or 154. It's absolutely within reason to think he could win, given the trouble he gave Ray.

One fight typically doesn't tell the whole story when dealing with great fighters. Hearns and Benitez both could have improved on their performances, if not won. There should be no trouble admitting that, if thinking with a clear head, I don't think.

You can't really compare Leonard to Hagler based on their fights with Hearns. Hearns had freakish size and power for a welterweight. His power and size at 160 was only above average. Also, Hearns chose to fight Hagler very differently than he fought Leonard. With Leonard, he chose to box. He kept Ray on the outside and used his jab throughout the fight. With Hagler, he stood toe to toe and hardly ever used his jab. He went into the Leonard fight to box. He went into the Hagler fight to KO him. Very different styles employed against these two!

Why would Benitez improve on his performance and not Leonard? Benitez had been boxing for 6 years, had won titles in two different weight classes, and had 38 fights going into his match with Leonard. Leonard only had 25 fights and fighting for his first title. I think Leonard had more room for improvement than Benitez here.

*yawn*

Do you really think anyone actually reads your posts?

Before I put you on ignore, why the name change?

It took me only second to recognize Fred's bullshit. Funny, he thinks he knows what he is talking about and yet his horse shit posts are so obvious that we bothe spotted him in a matter of 10 useless posts.

Nelson stopped Gomez in 11 & Holmes/Norton was not an upset. It was exactly what was expected. A razor close fight that could go either way.

Alfredo Layne stopped Wilfredo in 9(to save your sorry ass the box rec trip)

You suck far too badly to read your entire posts. I just grab a few of your false facts and stop at that. I am sure there is plenty more in that blubbering mess.

You're not worth debating because you have no desire to be educated on the sport. No sense wasting time with a kid that does not want to learn

Well its not entirely unfair to believe so but then what? I've always given Duran full credit for that win, I just think that Leonard learned from it. Hearns may have gotten better after that loss but I still think Leonard was the better fighter.

Anyway, im done with this issue as I have no interest in changing anybody's mind. If you feel Hagler was his equal, completely your perogative. I dont, oh well.

Leonard fought and beat great fighters his own size and you are looking for excuses. Fair enough, he won because he was lucky. Hagler sucks donkey balls then in comparison as his opp was terrible comparatively and he still got embarrased by two formerly great fighters./

I'm sorry, but what is this in response to? I don't dispute any of this. In fact I said that if Tommy boxed Hearns he could have (but now WOULD have...that's extreeemely speculatory) beaten Hagler. Same as if he had gotten a rematch with Leonard. Nothing more.


Well he may have trained for more than a week. And maybe wouldn't have started the fight with a massive gash on his forehead. Let's not pretend that Bentiez was a consistent genius in or out of the ring. Bruce Curry beat him. Knocked him down 3 times. And held his own in another tight fight in the rematch. He also has a draw against Harold Weston, who is a very good fighter, but could never get over the hump. He took Leonard to the 15th. Not a stretch to say he could improve his performance. Both guys could. That's why they fight the fight. Unfortunately, those two natural rematches never happened. Leonard's with Duran did.

Im sure he trained one week, just as you are.

Funny he must be some specimen.

Ok, man.

You're right, it actually hurt him against Hearns.

Theres no point in arguing with a brick wall. Over your head.

Fred, your jokes suck. You're only funny when you are trying to be serious. Hagler's chin is the main reason he won that fight.

Mark, who are you talking to?

That clown who is going by GOD. He thinks he made a funny by saying beard meant facial hair. A real knee slapper.

Remember when he told us that Hagler was stripped of his titles, before the loss to Leonard, because he was so old? That was a good one!

I think his mother told him that Ray was his daddy and abandoned him or something. It's all he posts about. If it doesn't involve Leonard he doesn't care.

Perhaps there was an illfated contender tryout. Not sure what. But this runs personal. You don't find many 20 year olds odsessed with ray leonard's boxing career, packed with misinformed facts

Yeah, this clown's been banned by more boxing sites that I can count. Lucky for him that we don't ban based on delusional views.

It's funny though, every site he goes to, he's the only one with his POV. Yet everyone else is the delusional one.

That's more like it!

BTW kid, don't ever doubt that you can be gone from this site! If I made it public why you've been bounced from the other sites, you wouldn't be posting here!!

Now that is the best post I have seen from any of these aliases. Maybe there is hope for you yet

Doubtful

No fucking shit....

Yup! I thought you knew

Id say Leanard.Based on his mobility,speed and mental edge.Hagler great as he was could be contolled mentally.By a crafty,skilled and elusive boxer.Leanard was all that.Even Duran who had subtle moves and gave sneaky angles was able to make Marvin hesitate and he didnt have that much success with Duran until Roberto got winded late.
In their actual fight many of Leanard`s flurries were slaps or shoeshines without much power but they were still effective in stopping Hagler from getting off.He was waiting and waiting for Ray and he lost rounds because of it.
In a P4P match youd see more of that IMV.
RL by UD this time without the controversey.