Jump to content

Who was the best; Leonard, Hearns, Hagler or Duran?


RAZZ-MCFC
 Share

Who was the best; Leonard, Hearns, Hagler or Duran?  

6 members have voted

  1. 1. Who was the best; Leonard, Hearns, Hagler or Duran?

    • Sugar Ray Leonard
    • Thomas 'Hitman' Hearns
    • 'Marvelous' Marvin Hagler
    • Roberto Duran


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 110
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

He's not my favourite of the bunch,but Duran's overall accomplishments outweigh the other three.Hearns,Leonard and Hagler all defined each others career while Duran had already established himself as an ATG before he even fought any of them.You have his great lightweight reign then wins over Leonard,Palomino,barkley,Mamby and Cuevas.

 

 

 

And yes,my avatar is a great one boxing//

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just looking at the four fighters records against each other it's Leonard....

 

 

Leonard beat Hagler x1, Hearns x1, Duran x2. With 1 Draw vs Hearns and 1 Loss to Duran. Total is 4-1-1

 

Hagler beat Hearns x1, Duran x1 and lost to Leonard. Total is 2-1

 

Hearns beat Duran x1, lost to Hagler x1, and Leonard x1. Plus a Draw with Leonard. Total is 1-2-1

 

Duran beat Leonard x1 and lost to Hagler x1, Hearns x1 and Leonard x2. Total is 1-3

 

These figures of course do not take Duran's Lightweight domination into account. The same applies to Hagler, he dominated the middle's for years, but unlike Duran didn't capture multiple titles.

 

 

Ranked on World titles the scores are...

 

Leonard - WBC 147, WBC 147, WBA 154, WBA 147, WBC 160, WBC 168, WBC 175. Total is SEVEN titles.

 

Hearns - WBA 147, WBC 154, WBC 175, WBC 160, WBO 168, WBA 175. Total is SIX titles.

 

Duran WBA/WBC 135 WBC 147, WBA 154, WBC 160. Total is FIVE titles.

 

Hagler - WBA/WBC/IBF 160. Total is THREE titles.

 

 

Hearns is the odd one out amongst the above though as he was never an undisputed champion at any weight, unlike Leonard at Welter, Hagler at Middle and Duran at Lightweight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just looking at the four fighters records against each other it's Leonard....

 

Leonard beat Hagler x1, Hearns x1, Duran x2. With 1 Draw vs Hearns and 1 Loss to Duran. Total is 4-1-1

 

Hagler beat Hearns x1, Duran x1 and lost to Leonard. Total is 2-1

 

Hearns beat Duran x1, lost to Hagler x1, and Leonard x1. Plus a Draw with Leonard. Total is 1-2-1

 

Duran beat Leonard x1 and lost to Hagler x1, Hearns x1 and Leonard x2. Total is 1-3

 

These figures of course do not take Duran's Lightweight domination into account. The same applies to Hagler, he dominated the middle's for years, but unlike Duran didn't capture multiple titles.

 

Ranked on World titles the scores are...

 

Leonard - WBC 147, WBC 147, WBA 154, WBA 147, WBC 160, WBC 168, WBC 175. Total is SEVEN titles.

 

Hearns - WBA 147, WBC 154, WBC 175, WBC 160, WBO 168, WBA 175. Total is SIX titles.

 

Duran WBA/WBC 135 WBC 147, WBA 154, WBC 160. Total is FIVE titles.

 

Hagler - WBA/WBC/IBF 160. Total is THREE titles.

 

Hearns is the odd one out amongst the above though as he was never an undisputed champion at any weight, unlike Leonard at Welter, Hagler at Middle and Duran at Lightweight.

 

thanks for the research James

 

really interesting results, nice one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without taking their achievements into the equation, and simply answering the question "Who was the best?", despite the fact I don't like the guy, and he wouldn't be many people's pick, I go for Marvin Hagler.

The guy was a complete all-rounder; Fast, powerful, tough as teak, and difficult to handle.

Leonard was obviously the best boxer (skill) out of the lot of them, and Hearns and Duran are probably 2 of my favourite boxers ever, but being honest, Hagler seemed almost unstoppable in his prime.

Leonard may hold a win over him, but it provided plenty of controversy at the time, and plenty of people had it the other way. I thought Leonard edged it, but it was close, either way.

 

The other 3 all had their flaws, but it was difficult to pick one with Hagler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think in terms of pure boxing skills,Hearns was the best out of all four of them.Hearns was never outboxed in his entire career,even outboxing a prime Virgil Hill while being on the decline himself.Leonard needed alot of pressure and to absorb alot of punishment before getting to Hearns.Hagler,while normally a smooth boxer puncher type immediately jumped on Hearns and lured him into a brawl.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who is the best?

 

What is "best"?

 

Best as in who was the greatest.

 

What is the criteria for determining and measuring "greatness"?

 

I ask only because 99% of fans don't really know, they just like who they like. I like to uncover true answers to legitimate questions and avoid basing the response on popularity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without taking their achievements into the equation, and simply answering the question "Who was the best?", despite the fact I don't like the guy, and he wouldn't be many people's pick, I go for Marvin Hagler.

The guy was a complete all-rounder; Fast, powerful, tough as teak, and difficult to handle.

Leonard was obviously the best boxer (skill) out of the lot of them, and Hearns and Duran are probably 2 of my favourite boxers ever, but being honest, Hagler seemed almost unstoppable in his prime.

Leonard may hold a win over him, but it provided plenty of controversy at the time, and plenty of people had it the other way. I thought Leonard edged it, but it was close, either way.

 

The other 3 all had their flaws, but it was difficult to pick one with Hagler.

 

There was one glaring if mostly unnoticed flaw....and both Duran and Leonard exposed it....in fact....Leonard banked on it.

 

It would be the one flaw that Bernard Hopkins would zero in on and use to his advantage had these two ever met and competed in the same era.

 

I won't list it just yet....but wonder who here can tell us all what it was>

 

Anybody?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without taking their achievements into the equation, and simply answering the question "Who was the best?", despite the fact I don't like the guy, and he wouldn't be many people's pick, I go for Marvin Hagler.

The guy was a complete all-rounder; Fast, powerful, tough as teak, and difficult to handle.

Leonard was obviously the best boxer (skill) out of the lot of them, and Hearns and Duran are probably 2 of my favourite boxers ever, but being honest, Hagler seemed almost unstoppable in his prime.

Leonard may hold a win over him, but it provided plenty of controversy at the time, and plenty of people had it the other way. I thought Leonard edged it, but it was close, either way.

 

The other 3 all had their flaws, but it was difficult to pick one with Hagler.

 

There was one glaring if mostly unnoticed flaw....and both Duran and Leonard exposed it....in fact....Leonard banked on it.

 

It would be the one flaw that Bernard Hopkins would zero in on and use to his advantage had these two ever met and competed in the same era.

 

I won't list it just yet....but wonder who here can tell us all what it was>

 

Anybody?

 

all i can think of is that he couldn't handle slick, technical boxers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share




×
×
  • Create New...