The Greatness of Manny Pacquiao

The seven weight divisions status means little to me, as many of the weight divisions are artificial not natural. Yes, I know weight are all artificial in the sense that they are human creactions and have changed historically. By saying the junior titles are not natural, I mean they are not original - a fact - and they add nothing to the sport - my opinion - and that it is unfair to boxers who won three titles in the natural weight divisions (Armstrong, Duran) to have their accomplishments eclipsed by modern day fighters who can put on a few pounds and win a title - and they have so many to choose from, another absurdity - in another weight division, a complaint that seems so obvious to me as to be uncontroversial. At best, Manny has claims to championships in two weight classes: flyweight and lightweight. That's something in itself.

What is more significant about Manny is that he has moved from being a world class flyweight (WBC is a venerable authority going back to the 1960s) to a world class lightweight (again, winning the WBC title), and is now competing among the best welterweights in the world. He has secured his pound-for-pound status by beating top fighters across a great weight span and by displaying rare ability. If we were to judge fighters like Manny on accomplishments, any record book that honored the tradition of boxing would not have Manny accomplishing much at this point (he only defended his WBC flyweight title once and didn't defend his lightweight title at all). But if we judge him the way we judge Ezzard Charles, Sam Langford, Charlie Burley, and other all-time greats who didn't accumulate titles, then Manny shines. He's a throwback, and if he beats Floyd Mayweather, I think he's top twenty all-time material.

Hopkins and Title Defenses

Bernard Hopkins did not register twenty defenses of the world middleweight championship for the simple fact that many of his purported title defenses were not for the world middleweight championship. Moreover, the IBF title is not only not the world championship but isn't a legitimate boxing title, for it has no history and its existence, like the existence of most of the purported world boxing titles, is detrimental to the sport of boxing. Only the WBA and the WBC organizations have a history and have advanced the sport, both going back to the 1960s and furthermore are rooted in championship organizations (NBA and NYSAC) going back to the early decades of the twentieth century.

If we recognize Hopkins as becoming middleweight champion of the world with his April 2001 victory over Keith Holmes, the established two-time WBC champion, then Hopkins recorded seven successful title defenses before losing his claim to Jermaine Taylor. But even then this is problematic. Arguably, if we apply the old rules, Hopkins was never middleweight champion at all.

In 1987, Marvin Hagler was the linear champion. He held a lineage unbroken since the 1940s. He lost his championship to Ray Leonard that year. Leonard defended his championship successfully once, against Roberto Duran in 1989, and this lost it to Terry Norris in 1991. Why lineage is tranferred is very clear: championships are foremost won and lost in the ring, all of these fights were under the middleweight limit of 160 lbs, and Leonard never really retired after his fight with Hagler. Thus lineage transfers down the line. Keith Mullings beat Norris (who was three time middleweight champion by then) in 1997. Javier Castillejo beat Mullings in 1999 and then lost to Oscar de la Hoya in 2001. Shane Mosley beat de la Hoya in 2003 and then lost to Winky Wright in 2004. Paul Williams beat Wright in 2009. Thus Paul Williams stands in a direct line to the middleweight championship that can be traced to the 1950s.

But, Andy, many of these were light middleweight champions. Irrelevant. Robinson often fought as a middleweight weighing between 147 and 154 lbs. The junior middleweight division is an artificial weight class. The 160 lbs division is an original weight class, and any fight in which the participants weigh less than 160 lbs and the linear middleweight championship is present is for the middleweight championship. Old school, I know, but old school rules almost always brings sanity to boxing (with the exception of Ray Robinson's return to the sport, and there things are very messy).


Whatever the case, this remains indisputably true: Carlos Monzon has the most title defenses of any middleweight champion (not titlist or claimant) with 14 and Marvin Hagler is second on the list with 13 (his last defense was unsuccessful).

Round-by-round scoring
The champion's score on the left.

round 1: 10-9 Close, but Leonard edges it. Duran a bit reckless.
round 2: 9-10 Duran hurts Leonard.
round 3: 9-10 Duran on fire.
round 4: 9-10 Still on fire.
round 5: 10-10 This is one of those rare times that I scored an even round. Leonard has big moments. Duran is the constant aggressor. Duran is ducking a lot of shots. The exchanges are even.

First third...
Leonard: 47 points
Duran: 49
Duran decisively wins first third of fight.

round 6: 10-9 Very close. Leonard edges it with some clean hard shots.
round 7: 10-9 The fight moves to the center of the ring. Leonard even had Duran on the ropes for a spell. Duran comes on at the end, but Leonard edges it.
round 8: 10-9 The round is fought almost entirely in the center of the ring. Duran comes on at the end with some tremendous shots, but he is resting mostly. Leonard carries the round by a slim margin.
round 9: 9-10 Pretty much all Duran. Leonard is resting, perhaps. And holding a lot. Leonard appear to be cut by a butt. Maybe this is distracting him.
round 10: 9-10 Leonard does some impressive shining at the end and ends with a good shot. He started off the round with a good shot. But Duran outhustles him in between.

After two-thirds...
Leonard: 95
Duran: 96
Leonard carries middle third of fight, but by the slimmest of margins. For a while it looked like he was crawling back into the fight. But Duran came on big in 9 and 10. Duran clearly has the momentum going into the championship rounds. Leonard needs to do something dramatic.

round 11: 9-10 Leonard is tired. Duran has second wind. Leonard tries to put Duran on the ropes but Duran turns Leonard right back around. He is pounding Leonard throughout the round.
round 12: 9-10 Another big round for Duran. Leonard is very tired. Duran is landing clean hooks and right hands, while digging to the body. Leonard is missing a lot of punches.
round 13: 9-10 Duran has taken clear command of the fight. He is teeing off on Leonard head. Hooks, right hands. Leonard’s head snaps back several times. Even off the ropes Duran is landing punch after punch and Leonard is just leaning on him. Leonard needs a knockout to prevent Duran from snatching his undefeated record and he has nothing in the tank and although he hurts Duran in the final seconds, it has been one of Duran’s most dominant rounds in the fight.
round 14: 9-10 Both fighters are very tired. Duran outhustles Leonard and lands several clean shots. He buckles Leonard’s knees. It’s amazing how Duran makes Leonard miss. The bolo punch gets a lot of attention, but you can see clearly from the close up that it doesn’t land – it misses Duran by almost a foot - and Leonard is in any case holding and hitting in a flagrant foul. (I can’t believe people fall for gimmicks like this. Remember Leonard's low blow bolo on Hagler and the attention it received?)
round 15: 10-9 Duran gives the round away. He knows he has won big and knows Leonard doesn’t have the stuff to knock him out.

Final score...
Leonard: 141
Duran: 145
Duran romps through the championship rounds to seal the deal.

The officials scores are surprisingly close. Angelo Poletti scores a lot of rounds even (10 of them, in fact). At least the judges got the unanimous verdict right. Can you imagine how crazy a majority decision or draw would have been? I can’t even contemplate a Leonard win. You really have to wonder sometimes what people are looking at when they score a fight.

Ridiculously, the New York Times had Leonard winning the fight 144-142. This is the same New York Times that absurdly scored the Hagler-Leonard fight a draw. That rag seems to spot Leonard several rounds before the fight begins.

Some people I talk to score round 1 even and then maybe find another round for Duran in between 6-8. But then these same people often given Leonard round 5, which I don't. Almost everybody I talk to has Leonard evening up the fight in the second third. I thought that was the standard understanding of the fight, but I respect your opinion. Leonard doesn't win very many rounds at all decisively, so I guess I can see how you might give some of those to Duran.

However, if you watch the ebb and flow you will see that Leonard is able to crawl back into the fight because Duran's furious pace winds him a bit and the fight moves more to the center of the ring. This is strategic. Duran decides to take a few breathers so he can dominate down the stretch. By the 9th round, Duran clearly has his second wind and takes it over, putting Leonard back on the ropes. Watch the fight again and you will see what I'm talking about.

By the middle of the championship rounds Leonard clearly needs a knockout or several knockdowns to win. Duran puts far too much distance between Ray and himself in the final third. Leonard was exhausted. It isn't until the 14th that Duran starts to fade. Throughout the fight Leonard is only able to get things done when Duran pulled back on the fury. Otherwise he's popping Leonard with shots from all angles and particularly nailing Leonard with hooks.

When I watch the fight with people I make them aware of three key things observers often miss. So I will suggest these here.

The first is Duran's body punching. He is constantly punching underneath. Leonard does some shining to the body, but he is ineffective in coming up with solid punches underneath. Body punches are extremely important punches in boxing, but observers often miss them or don't accord them their deserved importance.

Second is Duran's constant punching. Leonard tries to tie Duran up by clutching Duran's arms under his arms. But whenever Duran has a free hand, he's banging. All these punches count. I have noted that many observes stop counting punches when one fighter is holding.

Third, Duran slips punches. Duran is the absolute master of this. He has a uncanny ability to move at the last fraction of a second. He does this so that his opponent is committed and he can counter. Duran almost always leaves exchanges having the last word. He steps up this tactic down the stretch. Leonard is missing like crazy. Also, Duran is ducking down and Leonard does not change his style to account for this. Instead of coming up with his punches, Leonard is firing hooks over Duran head or overhand rights that hit Duran's back. These are not scoring punches. The one dramatic uppercut Leonard does throw, the bolo, which gets observers excited, misses by a country mile.

Pernell Whitaker

Pernell Whitaker was the Willie Pep of my generation. An outstanding amateur and an Olympic gold medalist in 1984, he won his first 15 professional fights (including a win over Roger Mayweather), and his sixteenth, in 1988, was a challenge for the WBC world lightweight title!

In that fight, Whitaker dropped a controversial split decision to the outstanding Mexican lightweight Jose Luis Ramirez. Ramirez was the far more experienced fighter, sporting a record of 100-6. Whitaker was clearly advanced beyond his record, dazzling Rameriz. Whitaker's mistake was putting on too keen a defensive effort, which left Ramirez appearing to have made more of a fight of it. Most observers believe Whitaker was robbed. It would not be the first time controversy would surround a Whitaker fight.

Four fights later, Whitaker was matched with Ramirez again were matched again four and this time Whitaker was awarded a clear unanimous decision, claiming a part of the lightweight championship. He defended his claim twice, including a win over all-time great Azumah Nelson (32-1). Nelson had, in only his 14th professional fight, nearly defeated the great featherweight Salvador Sanchez, and six fights later he knocked out Wilfredo Gomez for the WBC featherweight. The fight with Whitaker was close, but Whitaker's size and skill prevailed.

In 1990, Whitaker unified the lightweight championship by picking up the WBA title in a one-round blowout of Juan Nazario. He defended the world championship three times.

By 1992, Whitaker had outgrown the lightweight division and set his sites on the welterweight champion James McGirt (59-2-1). Whitaker outpointed McGirt over twelve rounds in 1993. Whitaker would defend the welterweight championship eight times, including a controversial draw against Julio Cesar Chavez (87-0) and a rematch with James McGirt (64-3-1). The Chavez draw was a big disappointment, as most observers felt Whitaker won the fight convincingly. Whitaker also ventured into the middleweight division, defeating Julio Cesar Vasquez (53-1) over 12 rounds.

In 1997, Whitaker lost his welterweight championship to Oscar de la Hoya in a controversial 12 round decision. It is this writer's opinion that Whitaker deserved the verdict. There would be no rematch.

In 1999, Whitaker lost a lopsided decision to Felix Trinidad. It was clear Whitaker was not the same fighter he was before. Rumors had it that he was using cocaine. In fact, his victory over Andrei Pestriaev was converted to a no contest after he tested positive for cocaine.

In 2001, Whitaker fought one more fight, a fight in which he broke his clavicle, and hung up the gloves for good.

Whitaker retired with a record of 40-4-1. However, only two of those blemishes were deserved. He deserved wins over Ramirez, Chavez, and de la Hoya. His final record should read 43-2.

Whitaker, a left hander, was a defensive wizard, proving to be very difficult to hit cleanly. He was awkward offensively and often befuddled his opponents. His fight with Chavez is an excellent illustration of his ability to stay in the field of danger while avoiding taking any significant punishment. He was one of those rare instances of a master boxer. The fact that he accomplished such a high level of performance while having relatively few ring bouts (he claimed his first title in only his 20th bout) makes his career even more astonishing. At the same time, this was disappointing for fight fans, as we would like to have seen a lot more of Whitaker in the ring. He was a real joy to watch, and one of the greatest lightweights and welterweights in ring history.

Leonard-Duran Scorecard

First, round-by-round scoring and round descriptions. The champion's score is on the left.

Round 1: 10-9 Close, but Leonard edges it. Duran a bit reckless.

Round 2: 9-10 Duran hurts Leonard.

Round 3: 9-10 Duran on fire.

Round 4: 9-10 Still on fire.

Round 5: 10-10 This is one of those rare times that I scored an even round. Leonard has big moments. Duran is the constant aggressor. Duran is ducking a lot of shots. The exchanges are even.

First third summary: Leonard: 47 points. Duran: 49 points. Duran decisively wins first third of fight.

Round 6: 10-9 Very close. Leonard edges it with some clean hard shots.

Round 7: 10-9 The fight moves to the center of the ring. Leonard has Duran on the ropes for a spell. Duran comes on at the end, but Leonard edges it.

Round 8: 10-9 The round is fought almost entirely in the center of the ring. Duran comes on at the end with some tremendous shots, but he is resting mostly. Leonard carries the round by a slim margin.

Round 9: 9-10 Pretty much all Duran. Leonard is resting, perhaps. And holding a lot. Leonard appear to be cut by a butt. Maybe this is distracting him.

Round 10: 9-10 Leonard does some impressive shining at the end and ends with a good shot. He started off the round with a good shot. But Duran outhustles him in between.

After two-thirds: Leonard: 95 points. Duran: 96 points. Leonard carries the middle third of fight, but by the slimmest of margins. For a while it looked like he was crawling back into the fight. But Duran comes on big in 9 and 10. Duran clearly has the momentum going into the championship rounds. Leonard needs to do something dramatic.

Round 11: 9-10 Leonard is tired. Duran has second wind. Leonard tries to put Duran on the ropes but Duran turns Leonard right back around. He is pounding Leonard throughout the round.

Round 12: 9-10 Another big round for Duran. Leonard is very tired. Duran is landing clean hooks and right hands, while digging to the body. Leonard is missing a lot of punches.

Round 13: 9-10 Duran has taken clear command of the fight. He is teeing off on Leonard head. Hooks, right hands. Leonard’s head snaps back several times. Even off the ropes Duran is landing punch after punch and Leonard is just leaning on him. Leonard needs a knockout to prevent Duran from snatching his undefeated record and he has nothing in the tank and although he hurts Duran in the final seconds, it has been one of Duran’s most dominant rounds in the fight.

Round 14: 9-10 Both fighters are very tired. Duran outhustles Leonard and lands several clean shots. He buckles Leonard’s knees. It’s amazing how Duran makes Leonard miss. The bolo punch gets a lot of attention, but you can see clearly from the close up that it doesn’t land – it misses Duran by almost a foot - and Leonard is in any case holding and hitting in a flagrant foul. (I can’t believe people fall for gimmicks like this. Remember Leonard's low blow bolo on Hagler and the attention it received?)

Round 15: 10-9 Duran gives the round away. He knows he has won big and knows Leonard doesn’t have the stuff to knock him out.

Final score: Leonard: 141; Duran: 145. Duran romps through the championship rounds to seal the deal. Very impressive win. Even more impressive when taken in its totality. Duran whips Leonard's ass.

The officials scores are surprisingly close. Angelo Poletti scores a lot of rounds even - 10 of them, in fact! At least the judges got the unanimous verdict right. Can you imagine how crazy a majority decision or draw would have been? I can’t even contemplate a Leonard win. You really have to wonder sometimes what people are looking at when they score a fight. Leonard and his camp believed they won on the night of the fight.

Ridiculously, The New York Times had Leonard winning the fight 144-142! This is the same New York Times that absurdly scored the Hagler-Leonard fight a draw. That Times seems to spot Leonard several rounds before the fight begins.

Some people I talk to score round one even and then maybe find another round for Duran in between 6-8. But then these same people often given Leonard round 5, which I don't. Almost everybody I talk to has Leonard evening up the fight in the second third. I thought that was the standard understanding of the fight, but I respect your opinion. Leonard doesn't win very many rounds at all decisively, so I guess I can see how you might give some of those to Duran.

However, if you watch the ebb and flow you will see that Leonard is able to crawl back into the fight because Duran's furious pace winds him a bit and the fight moves more to the center of the ring. This is strategic. Duran decides to take a few breathers so he can dominate down the stretch. By the 9th round, Duran clearly has his second wind and takes it over, putting Leonard back on the ropes. Watch the fight again and you will see what I'm talking about.

By the middle of the championship rounds Leonard clearly needs a knockout or several knockdowns to win. Duran puts far too much distance between Ray and himself in the final third. Leonard was exhausted. It isn't until the 14th that Duran starts to fade. Throughout the fight Leonard is only able to get things done when Duran pulled back on the fury. Otherwise he's popping Leonard with shots from all angles and particularly nailing Leonard with hooks.

When I watch the fight with people I make them aware of three key things observers often miss. So I will suggest these here.

The first is Duran's body punching. He is constantly punching underneath. Leonard does some shining to the body, but he is ineffective in coming up with solid punches underneath. Body punches are extremely important punches in boxing, but observers often miss them or don't accord them their deserved importance.

Second is Duran's constant punching. Leonard tries to tie Duran up by clutching Duran's arms under his arms. But whenever Duran has a free hand, he's banging. All these punches count. I have noted that many observes stop counting punches when one fighter is holding.

Third, Duran slips punches. Duran is the absolute master of this. He has a uncanny ability to move at the last fraction of a second. He does this so that his opponent is committed and he can counter. Duran almost always leaves exchanges having the last word. He steps up this tactic down the stretch. Leonard is missing like crazy. Also, Duran is ducking down and Leonard does not change his style to account for this. Instead of coming up with his punches, Leonard is firing hooks over Duran head or overhand rights that hit Duran's back. These are not scoring punches. The one dramatic uppercut Leonard does throw, the bolo, which gets observers excited, misses by a country mile.

Hagler on the Leonard Fight

Hagler is arguing that you can't take it away from the champion under these circumstances because that's what everybody told him after the Antuofermo fight. Remember that? It was a draw because Hagler didn't do enough to take the title. Hagler is wondering, as he has in so many previous interviews, "Why doesn't that argument work for me?" As somebody who always had to worry when fights went the distance, wondering whether a double standard is being applied is hardly an illegitimate question. Like Holmes, Hagler didn't get the respect he deserved. That always seemed to be reserved for the glamour boys like Leonard.

Hagler made the fight with Leonard. He was aggressor. He threw many more punches and landed the harder shots. Leonard ran, clowned, and fouled. Some people like that shit, but it's not boxing. Furthermore, in a fight with that much controversy, a real champion fights a rematch to clear up the matter. Hagler makes this argument, too. And he's right again. No fight in history screamed rematch more than this one. But Leonard knew he lucked out the first time around. He was the news and he (and Dundee) gave a good enough performance to convince some people he had done enough to win. The second time around he knew the novelty of it wouldn't fly. Leonard needed the Hagler win on his record to make the historical case, especially after getting overwhelmed by Duran and looking so bad against Hearns. Having Hagler erase the win makes the reality of record all the more apparent.

Hagler is making the same arguments that a lot of us make, and we can't all be bitter, can we? Of course not. How can you be bitter for another person? You can't attribute Hagler's argument to bitterness, then. Especially when it's so logical. The Associated Press scored the fight for Marvin by an overwhelming majority. Contrast that with the score of that joke-of-a-paper the New York Daily News and we can see were the gravity lies. The best that Leonard nut huggers over at the New York Times and the Washington Post could do for their man was give him a draw, which means Hagler keeps the title. Go back and check the Associated Press score for the Antuofermo-Hagler fight. Now that was a close fight. Antuofermo did much better against Hagler than did Leonard and look where the controversy goes. Hagler recognizes the significance of the Antuofermo fight to this whole matter. He even acknowledges in the interview the problem with that fight.

Why this controversy about Hagler-Leonard persists is because people who side with Leonard have to keep putting out the idea that it was close and therefore a Leonard victory plausible. One of the dead giveaways is this qualification: "I thought Leonard won the fight and I am a huge Hagler fan." Right. Sure. That's the same qualifier we see on CSPAN when liberals call on the conversative line saying, "I'm a Republican, but I believe Obama is right for our country right now." We are on to this trick, folks. We get it. Another dead giveaway is that any score in which Leonard wins several more rounds that Hagler is a problem because "admittedly the fight was so close." They admit that Guerra's score was absurd. Yet Leonard-loving boxing publications in the aftermath of the fight extolled the virtues of his scoring. Why? Because they wanted the make the miracle as big a possible. But the people didn't buy it. The more time passed, the more people saw the fight beyond the hype the more they said, "What a second, who was pressing, who threw the most punches, who hurt who?" So people on the Leonard side have over time backed off the Guerra score and made up this myth about "it was anybody's fight."

Hagler is perfectly justified in making his points. And, truthfully, he doesn't sound bitter to me at all. He waited for Leonard to give him a rematch. When he realized Leonard wasn't going to do it, he retired. He didn't have anything left to prove. He wasn't going to break Monzon's record, so there was no need in continuing. It was time to move on to what he was planning on doing: acting. Hagler is a very reasonable fellow. And he was in great spirits for the interview. I appreciate the man for his down-to-earthness. He worked his tail off to give us a great ride. The man's got my respect.

How to Rank the Fabulous Five Pound-for-Pound

Of the four notable fighters of the early 1980s - Wilfred Benetiz, Roberto Duran, Marvin Hagler, Thomas Hearns, and Ray Leonard - Hagler is the outstanding candidate for the top spot. He not only defeated Duran (over 15 rounds), Hearns (by knockout), and Leonard (but was robbed in Las Vegas), but defeated other outstanding fighters, including Mustapha Hamsho, who held a win over Benitez, and Juan Roldan, who thrilled fans with a shotout versus Hearns for the vacant WBC middleweight title. There is little doubt among boxing observers that Hagler would have overpowered Benitez.

Duran decisively defeated Leonard, put on a fabulous, albeit losing, performance against Hagler, and won the WBC middleweight title by defeating Iran Barkley, who had knocked out Hearns (and would go on to decision Hearns at light heavyweight). Duran overwhelmed Carlos Palomino, whom Benitez had, in a controversial split decision, defeated for the world welterweight title. Moreover, Duran was world lightweight champion for nearly the entire decade of the 1970s, posting 12 successful title defenses. Against Duran are these facts: Duran suffered a crushing defeat to Hearns (second round blowout) and was outboxed by Benitez (granted Duran was flat for the fight).

Hearns was cleanly outboxing Leonard in their first fight before the referee inexplicably stopped the action and awarded the fight to Leonard. In fact, over the first 12 rounds, except for two rounds, Leonard appeared to be completely baffled by Hearns' boxing ability. Hearns outboxed master boxer Benitez and blew away Duran and Roldan. He outpointed Leonard in the rematch, dropping him twice. Hearns moved up in weight to win the WBA and the WBC light heavyweight titles in separate fights. Hearns' boxing ability was phenomenal, losing only one decision during his entire career, a close loss to Iran Barkley in their rematch. However, Hagler blew Hearns away and he was wiped out by Iran Barkey to lose his middleweight title.

It is difficult to rank Benitez above Duran even though he defeated him because of Duran's accomplishments, particularly his victory over Leonard (and especially in light of Benitez's loss to Leonard), and his performances against Hagler and Barkley. We can't rank him over Hearns given that he dropped a decision to Hearns.

However, it's difficult to rank Leonard over Benitez. Benitez defeated Palomino, who lost to Duran, defeated Duran, to whom Leonard lost, and lost a close decision to Hearns, who had clearly demonstrated his superiority over Leonard. The Benitez who defeated Duran and fought a close contest with Hearns would have likely have outboxed Leonard. And Leonard's unjust 14th-round stoppage against Hearns should not benefit Leonard in these rankings.

Leonard has trouble against the others because of the reality of his record. He rose to challenge for the welterweight title without having to fight outstanding opposition. He won the title on a controversial 15th-round stoppage against Benitez. He was thoroughly dominated by Duran and regained the title when Duran couldn't continue in a fight where there was no clear leader (it is itself quite revealing that Leonard could not dominate an opponent who would only hours later be hospitalized for severe stomach cramps). Leonard lost almost every round against Hearns (he maybe won two of the 13 rounds) before the referee stopped the fight without cause and awarded the title to Leonard. Leonard lost to a shop-worn Hagler over twelve rounds. Leonard lost to Hearns in the rematch and was knocked down twice. And while Leonard outpointed Duran over 12 rounds in their rubbermatch, Duran was 38 years old and Leonard refused to engage Duran in battle (in my view it should have been ruled a "no contest," as Leonard effectively refused to fight).

So after a comparative analysis, the rankings of the fabulous five look like this:

1. Roberto Duran: world lightweight champion, 12 successful title defense; world welterweight champion; and WBC middleweight champion. Held wins over Palomino, Leonard, Cuevas, and Barkley. Capturing titles in two more weight classes after having dominated a division for nearly a decade is nothing short of phenomenal. Duran is a top five all-time great.

2. Marvin Hagler, world middleweight champion, 12 successful title defenses, including wins over Duran and Hearns, as well as wins over Antuofermo, Hamsho, and Roldan. If there was justice in scoring, Hagler would have 13 successful title defenses. Hagler is clearly the best middleweight of the five and the best middleweight in history. He is a top ten all-time great.

3. Thomas Hearns, WBC middleweight champion (clearest claim on the world title), WBA light heavyweight champion, and WBC light heavyweight (clearest claim on the world title) champion. Held wins over Cuevas, Duran, Benitez, and Roldan. He beat Leonard in their rematch, and he was the victim of a serious injustice in their first fight. He proved in both fights that he could outbox Leonard. While Hearns was among the ten best welterweights and middleweights, crushing defeats to Hagler and Barkley put him outside the top ten all-time pound-for-pound rankings.

4. Wilfred Benitez and Ray Leonard (tie). Benitez defeated Duran whereas Leonard lost to Duran. Benitez did far better against Hearns than did Leonard. A prime Benitez would have done as well as Leonard against an old and faded Hagler. At the same time Leonard was outboxing Benitez in their match before the referee stopped it. Neither fighter is a top 20 all-time great, though.

Why Jersey Joe Walcott cannot possibly be an all-time top ten heavyweight

Here are the reasons:

1. Muhammad Ali, Larry Holmes, George Foreman, Sonny Liston, Joe Frazier, Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield, Michael Spinks, Lennox Lewis, Joe Louis, Ezzard Charles, Rocky Marciano must be ranked ahead of him for the simple fact that they would beat him. Even a badly faded Joe Louis knocked out Walcott. There are many other heavyweights who would beat Walcott, including Ken Norton, Ron Lyle, Floyd Patterson, and Tim Witherspoon. In fact, I don't have time to list all the heavyweights who would beat Walcott.

2. Walcott's record is miserable. He lost 18 times against 51 wins. Of those 18 losses, six of them were by way of knockout. He was knocked out by Abe Simon in six. Ever seen any film of Abe Simon? Then you know what I'm talking about. He was knocked out by Abe Ettore in eight. Light heavyweight Tiger Jack Fox knocked out Walcott in eight, too. Fox whipped him on points in the rematch. He lost to 11-15-1 Johnny Allen. He lost to tough but rather ordinary light heavyweight Joey Maxim and only managed majority and split decisions over him in subsequent matches. He twice lost to Charles (by wide margins in the first fight 73-77, 72-78, and 72-78, and even wider margins in the rematch of 70-80, 66-84, and 67-83, as well as being dropped for a 9 count) and was gifted a win in their fourth encounter (but nobody much cared because they couldn't stand seeing the two of them fight a fifth time). He lost to Rex Layne by scores of 2-6, 3-6, 3-6 in a fight in which he was a 4-1 favorite. When you are that cleanly outboxed by Rex Layne there is no spot for you on a top ten list. Walcott did not avenge this lost.

3. His only significant accomplishment was to become (at that time) the oldest heavyweight champion. What were his notable wins? He had one: a seventh round one-punch knockout of Ezzard Charles, a shop-worn natural light heavyweight (how Walcott got a third match with Charles is a testament to the tragic condition of the heavyweight division at the time). He lost a split decision to an out-of-shape and shot-worn Joe Louis that many observers thought he won, but then he was destroyed in the rematch. He was boxing well against Rocky Marciano, but then Rocky was a natural light heavyweight with very limited skills - and in the end Marciano knocked out Walcott with a single punch. Marciano knocked out Walcott in the first round of the rematch.

I don't mean to sound rude, but this must be said: if you believe Walcott is a top ten heavyweight, then you simply don't understand what great boxing is. You are letting a Cinderella story cloud your judgment. You are operating on sentiment and not reason. Walcott was a journeyman who lucked into the title because he boxed in the worst era in the history of the heavyweight division. Again, I apologize for my bluntness.

Boxing observers who believe Walcott is a great heavyweight are like amateur philosophers who extol the virtues of Ayn Rand's writing.

Hagler versus the Judges

It was always a relief to see Marvin Hagler beating an opponent into submission because you knew that, if the fight had gone the distance, Hagler was at the mercy of judges who often did not fully appreciate his work.

Hagler's fight in 1987 with Ray Leonard was the epitome of the way judges treated Hagler in the scoring. I was hoping he would knock out Leonard because I didn't feel good at all about how the judges would decide the fight, Leonard being the media darling and all. The judges were going to be focused on everything Leonard did and ignore Hagler's work, which was often subtle. Hagler didn't knock out Leonard and my worst fears were realized. Of major news organizations covering the fight, Hagler drew or won on eight of 14 cards. The Associated Press had Hagler winning 117-112, which is about what I had after 12 rounds. However, the official decision was split, with one judge awarding the fight to Hagler and the other two giving the fight to Leonard, one by a ridiculous 8 point margin. Hagler threw many more punches than Leonard according to punchstat numbers, 792 to 629. That Hagler was the busier fighter was obvious. What wasn't obvious were punchstat numbers showing that Leonard landed 15 more punches than Hagler (291-306). In any case, that is not a significant difference and Hagler's punches were the cleaner and harder of the two boxers, often staggering Leonard. Hagler controlled the pace throughout most of the fight and assumed control after the fourth round. For his part, Leonard ran and flurried, punched low, slapped, spun, clowned. It was a major league robbery.

Another notable case was Hagler and Antuofermo 1979 scrap. This was Hagler's first shot at the title and easily his toughest fight at the championship level. Hagler dominated the first half of the match. Antuofermo turned it on in the eighth and fought like a man possessed from that point onward. Hagler stepped up his game, too, and the fight descended into trench warfare. Hagler dominated more of the exchanges, but Antuofermo's intensity was impressive and he lept it close, even winning some rounds. More ringside observers believe Hagler won the fight rather handily. I agree. However, one judge saw it for Antuofermo (by a ridiculous margin) and another scored the fight even. Thus the fight was declared a draw and Hagler was viewed as the uncrowned champion. Ironically, Antuofermo put forth a much better fight against Hagler than did Leonard, yet most people believe Hagler was robbed in the Antuofermo fight.

Hagler-Duran 1984. Hagler won this fight by a wide margin in my view, however, two of the three judges at Duran ahead the end of the 12th round. Hagler turned it on in the last three rounds to pull out the victory. Both fights put on a grand display of boxing savvy. Duran was especially impressive given that he had moved up from welterweight (before that he was the long-standing lightweight champion). Why the judges had it so close is a bit of a mystery, though. Hagler's physical advantages made it very difficult for Duran to dominate exchanges. He kept it close by using his boxing skills. But Hagler clear one.

Why Leonard Didn't Win

The fight between Marvelous Marvin Hagler and Ray Leonard, held in 1987, in Las Vegas, a cursed city for the Marvelous One (recall the travesty of justice that is the first Hagler-Antuofermo fight), remains controversial more than 20 years after Leonard was awarded a split decision. Public opinion is divided between those who believe Hagler won (an increasing majority), those who believe Leonard won (a dwindling minority), and those who believe the fight was a draw (a bold first step to righting their opinion). The fight was controversial because of the score cards. But the fight remains controversial for one simple reason: Hagler was robbed.

Those who cling to the opinion that Leonard won or that it was close do so because they were taken in by the charm and tricks of Leonard. They actually thought Leonard was winning because he was surviving. They actually believed that the spinning, low hitting, slapping, flurrying, mugging, shuffling - all things that have nothing to do with boxing - was something worthy of merit. Many of them, with the passage of time, know he lost; but they have argued so stridently for so long that he won, they were so convinced at the time that Leonard beat Hagler because their man didn't lose, that they cannot now bring themselves to admit that they were wrong. There are honest people. Referee Richard Steele admits that every time he watches the fight it gets closer. Steele is moving, step by step, towards the truth. Many of those who stopped watching the fight that night and watched Leonard instead are revisiting their opinion when distances allows them to actually watch the fight.

Hagler beat Leonard because he won more rounds. He was the effective aggressor. He landed the harder shots. He hurt Leonard on several occasions. He made the fight. He came to fight. He beat Leonard. That what this sport is about. It's not about flurrying and running. Leonard was a rabbit in there, and rabbits aren't supposed to win boxing matches.

I begin my analysis with the scorecards. Here's Lou Filippo's card:

Hagler: 9, 9, 10, 10, 10, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 9, 9
Leonard: 10, 10, 9, 9, 9, 10, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10

That's 115-113 Hagler. Perhaps Filippo gave the final two rounds to Leonard because he thought that a score of 117-111 would be viewed as excessive. I will discuss the first four rounds in detail later on. Suffice to say, I don't find Filippo's scoring accurate over these rounds. I also disagree with his score for round six. Suppose he gave Hagler round 12, as did the other two judges. That is a score of 116-112. In any case, he awarded the fight to the actual winner, so good for him.

Here's Dave Moretti card:

Hagler: 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 9, 10, 10, 10, 9, 9, 10
Leonard: 10, 10, 10, 10, 9, 10, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10, 9

That's 115-113 Leonard. Moretti awarded the fight to the actual loser. He gave Leonard the first four rounds. This put Hagler in a hell of predicament. He would have to win most of the rounds that followed. Note that he gave Hagler the last round. Had Moretti given at least one of the first four rounds to Hagler, it would have been a draw.

Here's Jo Jo Guerra card:

Hagler: 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10
Leonard: 10, 10, 10, 10, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 9

That's 118-110 Leonard. This scorecard is scandalous. Guerra gave Leonard rounds 6 through 11. To award Leonard all of those rounds is to completely leave the planet. This also means that his grasp of the first four rounds - in which he gives Leonard every single one - is meaningless, completely discredited by his scoring of the other rounds. And why did he give Hagler the 12th? Could it be that he figured he would look even more like a loon if scored the fight 119-109?

Essentially the fight is a two card fight, with one judge finding for Hagler by two points and the other judge finding for Leonard by two points. One can reject outright Guerra’s card as fraudulent. Something was going on there. But even Moretti's card is hardly arguably correct.

Here's my card:

Hagler: 9, 10, 10, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10, 9, 10
Leonard: 10, 9, 9, 10, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10

117-112 Hagler. I scored round 12 even. This was because Leonard was elusive at first and landed a lot of combinations, while Hagler was the aggressor and came on strong in the end. Oddly, both Moretti and Guerra give that round to Hagler, while Filippo does not. However, I think in all cases, this was a psychological attempt to keep their scores from looking what they perceived to be too lopsided. Leonard edged round 11, as Hagler was tiring. I will discuss the first four rounds in greater detail late. However, whatever may be said about the first four rounds, from the fifth round through the tenth round, Hagler dominated the fight. Note that all the judges gave Leonard the sixth round. This was the round that Dundee screamed loudly, “I want you off those ropes. It looks like he’s hitting you.” This line stuck in everybody’s mind. But in fact, it didn't just look like Hagler was hitting Leonard. He was hitting Leonard. Close round, but Hagler edges it. Nonetheless, suppose I give the round to Leonard. Now my score card reads 116-113, still a clear victory for Hagler. Consider how many more rounds I have to flip to give the fight to Leonard. One can't honestly get there. At best, one can come somewhere close to Filippo's card, which nevertheless awarded the fight to Hagler. Something is clearly wrong in the scoring of the other two judges.

How did some reporters come up with a draw? Let’s suppose that we generously give Leonard all four of the first rounds and score the final round for Hagler as did two of the judges. Leaving every thing as I saw it, it's a draw. I have to admit that, although I would have disagreed with a draw decision, it would have allowed Hagler to retain his title. While an injustice would have occurred, the robbery of Hagler's world championship belt would not have.

I now want to move to a discussion of the several false notions about this fight. I call these false notions myths because people repeat them as if they were bits of religious doctrine.

The first myth is the claim that Hagler gave away the first four rounds. Gil Clancy, who was a vocal commentator during the fight on the pay-per-view broadcast, kept chanting “Rounds in the bank for Leonard, Tim. Rounds in the bank.” But, if you watch the fight - and turn off the sound off if you are influenced by biased commentators - you will see Leonard does not actually win all four rounds. Moreover, the two he does win are very close.

One may reasonably score first round for Leonard, particularly if that person is adverse to scoring even rounds. Leonard lands a significant punch. Not much else happens in that round. Leonard is running. However, Hagler wins round two. He catches Leonard coming in several times. He rips uppercuts in close. He pounds the body with a free hand. Leonard clutches and scores a noise point with an amateurish overhand right. Leonard's only moments in this round come at the very end (part of Leonard's game plan). Moreover, the first half and then some of the third round is all Hagler. Leonard lands only one meaningful shot, another loud slapping overhand right. Leonard does well over the final third of that round, holding and hitting while shutting down Hagler's offense somewhat, but it's not enough to win the round. He mostly accomplishes this by a clutching style reminiscent of Sammy Angott. The 4th round is close, but Leonard might have edged it with his ability to control some of the action and a big combination at the end. Two low blows, though, and lots of holding, mar the round for Leonard. Steele could have done more to stop Leonard's fouling. At any rate, there goes that myth. Moretti and Guerra's scorecards are just not sustainable on the basis of the empirical evidence.

The second myth assumes the first myth is true and goes on to claim that Hagler blows the first four rounds because he boxes from the orthodox stance. This claim is easily subjected to empirical falsification. For two and one-third rounds out of the four first rounds, Hagler fights as a southpaw. Get your hands on a stop watch, cue up the tape, have somebody mark the stance used, then add up the seconds. Hagler does what he has always done: he switches stances. A false claim is related to this second myth, namely that Hagler is not effective in the orthodox stance. If you focus on Hagler in watching these four rounds, you will see that he is more effective in the orthodox stance in round two than he is as a southpaw in round four. On balance, Hagler is effective from either stance throughout the fight.

The third myth is that Hagler showed Leonard too much respect and fought a subdued fight. Observers say this is a pattern with Hagler when he faces great fighters, and they cite the Duran fight as a case in point. In the Duran fight, the only other other fight of Hagler's 13 title defenses that went the distance, Duran's reputation is said to have made Hagler wary. However, Hagler’s performances against both Duran and Leonard are more typical of the way he fought most of his career. He has always been a boxer first. Observers have developed a false memory of Hagler because of his high profile shootouts with Minter, Hamsho, Hearns, and Mugabi. Hagler could brawl, as he proved in those fights, but he was not ordinary a brawler. Besides, he dominated Duran. The cards were close, but the fight wasn't. Wasn't that fight in Las Vegas?

A fourth myth is that Leonard performed some kind of psyche job on Hagler before the fight. The same argument is made about Leonard's rematch with Duran. Leonard, it is claimed, made Duran quit via his super mental powers. Leonard, the legend goes, really knew how to get inside a fighter's head. The reality, as anybody who cares to take an objective look at the matter knows, Duran was sick to his stomach. He spent the night in the hospital after the fight because of a gut ailment. Leonard didn't make him quit. Nobody makes Duran quit. Leonard didn't psyche Hagler out, either.

Now, Hagler was slow. There's no question about that. It is almost universally admitted to that had the two faced one another in their primes, Hagler would have won going away. Ironically, those who admit this want to deny the obvious: that Hagler was way passed his prime, but Leonard wasn't. They make so much out of Leonard's three year layoff, while ignoring the reality that while Leonard was taking years off his body in the ring, and was still a relatively young man at 30 years of age, Hagler was an aging shopworn middleweight.

Those who deny Hagler's condition point out that he was 32 at the time of the fight. But I have uncovered evidence that strongly suggests - I believe proves - that Hagler is much older than that. Hagler claims he was born on May 23, 1954. But consider this passage from, an from the Oakland Tribune (Oakland, California), dated Saturday, August 31, 1974, page 20:

Marvin Hagler, the 1973 National Amateur Athletic Union middleweight champion, dumped 1972 Olympic Gold Medal winner Sugar Ray Seales from the unbeaten pro ranks with an easy 10-round boxing decision Friday night in a television studio bout. Hagler, 21, posted his 18th consecutive pro victory.

If in fact Hagler were born on May 23, 1954, he would have been 20 years old on August 31, 1974, not 21 years old as reported in the Tribune. However, Hagler was more likely 22 years old at the time, with the Oakland Tribune looking at an old press sheet from before Hagler’s most recent birthday, a common error in reporting ages in fights. Press sheets are often not updated for months after a fighter had a birthday. This is often on purpose, to give the appearance that the fighter is more youthful. Many fighters have lied about their ages - Archie Moore, Jersey Joe Walcott - for this reason.

An Associated Press in the News Journal or Mansfield, Ohio, dated Monday, May 14, 1973, page 17 lists Hagler’s age at 20:

“BOSTON (AP) – Marvin Hagler, a 20-year-old southpaw slugger voted the outstanding fighter in the 85th National AAU boxing championships, is going for the money. "I'm turning pro," Hagler said after winning the 165-pound AAU title "I'll never get to the Olympics. I'm working as a machinist apprentice.”

If Hagler was born on May 23, 1954, then the Associate Press should have listed his age at 18 years. He would have been nine days shy of his 19th birthday on May 14, 1973. But here is is nine days shy of the 21st birthday. In other words, he was born on May 23, 1952, two years earlier than he now claims.

I could summarize and quote literally hundreds of newspapers showing the same facts. Either Hagler is listed as born on May 23, 1952 or (a few) papers miss his latest birthday looking off an old press sheet. Whatever they say, they do not report that he was born on May 23, 1954. This is something that only appears later, as the aging warrior and his management team strive to keep that youthful appearance about him. Hagler may even be old than this, if we consider that his late start has motivated him to reset his age more than once.

So the facts indicate that Leonard, a outstanding fighter (Olympic champion, two-time welterweight champion and junior middleweight champion) without a lot of wear and tear on his body (short career and a three-year layoff), who had been engaging for months in mock fights under the guidance of one of the outstanding trainers in the history of the sport, Angelo Dundee, faced a 34, maybe even 35-year-old warrior who had been through wars with some of the roughest and hardest punching middleweights that division has every produced - Bennie Brisco, who had registered 50 knockouts in his 60 victories by the time he faced Hagler; Fulgencio Obelmejias, who was undefeated in 30 fights the first time he met Hagler, 27 of those wins coming by way of knockout, and entered the rematch with a record of 38-1 with 35 knockouts; the rugged Mustafa Hamsho between the Obelmejias fights; Juan Roldan, who sported a fantastic record of 52-2-2, with 37 knockouts; Tommy Hearns, arguably the hardest right handed hitter the sport has ever seen, coming into the first with a record of 40-1 with 34 knockouts; and John Mugabi, who entered the ring undefeated in 25 fights, every one of those fights coming inside the distance. These fights are recorded as some of the most brutal ring ways in the divisions history.

Hagler had the fortune from the standpoint of history to be champion during an remarkably competitive period - it is his resume that puts him as the top of the middleweight pantheon - but the misfortune of attempting the long pursuit of Carlos Monzon's illustrious record of fourteen consecutive title defenses amid such a sea of talent. It was clear to all that Hagler was past his prime in the Mugabi fight, a fight he likely would have won easily two or three years earlier (but which was much more entertaining because hagler had lost a step). Hagler was ready to be taken. If not Leonard, then soon. It was hard to see how he would overtake Monzon given his age and his condition. This was Hagler in the twilight of his career. There are shots he could’ve taken but didn’t.

A fifth myth is the claim that Leonard controls the action throughout the fight. All one needs to do here is get out their stop watch again and compute the number of minutes Hagler is on offense and backing Leonard up. Hagler mixes punches downstairs and upstairs. He makes Leonard miss and blocks a lot of punches with his gloves. He lands the most damaging blows. He presses the action. Round after round Hagler pile up points, while Leonard backpedals. These are facts. One only needs to put aside their bias and record the facts.

Here is the character of the fight: Leonard is running, clowning, and fighting the last 15-30 seconds of the round to impress the judges. Leonard slaps and punches low. He does most of the clinching. He is constantly holding and hitting on the breaks. Most of his punches miss, hit Hagler's gloves, or graze the top of Hagler's bald head. Leonard lands a few decent punches, no question, but Hagler lands many more clean punches. Leonard is desperate and out of breath through much of the fight. Unless he's running, he’s not really moving effectively. He is clearly frustrated in several rounds. He can't stay in and box because Hagler is catching him. So he goes into survival mode on his bicycle. What opportunities Leonard has to catch Hagler, he can't think fast enough to go after him. Dundee is screaming at Leonard to counterpunch. He chastises Leonard between rounds for allowing three missed punches to go unanswered. That is the whole strategy - run, flash, and counterpunch. But Hagler disrupts the plan with constant effective aggression and good defense despite his age and slowness. Leonard grabs, spins, and pushes, and tries to take advantage of the situation, but he can't.

Through the sixth round Leonard lands only fourteen more punches than Hagler according to punchstat records The punchstat guys are being generous, as many of the punches Leonard "lands" are actually bouncing harmlessly off Hagler's gloves and forearms. Hagler's punches are by far the cleaner and more damaging. Hagler misses a lot of punches, to be sure, but that was because he is throwing way more leather than Leonard. Through 6 rounds Leonard throws around 250 punches, whereas Hagler throws more the 300. Hagler has always thrown punches in bunches and has always missed a lot. Trusting punchstat, what does that average out to, anyway? Fewer than 3 more punches a round? Hardly the commanding performance and Gil and the audience think they’re seeing. Hagler is hitting Leonard from all directions. Right hooks, straight rights, uppercuts inside, mixing body to head. Leonard is shoeshining.

Through round 8, if you are scoring the fight on all the relevant fine points of scoring, Hagler is winning by a score of 80 to 74. The closest round is round 5, and even Dundee thinks Leonard loses that one because Hagler takes over in the second half and wobbles Ray with clean shots. Round 6 is close, but Hagler lands the better punches and controls the pace. Leonard does a lot of holding and hitting and Steele warns him twice. You can see he's getting tired and desperate. Hagler wins rounds 7 and 8 big. He is nailing Leonard with clean shots and controlling the tempo. Leonard's punches have nothing on them and most of the bounce off of Hagler's gloves and forearms. Leonard can't even steal any rounds late he’s too tired, although he tries in the eighth. The announcers can be heard hoping Leonard will get his second wind, all the while Gil is going on about how Leonard is moving beautifully. In fact, Leonard isn't moving beautifully at all. He is tired and taking big shots. The writers at KO Magazine also tried to rationalize Leonard founding as some sort of poetry. The bias for Leonard at the time was sickening, frankly. The boxing world so wanted another Ali.

The coverage of the match is very biased. The director of the HBO broadcast shows Leonard's punchstat numbers through round 10 but not Hagler's. Go back and watch the tapes. Hagler is nailing Leonard in rounds 9 and 10, so it's all the more suspicious that they choose to leave out the punchstat numbers. Hagler has Leonard rocking and rolling in these rounds. Leonard is tired. Hagler wins round 9 huge. Leonard has some moments in round 10 because Hagler is tiring, but Hagler still outpunches him. Hagler slows considerably in round 11. He is getting tired and Leonard is picking up the pace. The round is arguably a draw. Leonard lands some fast clean shots, but Hagler's attack is constant pressure and he lands bunches in bunches. Round 12 is a draw. Leonard is mostly running, but he jumps in with impressive combinations. Hagler comes on and has him hurt in the last 30 or so seconds, but was it enough to steal the round?

The final punchstat numbers were 792 thrown by Hagler, 291 landing, and 629 punches thrown by Leonard, with 306 landing. That is a difference of only 15 more punches landed by Leonard. The quality of these punches were inferior to the punches hagler landed. Moreover, the punchstat technicians appear to have undercounted Hagler's punches, marking too many of the thrown punches as missed punches.

The ringside press saw it this way. The New York Times saw it as a draw, as did the New York Post, and the Washington Post (114 all). The New York Daily News (117-111), the Houson Chronicle (115-114), the Boston Globe (117-111), the Boston Herald (116-113), the Oakland Tribute (117-112), and the Baltimore Sun (7-5), saw the fight in Leonard's favor. The Associated Press (117-112), Newsday (115-114), San Jose Mercury News (116-115), and the Chicago Tribune (7-5) all saw it for Hagler. That's three draws, six for Leonard, and four for Hagler. Thus only six out of thirteen major papers and a wireservice thought Leonard won the fight. True, only four of the thirteen called it for Hagler. But had the scores reflected the majority who called it either a draw or a win for Hagler, the title wouild not have changed hands. And, for the record, the Associated Press has been closer to actual scores of fights than any other source over the past several decades.

Here is the way Hugh McIvanney encapulated the injustice of the fight in an article for Sports Illustrated, aptly titled, "The illusion of Victory"

It is not only in Las Vegas that professional boxing's system of scoring shows all the intellectual consistency of a rolling pair of dice.

Don't blame the desert air for the rush of blood to the brain that caused Jose Juan (Jo Jo) Guerra, a WBC judge, to make Sugar Ray Leonard a winner by 10 rounds to 2 over Marvin Hagler while another official, Lou Filippo, was giving the April 6 fight at Caesars Palace to Hagler 7 rounds to 5. If the record of judges sanctioned by its State Athletic Commission is anything to go by, Nevada is a congenial environment for officials with the glorious eccentricity of mind brought to his work by Guerra. But bad decisions know no boundaries.

The simple truth is that at this stage of its long and erratic history, prizefighting is still nowhere near establishing any consistently accurate means of measuring performance. If the comparative effectiveness of two fighters is so difficult to calibrate (or so open to extravagantly subjective interpretations) that Guerra and Filippo can contradict each other as outrageously as they did, then even when everybody stays honest, boxing clearly carries a far higher risk of recurring injustice than any other sport.

When judges talk about focusing on paramount criteria—on identifying effective aggressiveness, clean punching, ring generalship and quality defense—they are merely emphasizing the complexity, perhaps the impossibility, of the exercise. Much of the time all they can do is review a fighter's performance, much as a theater critic would an actor's, making the pseudoscientific adjustment of putting their impressions into figures.

No one has ever understood the boxing judge as reviewer of theater better than Sugar Ray Leonard. Even Muhammad Ali, who substituted histrionics for real fighting often enough in the latter part of his career, was usually more concerned with disconcerting his opponent and getting the crowd on his side. Leonard sought those dividends too against Hagler. But the overriding priority for him appeared to be the manipulation of official minds.

Naturally, to achieve that end, Ray had to bring a lot to the party. Physically and mentally, he was astonishingly strong, sharp and resilient after what had been, essentially, a five-year layoff.

Thus, looking and moving so much better than anyone had a right to expect, Leonard was in a position to exploit the Schulberg Factor. This phenomenon—a compound optical illusion—may not have been discovered by Budd Schulberg, the novelist and fight aficionado, but he receives credit here for pointing it out to a few of us who were asking ourselves how Hagler came to be so cruelly misjudged. Budd's reasoning was that people were so amazed to find Sugar Ray capable of much more than they imagined that they persuaded themselves he was doing far more than he actually was.

Similarly, having expected extreme destructiveness from Marvin, they saw anything less as failure and refused to give him credit for the quiet beating he administered.

What Ray Leonard pulled off in his split decision over Hagler was an epic illusion. He had said beforehand that the way to beat Hagler was to give him a distorted picture. But this shrewdest of fighters knew it was even more important to distort the picture for the judges. His plan was to "steal" rounds with a few flashy and carefully timed flurries and to make the rest of each three-minute session as unproductive as possible for Hagler by circling briskly away from the latter's persistent pursuit. When he made his sporadic attacking flourishes, he was happy to exaggerate hand speed at the expense of power, and neither he nor two of the scorers seemed bothered by the fact that many of the punches landed on the champion's gloves and arms. This was showboating raised to an art form, and the brilliance with which it was sustained was a tribute to Leonard's wonderful nerve, which is cut from the same flawless diamond as Ali's.

But, however much the slick ploys blurred the perceptions of those on the fevered sidelines, they never broke Hagler. He has a different kind of spirit, but it is no less resolute than Leonard's. The hounding intensity that kept him unbeaten through 11 years from 1976 will soon be a memory, but he had enough left to press on through his early frustrations, throw the superior volume of hurtful punches. I'm convinced Hagler won the fight; a draw, and the retention of the title, was the very least he deserved.

"It's unfair, man, it's unfair," Hagler said helplessly to the master illusionist at the end. That's an old cry and—given the haphazard way boxing judges its heroes—all too often a true one.

Chavez the Machine

An offensive machine and durable as hell, Julio Cesar Chavez carried wicked power in both hands. He tossed and excellent hook to the liver and the jaw, a sharp uppercut on the inside, and a solid left jab (well educated to boot). He was arguably the most devastating body puncher in the history of the sport. His right hand was equally devastating. He threw overhands, uppercuts, and crosses, and developed a short right hook he used in close.

Chavez was nonstop and methodical. He just kept coming. It was nightmarish. Not defensively inept, he would take shots to give shots; but to the dismay of his opponents, he could really take a shot. In his first 91 fights, despite facing the toughest fighters of his day, Chavez was never stopped or knocked off his feet. He never lost in that frame, either, and drew only once, against Pernell Whitaker, another all-time great. How tough was his opposition? Rocky Lockridge, Juan LaPorte, Edwin Rosario, Jose Luis Ramirez, Hector Camacho, Meldrick Taylor - the list goes on.

For those who appreciate junior titles, Chavez held the WBC junior lightweight (1984-1987) and twice held the WBC junior welterweight titles, and successfully defended them 9 and 16 times respectively! Many believe he was the best fighter ever at those weights. I won’t quarrel with those who believe that.

As for the major weight divisions, he won the WBA lightweight title from Edwin Rosario on a brutal eleventh-round stoppage in 1987, defended the title once, then lifted the WBC lightweight title from Jose Luis Ramirez in a technical decision in 1988, thus unifying the world title for the first time since Roberto Duran vacated the title a decade earlier. Chavez fought for the world welterweight championship twice, drawing with Whitaker over 12 rounds, and, then, retiring in his corner against Oscar de la Hoya in the eighth round. Chavez was past his prime for the de la Hoya fight.

His glory moments were his victory over Rosario and then unifying the title against Ramirez, his blowout of Greg Haugen in front of some 130,000 fans in Mexico City, his domination of Hector Camacho, and his war with Meldrick Taylor, in which he prevailed by a twelfth round stoppage in a thrilling come-from-behind contest.

Chavez for the first time in 1994, 14 years after he debuted, against Frankie Randall. That fight was also the first time Chavez had even been knocked off his feet. Chavez regained the title in the rematch.

Chavez is one of the best lightweights in history and, despite never winning the welterweight title, should rank among all-time best welterweights. I put him in the top three all-time lightweights.

Jose Luis Ramirez of Mexico

Jose Luis Ramirez of Mexico was one tough hombre who accomplished a lot in his 17 years as a professional boxer. His name is not well-known, which is a consequence of his low-key manner of conducting himself in public and his being surrounded by flashier boxers. He was in the mix that included such household names (at least boxing households) as Julio Cesar Chavez, Alexis Arguello, and Hector Camacho.

Ramirez started boxing professionally at 14-years-old in 1973. By 1978, he had amassed a record of 43 wins, 37 inside the distance, against only one 10-round decision loss. It was in 1978 that Ramirez took on legendary Mexican knockout artist Ruben Olvares. Olivares sported a record of 82 wins, with 72 knockouts, against 9 defeats and 1 draw. He became world bantamweight champion in 1969, defending the title twice before losing it on a cut eye in 1970. He regained the title in 1971, defended it twice more before losing it in 1972. He then moved up to featherweight and won the vacant WBC featherweight title in 1974, lost it that same year, regained it and lost it again in 1975. In 1978, Olivarez was clearly not the same fighter he was in his glory years, but he was still a forbidable puncher, and he proved too much for the young Ramirez. Ramirez was stopped in the second round. It would be only one of two times across 111 fights that Ramirez would not finish a fight (the other time was on account of an accidental headbutt against Julio Cesar Chavez, which I address later one).

After the Olivarez fight, Ramirez ran his record to 67-2 by the end of 1980, 58 of those wins coming inside the distance. He picked up the Mexican lightweight title in 1979 and was recognized as one of the best lightweights in the world.

In 1980, he was matched with legendary boxer Alexis Arguello (69-5), former WBA featherweight champion and WBC junior lightweight champion. Ramirez surprised the pro-Arguello crowd by flooring Arguello in the sixth round and outboxing the Nicaraguan throughout. Judge James Kenon had the fight 98-95 Ramirez. However, judge Sam Biller voted for Arguello with a score of 97-94. Referee William Conners had the fight 95-94 Arguello. The length of time the officials huddled before announcing the decision suggested to this observer that perhaps a bit of a fix was involved. In my view, Ramirez won the fight. In any case, Ramirez proved before a world audience that he was among the elite in the lightweight division.

In 1981, Ramirez suffered a disappointing 12-round defeat to lightweight phenom Ray Mancini in a fight to earn a shot at the WBC lightweight title, now held by Arguello. Although he only had 19 bouts under his belt, Mancini's perpetual motion style proved to be a riddle Ramirez couldn't solve. Mancini was unsuccessful in his bid to dethrone Arguello, but he would live up to his promise by winning the WBA lightweight title and successfully defending it four times.

Meanwhile, Ramirez pressed on, winning 11 straight fights, 9 inside the distance, earning a shot in 1983 for the WBC title vacated by Arguello. He was matched with undefeated phenom Edwin Rosario, who had won 20 of his 21 fights by knockout, including an impressive three round destruction of perinneal contender Edwin Viruet. The Ramirez-Rosario contest was a closely fought affair, but in the end the judges saw it for Rosario in a unanimous 2-point decision. Rosario would defend his title twice, with one of those coming against highly touted Howard Davis, Jr (26-1-0), before meeting Ramirez again. Things would be different this time. In the rematch, Ramirez rose from two knockdowns to stop Rosario in the fourth round to win the WBC lightweight title.

Rosario and Ramirez would never unfortunately never matched up against. However, Rosario went on to have an outstanding career. He would beat Frankie Randall (23-0) in a thrilling 10-round match that brought the house down, get robbed in a bout for the WBC lightweight title against Hector Camacho (28-0) in 1986, and then win the WBA lightweight title in 1986 in a two-round demolition of Livington Bramble, the man who twice defeated Ray Mancini. Rosario is credited with forever changing the way Camacho fought, making the man defense consciousness to a fault.

In 1985, Ramirez entered the ring with Hector Camacho (26-0). Camacho, one of the best boxers the ring has ever seen, was at his absolute peak at this point. He proved was too slick for Ramirez and outboxed the Mexican the entire way. So it was that Ramirez lost the WBC title in his first defense of it. However, after two title defenses, Camacho relinquished the title to move to welterweight and Ramirez was selected to fight for the vacant title. He was matched with the capable Terrence Ali (33-4-2) in 1987 and won a 12 round decision. He defended his title successfully against Cornelius Boza-Edwards 45-6-1 on a fifth round knockout.

In 1988, Ramirez was matched with future all-time great welterweight Pernell Whitaker. It was only Whitaker's 16th pro fight, but his progress had been so rapid that his handlers believed he was ready for the match. Ramirez won a split decision. The fight remains a matter of dispute, with many arguing that Whitaker was robbed. In this writer's opinion, Whitaker erred in fighting an almost exclusively defensive fight. After 12 rounds of Ramirez making the fight happen, he was, in my view, entitled to the win. I appreciate defensive boxing. However, boxing is also about fighting and there has to be significant offensive effort or at least impressive counterpunching in order to make a case that a win is warranted. Whitaker did neither.

For his fourth defense, Ramirez was matched with the best lightweight since Roberto Duran, WBA champion Julio Cesar Chavez, who was undefeated in 61 fights, winning most of them by knockout. Chavez had won the WBA title by dominating Rosario in one of the most impressive ring performances in recent memory. The fight was significant in that it would be the first time the titles would be unified since Roberto Duran left the division in the late 1970s. Ramirez gave a terrific accounting of himself. He kept the fight within two points on two of the judges cards. However, in the 11th round an accidental headbutt prevented Ramirez from continuing. Chavez was awarded the victory on a technical win.

Chavez left the lightweight division the following year to fight as a welterweight. Ramirez was rematched with Whitaker for the WBC title in 1989 and, this time, was cleanly outboxed. Whitaker put on a show. Ramirez couldn't get his system into gear and was made to look stuck in the mud. Whitaker had indeed come into his greatness at this point and Ramirez was on the slide. He was 32 years old and had been at the sport for nearly 17 years.

Ramirez would fight one more fight, losing a 12-round decision to welterweight Juan Martin Coggi (43-1-2) by wide margins.

The Great Light-Heavyweights

There are many names to discuss. Archie Moore. Ezzard Charles. Bob Foster. Roy Jones Junior.

The one I want to begin with is Michael Spinks. Spinks won the gold medal in the middleweight division at the 1976 games. By the end of 1980 he was a top contender for the light-heavyweight championship, capping off the year with a win over Yaqui Lopez, who had just come of the fight of the year against Matthew Saad Muhammad.

Spinks put one more strong contender away in Marvin Johnson and then challenged Eddie Mustapha Muhammad for the WBA light heavyweight title in 1981, winning a 15 round decision. Spinks defended the title five times, all by knockout before facing Dwight Muhammad Qawi for the WBC light heavyweight title in 1983. Spinks took the title with a 15 round win. He defended the unified title four times.

In 1985, Spinks challenged the 6'3, 222 lbs heavyweight champion of the world Larry Holmes. Holmes was undefeated 48 fights and depending on how you counted them, had as many at 20 successful title defenses under his belt. Spinks executed the perfect game plan and at the end of 15 rounds he was the world heavyweight champion, the first reigning world light-heavyweight champion to put it off. He defended the heavyweight three times, including a rematch against Holmes and a knock out of Gerry Cooney.

In 1988, Spinks ran into Mike Tyson who, at the absolute peak of his awesome powers, blew Michael away 1:31 into the first round. It was Spinks' last fight and the only loss of a truly remarkable career.

Hagler's Competition

One measure of the legacy of a champion is the quality of his opposition. Hagler's title reign is studded with middleweight contenders who would have threatened in any era. Fulgencio Obelmejias, his first defense after demolishing Alan Minter to win the title, is a case in point. Obelmejias hailed from Venezuela. He was 6'1" tall and broad shouldered. He looked like a light heavyweight and indeed moved to that weight class after his two unsuccessful bids to win Hagler's title. Obelmejias came into the first fight with an undefeated record, with 27 of his 30 wins coming inside the distance. After his eighth round stoppage loss to Hagler, Obelmejias ran off eight straight wins, all inside the distance, to earn a second show at Hagler's title. Hagler stopped Obelmejias in five rounds in the rematch. Obelmejias retired with a record of 52-5 (41).

Reflections on a Not-so-Great Event

The welterweight title unification bout between Ray Leonard and Thomas Hearns is heralded as an all-time great boxing match. The fact that it was a unification match is one of the reasons for its notoriety. There are substantive reasons, as well. It has been hyped as demonstrating Leonard's singular ambition and tenacity - the :heart of a lion." And the role reversal, where the puncher - Hearns - became the boxer and the boxer - Leonard - became the slugger is the stuff of lore.

All of these beliefs about the fight are wrong. First, the fight was really a defense of Leonard's world welterweight title. Unification bouts are important only when there is no linear champion. Second, the fight demonstrated nothing special about Leonard except the high opinion of the man in the eyes of the referee, who intervened to save Leonard from possibly losing a fight in which he was completely outclassed from the outset. Third, Hearns was always the better boxer (and of course puncher), and displayed his superior skill by nearly shutting out Leonard. Hearns would have won easily had he not overtrained for the fight - he weighed in well under the welterweight limit and given that the young man was 6'1" and outgrowing the division, he didn't have the fat stores to carry him solidly through 15 rounds - and had Leonard not enjoyed the favoritism of referee Davey Pearl.

The referee's behavior was, frankly, disgraceful. In the 14th round, exhausted, Hearns fell through the ropes during one of Leonard's amateurish bull rushes. The referee correctly saw this as a push. Hearns righted himself and Leonard rushed him again, again pushing him through the ropes. Inexplicably, the referee ruled the same event as a knockdown. Then, with Hearns against the ropes, easily avoiding Leonard's desperate flailing, the referee stepped between the fighters and raised Leonard's hand in victory.

Testifying to the desire of people to see Leonard as an all-time great (and somebody to fill the void left by a true all-time great, Muhammad Ali), the news media spin of the fight has become the common memory.

Leonard avoided Hearns for eight years. In the belated rematch, Hearns floored Leonard twice and outboxed him throughout. The judges gave Hearns a draw. Figures.