Home Forums FineTunedMac Community Lounge Boxing

Marvelous Marvin Hagler. Only 66. The man was robbed twice.


cyn note: Originally posted in Ad astra: another passing.

I don't follow boxing enough to know about the second time, but the Leonard decision was a TRAVESTY!

The second time was yesterday...

I lived in Boston when Hagler was in his prime and I was a fan. Went to three of his fights. He wasn't a pretty fighter, which was his disadvantage against Leonard, who spent the fight keeping out of reach.

There is a clip on YouTube of the first round of the Thomas Hearns v Marvin Hagler fight, which only lasted three rounds. Awesome.

Ouch! ...slow on the uptake. Yeah, he was a young man.

I've always felt that the Leonard fight fell into "you don't decision a champ unless he got the bejeezus kicked out of him" territory, and that Leonard, as part of his fight strategy, because he guessed that it might be that close, actively conned the scorers into thinking that he, not Hagler, was the champ with his Ali impression, right down to dropping his hands.

And indeed, next to Leonard, it really was hard to remember that Hagler was the champ; he was an awfully non-flashy champ, particularly by comparison to Leonard.

Boxing is barbaric and has no place in a civilized world, IMHO. Someday, hopefully, the "sport" - seriously (?) - will become history, and future generations will look back and wonder: What were they thinking? (At one time, we used to burn "witches" at the stake! Just saying.)

Boxing (or some form of) has been going on for ages, and it is world wide. Doubt if it will ever go away.

Witch burning did (at least in North America) . . . so there is reason to hope we will evolve and progress will be achieved.

Witch burning typically led to deaths. Does not happen in boxing. And again, boxing is world wide, ie, not confined to one country/continent.

RE: Witch burning typically led to deaths. Does not happen in boxing.

Huh?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_deaths_due_to_injuries_sustained_in_boxing

Says it all, really. Multiple articles in a Google Search. I have nothing more to add to this thread.

OK, I was mistaken! Surprised there were so, so many.

Tip of the iceberg, as it were.


P.S. American football is discovering much about head injuries, too . . . but I digress.

Re: football. Yes, I agree. Have you ever watched the excellent movie "Concussion"? Really an eye opener!

In case you haven't been following closely you can add European football (Soccer) ⚽️ to the list of sports causing brain injury. "Heading" is the culprit there. Of course there is the infamous "beanball" in Baseball. 🥎 I guess that leaves Cricket 🏏 as a safe sport, but I don't think anyone not born and raised in Great Britain has a prayer of understanding it. 🤔

Maybe "Coach" had it wrong and you have to get your head OUT of the game in order to survive.

Don't forget Ice Hockey, especially in the NHL.

Cricket is as safe as any "non-contact" sport, yet all batters must wear helmets now, largely because of balls being directed at their heads by bowlers (beanball equivalent, a body-line bouncer).

Boxing: no one ever wants to see a fighter die in the ring, least of all his opponent. But, it happens. No boxer has ever entered the ring against his or her will.

Boxing has been an Olympic sport since the 7th century BC. Um, with the odd interruption.

I can't imagine a boy who has not been given advice about how to defend himself against bullies at school. "Keep your hands up!" "Kick him in the balls and run like heck!" When it gets organized, it's boxing and called sport.

I've been in a boxing ring. I was 12. I won. I've lost every single fight I've ever been in since then. (Two, ending with bloody noses.) I like to see guys who can handle themselves get in the ring. I had to grow to love Muhammad Ali after he denied Cassius Clay. He was class all the way. Joe Calzaghi was more recent and undefeated, and a local boy. Marvin Hagler was a thug in the ring and a gentleman out of it, another local boy. Mike Tyson/Sonny Liston were just thugs. It's a sport with many personalities. They all chose to get in the ring. All the guys they beat chose to get in the ring.

You can choose to watch a boxing match or not.

Should we start another thread?

Sounds like a good idea...and maybe the Moderator can move the discussion to date over to it.

Agree 100%.

You can add volleyball to the list.

I recently read about a college volleyballer who, after only two hits, has claimed that she suffers from an assortment of issues.

I never realized that a volleyball was that hard.

And since you haven't said it, I'll stick my neck out and say that there is indeed beauty in a really well-fought match...not that they come up all that often.

It's similar in a sense to wrestling, which I used to watch every Saturday night (in the early 80s) regardless of the fact that the matches were pretty much invariably awful, because every once in a rare while they'd show one that was such a stunning display of 250 pound guys doing incredible gymnastics that it was almost breathtaking.

Re: " . . . beauty in a really well-fought match."


-------

Seriously? I cannot grasp the concept even as sport or entertainment, let alone a thing of beauty! Geez.

You are looking at the world through a very narrow window if you allow your aesthetic sensibilities to be constrained by your ethical/moral/? (not sure of the correct word) sensibilities.

Sensibilities?

Living in the USA's closest neighbour to the North, I still am perplexed by the thirst for violence in the psyche of some folks. A family can sit around at mealtime eating their grilled cheese sandwiches and apple pie while watching people get beaten, pounded, kneed, pummelled, and kicked on TV news coverage. Yet, show two men kissing or - clutch my pearls - a bare breast exposed on the same broadcast, and there would be a public outcry of indecency on television. Go figure.

Disclaimer: This is just how it currently looks to me from this side of the border. This is neither a moral nor ethical position. Just my innate aversion to physical violence. This, naturally, extends to my view on boxing i.e. violence by choice. (I am well aware that you - and others - may not share this view. I don't expect to change your mind; I know I won't change mine. So let's just agree to disagree and leave it at that.)

Respectfully submitted . . .

Thirst for violence? Hardly. My father, long since passed, was a brilliant man who graduated from high school with honours when he was 15. He was also the gentlest person anyone could hope to meet.... a quality of his about which my wife often commented. And, at 18 years old, he was welterweight boxing champion of western Canada. Boxing was nothing more or less than a sport in which he chose to participate and which required considerable training and skill.

1. What do Lennox Lewis, George Chuvalo, Adonis Stevenson, Trevor Berbick, Donovan Ruddock and Donny Lalonde have in common?

2. More boxers die in road accidents than die in the ring. Okay, I suppose you could say that about any occupation. Well, maybe not a demolitions expert.

The Anthony Joshua v Tyson Fury fight is about to become the richest purse in British boxing history. An Olympic boxing hero and a gypsy street fighter. £200,000,000.00. It's gladiatorial combat with rules. I can't afford to watch it, but I'll be curious to see who wins. My (mind bet) money's on Fury, because I don't think Joshua's jaw will hold up, but I would be thrilled to be wrong. Joshua is such a nice kid.

Now, I don't much care for cage fighting or kick boxing. Wrestling would be better if you didn't know who was going to win when they stepped in the ring. I did like The Wrestler with Mickey Rourke and Marisa Tomei.

Anyway, I would never try to convince anyone to like or understand boxing. You do or you don't. You grow up with it or you don't.

Also, I do not get upset by sex or nudity. In fact, I quite like both.

Having said that, I had to reach for the remote every time that ex-president came on the telly.

In my opinion, 71 fatalities from around the world, spread over 93 years, doesn't say much without the third number. How many fights were held during the same time-frame in all those countries?

To be clear, I hate the idea of any person dying as a result of participating in their chosen sport, whether it be boxing, football, soccer, whatever. However, various sports are learning from their experiences and continue to develop rules and equipment to make the sports safer. Even boxers now wear helmets. It is absurd to suggest that the answer to any accidental death is: "Oh, oh, people are getting killed while they _________, so, instead of making it safer, let's ban it." The list of non-sports activities, which would also then cease, is endless.

It is my observation that my country's abhorrence with viewing homosexuality or nudity is based in religion, and because of religion many people here will vote against their own self-interests. So beat the crap out of someone on TV or in a movie, but if in so doing you reveal genitals, horrors! Go figure. I guess that's why it is called religion and not rationality.

Funny you say that, given your country's obsession with Ice Hockey. That is definitely a violent sport, but I do find it entertaining, especially when played cleanly. (And of course the best game I have ever seen is the US Hockey Team's HUGE upset over the Soviet Union in the 1980 Olympics. I STILL get goose bumps every time I watch it!).

On this side of the border (besides Ice Hockey and other sports), one of the most violent is of course football, and especially the NFL. As I mentioned above, "Concussion" is a very good movie, and an eye opener. It's based on a true story. Watch it.

Re: Hockey


------------


Feel free to apply my POV on "violence as entertainment in sports" to ANY sport in which the participant seeks - either intentionally or consequentially - to punch, hit, kick, pummel, wallop, clobber, beat, strike, or in any other way, INJURE his/her opponent(s).

There are plenty of sports available which are challenging, competitive, and entertaining . . . yet, neither require nor cause any of the aforementioned actions be directed toward another player (or players).

Yes, there are plenty of sports which are “challenging, competitive and entertaining” but, unfortunately, many of those have a downside of injury and death. So, let’s just err on the side of caution and ban every sports activity where there is a history of injury or death, whether by intention or not. These statistics from the Insurance Information Institute provide a good starting point.

I note that, according to a National Ski Areas Association (NSAA) Fact Sheet, during the 10 years ending in 2017, 38 people died skiing or snowboarding per year on average. Gee, more dead every two years than in 93 years of boxing.

Some clarification . . . The "banning" of certain sports is a separate issue from my expressed POV which was specifically regarding the attraction to "violence in sport" - and its ensuing injuries - as entertainment.

While good n theory, no way will that ever happen! Sports is HUGE business, whether violent or not. And in North America, banning hockey in Canada (and theUS) and NFL Football in the US would be an economic disaster.

The following was not meant to be taken literally.
It was intended as sarcasm (i.e. saying the opposite to make a point). It isn't, in my opinion, okay to ban one sport because people don't care for the way injury may be caused in it but, at the same time, suggest that injury and death are acceptable in others because those are “challenging, competitive and entertaining”.

RE: "It was intended as sarcasm . . . "

------------




I thought so at the time. Until now, I have not chimed in one way or another on the "banning" of selected sports. However, with the introduction of the word, this thread, potentially, could start veering off in that direction, and I don't wish my earlier POV posts to be misinterpreted as to include the subject of banning. (A little pre-emptive action on my part.)

No problem....if nothing else, I am flexible.

In my opinion, it’s wrong to suggest that one sport should disappear due to the way injury may be caused in it but, at the same time, find others acceptable because they are “challenging, competitive and entertaining” - even though the injury and death in them far surpasses the first. It is better to do what many sports have done, including boxing, which is to develop rules and equipment that will make them safer.

While it is fine for organizations to develop rules and equipment to make their respective sport safer, that seems to be a constantly moving target with the NHL and NFL (and to some degree, college football). I'm not sure how much more could be done before each of those sports becomes just about 100% "safe", especially with all the revenue generated by them. Their popularity is certainly overwhelming.

That sounds like you mean that "safety" is judged by its effect on revenue.

The very unhappy for sports bottom line is that until they begin banning guys - regardless of their star status - for extreme play, and perhaps even encourage the cops to arrest a few, sports will continue to be gladiatorial.

Wow! How "new" is that? Not much at all, and if one watches the excellent movie "Concussion", one will clearly see that.

And speaking of boxing and aesthetics...

Jake Paul Has Brought the Sport of Boxing to Its ‘Lowest Point’

Ha! In 20 years, will this be the golden age of boxing?

I don't think so because it has nothing to do with boxing. It's just a couple of greedy hucksters making a buck by putting on a sordid sideshow spectacle.

Dunno about that, but it will certainly be looked back upon as the golden age of charlatans of all colors, stripes, and even plaids.

Credibility is now based on your ability to make noise and make it heard, rather than, as it should be, on your ability.

Were it unique to boxing, I'd agree with you, albeit with crossed fingers, but it's more like another pandemic that's spread across the entire Internet and, hence, the world.

"Influencers" with NO credentials are spreading their version of whatever: think Trump, think COVID deniers, think anti-vaxxers, think Jake Paul.

But don't think too much or you're liable to make yourself ill.

I've taken the past year off thinking. Unfortunately, I can't seem to shake cynicism and sarcasm.

Absolutely true. And they are only able to be successful because thinking has pretty much disappeared from a large part of the general population.

I'm a non-thinking, gen pop sort of guy, so why have I never heard of Jake Paul until now? And why is someone trying to inject this litter into my brain against my will? I might have to punch someone in the nose, as this is a boxing thread.

You've apparently managed to either avoid frequenting websites that pop up links to bizarre characters like Jake Paul or to control yourself and not click on them.

Since this is a boxing thread, I thought the author's perspective on the state of the sport, particularly since he's a retired boxer, is pertinent.

In case you haven't been drawn to do any research: Jake Paul is a YouTube "star" whose professional resume lists three bouts with nobody, nobody, and nobody else, all of whom he's beaten. He offered Conor McGregor $50 million to get into the ring with him, was turned down, and, I believe, is now trying to drum up a match with any other big name MMA guy.

Jake's older brother Logan, also a YouTube "star," has fought - and lost - one professional (against another YouTube "star") bout, and his next one (pay/view) is with Floyd Mayweather. (Floyd must weigh in at under 160#, and Paul must weigh under 190#.)

Floyd's reason for fighting is "to bring more eyes to the sport" (He'd certainly never do it just for the money. ), but I doubt that anybody who'd pay to see that sort of charade would have the least interest in watching a fight between two two legitimate boxers.

So much for the state of the sport.

I try very hard to resist celebrity click bait, although my cursor has been known to hover for too long over a George Clooney link...

I read that when kids are asked what they want to be when they grow up, a current common answer is "I want to be a celebrity". I'm guessing Jake Paul is one of those kids and YouTube enabled him. Celebrity boxing is not boxing.

I liked boxing after the Marquess of Queensbury Rules and before there were four sanctioning bodies to muddy the waters. Back in the good ole days when you could switch on the black and white telly and watch a championship bout for free. Mind, I had to rely on Dad telling me what was going on.

Hear, hear!

But there's enough money in it these days to threaten the integrity of the sport.

Not that every YouTube and Instagram celebrity is undeserving of hir success, but qualifications have, in all too many instances, given way to making a spectacle of yourself as the best ticket to that success.

But, of course, the flip side of that is that YouTube and Instagram have enabled many people with absolutely no qualifications, and who'd have otherwise starved, to either make a lot of money or hook up with a basketball player.

The Friday night fights brought to you by Gillette Blue Blades "...for the cleanest, closest shave of all."

You know what? I've been using Gillette blades since I could shave.

I never considered my father to be wise, but he demonstrated great wisdom when he bought me an electric shaver rather than try to teach me how to shave with a blade.

It was ancient history that any time anyone gave me anything with an edge, I cut myself, and that is one lesson of history that was actually learned.

I’m with freelance on this one. I wouldn’t know Jake Paul if he came running out of an alley and bit my leg.

I also remember watching them with my Dad and, if my memory serves, there was a smiling animated parrot who carried a placard announcing the round numbers.

Yup! Good memory.

If memory serves, the fights in Las Vegas in the 60's and 70's had much better round numbers...

Those "birds" had much better legs than the parrot!

Ha! Not so many feathers, though.