There have been lots of closely contested high profile championship fights in boxing history that could have gone either way but it's indeed rare for a victor to admit defeat, even belatedly. Such is the case with Leonard. It takes a real man and a gentlemen of highest order to do what Leonard did. And we have to laud him for that.
Personally, I have no debate with the draw verdict. Hearns dominated the early goings and even floored SRL twice but he was hanging for dear life in the last few rounds.
He may have the edge in the end but we must understand that boxing is not a simple mathematical or perception or even logical matter.
In the SLR-Hearns 2, the judges gave the benefit of the doubt to the champion (;Leonard). Traditionally, the challenger has to take the fight to the champion and best him beyond the shadow of any doubt in most department to earn the decision. It is because the judges/officials also give importance to the efforts a champion had to exert and the sacrifices he had to endure to get the title. That's just fine by me.
But that does not apply to all champions at all times.
Marvin Hagler finished stronger than Hearns in his fight versus Leonard and yet despite being the defending champion, he did not get the verdict. Why was this so?.
Firstly, the verdict was unanimous in favor of SRL.
Secondly, while SRL did not really take the fight to the champion, it was clear that he bested him in nearly all the departments and aspects, most tellingly in ring generalship and in defense and endurance--Hagler had him in trouble in spots but never came near to threatening to knocking him out or stopping him.
Thirdly, SRL had the bigger name and the bigger potentials to push boxing further in the coming years. Hagler was seen to be on his last days as champion.
Leonard never admitted to that fight being so closely fought as he could have lost it and he was right on account of the factors mentioned above.
Manny Pacquiao never admit to anything in his first three fights with Juan Manuel Marquez and he is justified for the same reasons I mentioned.
Leonard has a terrible habit of saying what he thinks people want to hear, regardless to truth. You never know where you stand with him. I understand the fighter in him didn't want to admit defeat. No fighter wants to.
.
I had Hearns winning by a point. He faded towards the end but I felt he scored enough in the early rounds to keep a commanding lead and Leonard didn't do enough to close the gap.
.
There have been some whiners. Juan Manuel Marquez is the biggest whiner I can think of right now. Every time he loses he cries foul and follows up with dozens of excuses. You have to knock him out twice to get him to admit that the fight might have been a draw.
.
Oscar is another crybaby but mostly when it comes to Mayweather. It just makes him look girly to me. He acts like a woman who just saw her boyfriend in bed with her sister.
.
Victor Ortiz is another crybaby. I have more respect for things I flush down the toilet.
.
Well he WAS knocked down twice in that fight and was in the regain mode most of the fight trying to regain the points lost by the knockdowns and Hearn's power. The judges saw it as a draw as Hearns was fading fast toward the end.
Hearns won that fight, there is no doubt, but several great fighters got gifts for decisions after their prime and Leonard was just one of them.
BQ: Who makes your greatest whiners?
