I always heard boxing fans imply that the detached retina that forced Leonard into retirement was actually mostly caused by Hearns and not by his fight with Howard where it manifested. People at least seem to point to the many jabs Leonard’s eye had taken from Hearns as the biggest contributor to the injury; that those punches had damaged his eye enough for Howard to finally be able to deal the blows that separated the retina.
A part of me wants to believe this. The idea that Leonard’s victory over Hearns came at the cost of his career and nearly losing his eye really makes the rivalry feel extra special. It makes you wonder who really got the last laugh? Did either come out as the true victor? But the degree of separation between these two fights, September 1981 vs May 1984, really makes me question how true this is. Is there even really a way to quantify Hearns’ contribution to Leonard’s eye damage, assuming he even contributed to that damage at all?
A part of me wants to believe this. The idea that Leonard’s victory over Hearns came at the cost of his career and nearly losing his eye really makes the rivalry feel extra special. It makes you wonder who really got the last laugh? Did either come out as the true victor? But the degree of separation between these two fights, September 1981 vs May 1984, really makes me question how true this is. Is there even really a way to quantify Hearns’ contribution to Leonard’s eye damage, assuming he even contributed to that damage at all?
Comment