Why is Leonard so disliked?

I know what you mean. It's difficult to put it into words, but I get what you're saying.

 

and for a lot of fans it was his refusal after the Duran defeat to ever meet another high quality fighter w/out everything in his favor. Letting Roberto balloon up then getting the fight befoe as he said, Roberto had time to get in good shape"". He said he thought this was "clever". Getting a 24 foot ring (still the biggest ring I ever saw). Refusing to fight Hagler in 82 (which he talks about in the KO magazine that came out in Nov. 81 that had his pic from the Hearns fight on the cover and a great article on Frank Fletcher) unless Marvin came down to 154. He downplays it now, but he did say it and is embarressed by it. The way he cut off Dundee moneywise when the big bucks were coming. Even his family doesn't like him in all the documentaries you see of him. He just comes off on tv as a complete phony who's every public move is choreographed outside the ring.
A similar fighter is doing his fight picking now. Mayweather refuses to fight guys like Cotto, Mosely, Margarito, Pacquiouaeiiooa, Zoo, Fritos and Casamoyer in the primes, yet when he beats them after they have become washed up ALWAYS IN THE TOWN HE LIVES IN, he expects credit. The nonaware casuals fans give it to him, but the true knowledgable (allthough accoding to floyd, only former fighters are knowledgable) don't buy it. They see what these guys do. On a side note, Floyd did take the Mayweather name to the next level; Roger only beat girlfriends; Floyd abuses his kids too! lololololoo

 

What were all these things in his favor you speak of when he fought Hearns?

 

talent, better chin, faster hands, better fight resume, etc. He was definitely better than Hearns. I probabaly should have clarified my remark to exclude the first Hearns remark. Another example though was Leonard telling ESPN that he would only be on the top 100 athletes of the century if he was no lower than number 2 of all the boxers. They told him to blow and correctly so.

 

You said

"and for a lot of fans it was his refusal after the Duran defeat to ever meet another high quality fighter w/out everything in his favor."

I'm assuming you were alluding to things like ring size, timing of the fight, catchweights etc?

I'm still lost as to what was in his favor vs Hearns along these lines.

 

:deal

Is there a more unbeatable force on here than 147 Hearns? The majority give guys like Pea and Floyd absolutely no chance, he'd handle Napoles, Gavilan and Walker as easily... Only SRR stands a chance, and that's 50/50!

That's what I take from it. Um, Leonard beat this man. When he was 32-0 (30). He took him into deep waters and drowned him in one of the greatest comebacks in the history of the sport. In a 12 rnd fight, he'd turn the gas up even sooner, as he'd had Hearns hurt in the mid-rounds already. He isn't responsible for Duran's lack of dedication. He had as much going against him against Hagler, and nobody picked him to win despite the specifics. He beat an undefeated Benitez and Kalule, both lineal/Ring Champions. He also wiped out a slew of rated Welters en route to his title shot.

Tough ****. Leonard was one of the greatest and most complete fighters of all-time, that's where it starts and ends.

 

I just told you NOTHING. I did not mean him in the 1st fight.

 

Exactly. Leonard took on Hearns with nothing in his favor which goes against the claim that was made.

 

Well you stated "after the Duran defeat". I'm assuming the first Hearns fight was after that. Could be wrong.

 

A lot more. Mickey Walker would cave in his ribs andtrear off Hearns head with that left hook. Napoles beats him I think and Gaivlan. Griffith and the amazingly underrated Luis Rodrigues beats them both. The Philly poolshark, Gypsy on a concentrated night is a nightmare for both. There were a lot of good fighters and I'm not even foing past 1949 except the Toy Bulldog. Hearns had terrible balance and if he didn't get you early, he would have trouble against experinced greats who fought a great amount against different styles. and in the end, this is about why Ray is disliked and was disliked and back in the 80s, this is one of the reasons, as my original post said. It has nothing to do with how good he was.

 

Maybe I should have said, "Starting w/ the second Roberto Duran fight, but excluding first Thomas Hearns fight...."

 

That would be a much more honest assessment, yes.

 

Nothing in his favor, and he wasn't favored: Hearns was.

It's funny you know, Leonard fought Duran too soon and Hagler too late, he fought Hearns in a fight that was too many rounds and Hagler in one that was too few. Oh, and Hearns was green :blood despite the fact that Leonard was accused of ducking him a year before the fight actually took place. What would be said then? :rofl

 

I shudder to think

 

Leonard himself says he chose to fight Hagler because he thought Hagler had slipped enough to be taken.
It's not something his detractors came up with. It's straight from the horse's mouth.