Someone explain why Ray Leonard is ranked so highly?

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by MercuryChild, Dec 11, 2013.


  1. Waynegrade

    Waynegrade Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,684
    29
    Jul 27, 2008
    Plus we can`t forget about the `faked` retina ;)
     
  2. salsanchezfan

    salsanchezfan Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,646
    11,038
    Aug 22, 2004

    I'll bet he didn't even HAVE a retina! :hand
     
  3. redrooster

    redrooster Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,635
    331
    Jan 29, 2005
    sure there is

    the problem is, someone here is afraid to answer the question cuz they know they're trapped if they give an honest answer :smoke
     
  4. redrooster

    redrooster Boxing Junkie Full Member

    13,635
    331
    Jan 29, 2005
    Right on :good

    these people here know little and have little imagination which is probably why they always resort to this tired old line -- "Ali is overrated. Dude lost to Trevor Berbick". Notice how they automatically associate Leonard with Ali, thinking themselves clever & knowledgable?

    Had Ray been the special fighter they claim, Leonard, a 3-1 fave, in the Norris fight and also the favorite in the Camacho fight, wouldve overcome

    after all, Floyd is four years older and still unbeaten

    but Ray lost both - badly, which proves he was overrated all this time

    any fighter with speed, even someone of modest speed, had Ray in trouble - Geraldo and even Fireball Rodriguez

    I let the Rodriguez fight go becuz Ray was new to the sport but Geraldo? Geraldo is a slapper with not much body, not much power or speed but the sharpness of his slaps actually had Ray doing flip flops backwards across the ring

    Hagler, Nunn, Jones, wouldve killed this twerp in no time in an embarassing wipeout

    this is why Ray waited out Hagler for years, and why Norris got him in trouble so quick and had the fight won by round 3. In short, Terry OWNED Ray Leonard and would own him no matter the time no matter the place

    those are just the facts

    and no one here can deny it

    and Robinson? it wouldve been Norris-Leonard all over again

    Ray ducked Hagler and only interested in a once great with faded skills in his last fight shorn of 2/3 of his title

    cuz the truth is, Hags was going nowhere anyways but out of the sport never to be seen again

    his fans just can't accept this even tho they all know it's true :D

    yet still they make with the charades - "Benitez, Duran, Hearns, Hagler"

    ad get this, they're now adding Lalonde in yet another charade
     
  5. LobowolfXXX

    LobowolfXXX Member Full Member

    420
    1
    Nov 24, 2013


    No, there isn't. Because
    1) they might be at different stages IOC their careers;
    2) (most importantly) they're not being measured against a common denominator. Boxer A's chin is being measured against Boxer B's power, while Boxer B is being measured against Boxer A's power.
    3) style clash between the fighters may effect the outcome.

    Frazier dropped Ali, but Ali did not drop Frazier, so Frazier must have the better chin, right? Now ask Foreman.

    Foreman dropped Frazier many times, but Frazier did not drop Foreman, so Foreman must have the better chin, right? Now ask Ali.

    Ali dropped Foreman, but Foreman did not drop Ali, so Ali must have the better chin, right? So which one did Frazier knock down?

    If Sandy Saddler drops Willie Pep, but Pep doesn't drop Saddler, does that mean Saddler has the better chin? Of course not. Saddler was a power puncher, and Pep wasn't. You need someone who hits harder than Pep to test Saddler's chin.

    Your rhetorical question was poorly thought out.
     
  6. LobowolfXXX

    LobowolfXXX Member Full Member

    420
    1
    Nov 24, 2013

    You've finally said something I agree with - Leonard was overrated at the time of the Norris and Camacho fights..

    Speaking of "tired old lines," let's take a look at "any fighter with speed, even modest speed, had Leonard in trouble." Two yes/no questions for you:

    Did Benitez have speed?
    Did Benitez have Leonard in trouble?

    Who was better, Terry Norris or Keith Mullings?
     
  7. Foxy 01

    Foxy 01 Boxing Junkie banned

    12,328
    129
    Apr 23, 2012
    Let the children play Rooster, you know how easily impressed kids are.

    Lets look at the reality and laugh.

    In a 33 fight 5 year career this guy beats Benitez, a weight drained Hearns, Kalule, and won, and lost against the Lightweight Duran.

    Now according to all the little fanboys that puts him up there with the likes of the REAL Sugar Ray, Harry Greb, Willie Pep, Archie Moore, Carlos Monzon, you could make your own list that would go on for ever, feel free.

    As for the rest of his career, nothing to claim ATG status there, unless one is feeling very charitable regarding the disputable decision over the past his best Hagler.

    Lets see, dumped on his ass, by Howard, hurt by Lalonde who was forced to come in at a weight drained 169 even though his 175 title was on the line, cut badly by an old over the hill Duran, dominated to a " draw " ( tch tch ) by Tommy, and then proper fvcked by both Norris and Camacho.

    But my favourite is the old detached retina chestnut. You know, the one that was operated on in May 82, which Leonard " assured " the world was fully healed in November 82, but he had decided he just didn't want to box anymore.

    Now here we are a year later, and Leonard does a lot more spouting off about fighting McCrory, and Curry, after a couple of warm up bouts, and up comes Howard. The fight is put back from Feb 84 to May 84 for yet more surgery on a " loose " as opposed to detached retina. After the performance he announces his retirement yet again, but what ever happened to the retina excuses? No more mention of them.

    Yet the fanboys still cling on to the myth that retina problems caused their little hero the best part of his career, even though Leonard himself claimed only a total of 9 months for both operations to have been successful.
     
  8. LobowolfXXX

    LobowolfXXX Member Full Member

    420
    1
    Nov 24, 2013

    For someone who apparently has little patience for tired old excuses (like detached retinas), do you think that once in a while, you could write the word "Hearns" without preceding it with "weight drained"? Leonard didn't demand that Hearns drop down from light-heavyweight; he was a reigning world champion in the same weight class. And moreover...


     
  9. Waynegrade

    Waynegrade Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,684
    29
    Jul 27, 2008
    Poorly though out because he is one dimensional and close-minded... And that`s being gentle...
     
  10. Waynegrade

    Waynegrade Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,684
    29
    Jul 27, 2008
    The constant reference to ,my man beat prime SRL, is just bogus and delusional at best. It`s like saying,Berbick beat top notch Ali. Marciano,Louis. Walker/Arguello. etc,etc...We really need to stop feeding him and let it and he die... Really,it`s just all non-sensical babble !
     
  11. salsanchezfan

    salsanchezfan Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    15,646
    11,038
    Aug 22, 2004
    People buy into it with Rooster every damn time, though.........someone always bites on his arguments and plays with him. Always. They just can't help it.
     
  12. Waynegrade

    Waynegrade Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,684
    29
    Jul 27, 2008
    Good call ! Damn, even I bite on the foolishness :( Have to admit, I actually enjoy pushing his sensitive `Terry` buttons !
     
  13. Foxy 01

    Foxy 01 Boxing Junkie banned

    12,328
    129
    Apr 23, 2012
    What are you waffling about?

    1. Hearns was not the Light Heavyweight champion of anything at the time he rematched Leonard in 89 for their respective S / Middle titles.

    Perhaps you are getting confused with Lalonde, whom Leonard demanded could weigh no more than 169, even though his 175 title was on the line. You know the title that Leonard surrendered rather than defend.

    2. After September 81 did Hearns ever fight at 147 again? A simple yes or no will suffice.

    3. Are you claiming to know more about the detached retina saga than your hero, who made virtually NOTHING of it?

    Anyway I'm still waiting to read how you make Leonard a top ten ATG, on the basis of beating Benitez, Hearns in his last ever fight at 147, Kalule, and winning and losing against the Lightweight Duran, over a period of 5 years, and 33 fights.

    I really want to know how you can equate that **** with the resume's of people like Joe Louis, Ezzard Charles, Benny Leonard, Henry Armstrong, Arguello, SRR, Ike Williams, Greb, Jack Johnson, Dempsey, Archie Moore, and in fact dozens of others?

    You see I just don't believe that even the saddest of Leonard fanboys could be stupid enough to claim that the period from Howard, through Camacho is too much to get excited about. So all it really leaves is those four names in those 33 fights.

    Some people just don't get it. Fanboys leave themselves open to ridicule and abuse, with their half baked opinions.

    Why not just accept that Leonard was a very, very good fighter and leave it at that? Why this need to totally over rate the guy?
     
  14. LobowolfXXX

    LobowolfXXX Member Full Member

    420
    1
    Nov 24, 2013
    I'm talking about the 1981 fight. Hearns, like Leonard, was a reigning welterweight champion. It's not like he was a guy from a higher weight class whom Leonard made drop down to meet him at a catchweight.

    Well, no, I'm talking about the first fight where they were weight-class equals, which Leonard won by knockout.


    No.

    He moved to a weight class that didn't have Leonard in it. Wise choice.

    A. Leonard is not my hero.
    B. I'm not claiming to know more about the detached retina than Leonard; are you claiming to know more about the weight-draining saga than Hearns, who said that he WASN'T weight-drained?

    You've got a long wait. I never claimed that Leonard was a top-ten P4P ATG, and I don't believe he was.

    Certainly the bulk of Leonard's resume was accomplished through Hearns I, at which point he had a 75% record in four fights against easy Hall of Famers and wins over each. The latter part of his career is significantly worse (as it is with many fighters who stick around too long), but although he clearly (IMO and in his own) lost the Hearns rematch, he also added yet another win over Duran and the Hagler win.

    You don't even know where I rate him, which makes this comment or yours more half-baked than anything I've said on the subject. In fact, it's you who's going out of your way to underrate Leonard by minimizing the knockout of Hearns, when Hearns himself admitted that he made weight comfortably and was not, in fact, weight-drained.

    Hearns I, Duran II, and Benitez were great wins against legitimate Hall of Famers. Duran I was a close loss, Hearns II should have been a close loss, Hagler was a close win, and Duran III was a lopsided win. 5-1-1 is a pretty good record against Hearns, Hagler, Benitez, and Duran. Even if the draw should have been a loss, 5-2 is a good record against them.
     
  15. Foxy 01

    Foxy 01 Boxing Junkie banned

    12,328
    129
    Apr 23, 2012
    Then you shouldn't have typed......................

    For someone who apparently has little patience for tired old excuses (like detached retinas), do you think that once in a while, you could write the word "Hearns" without preceding it with "weight drained"? Leonard didn't demand that Hearns drop down from light-heavyweight; he was a reigning world champion in the same weight class. And moreover..

    should you? Much like the idiot Leonard you are far too prone to exaggeration it seems.

    Also your knowledge of Tommy Hearns, must be pretty minimal. Unlike the egomaniacal Leonard Tommy was a gentleman, and made no excuses for his losses, or silly contractual demands to gain advantages in fights. Of course he didn't blame weight making for the defeat in 81, but actions speak louder than words. The fact that he was back in the ring 3 months later at the higher weight, and indeed NEVER fought at 147 again proves a lot more than Tommy's magnanimity. What you think about it, is of no consequence to me at all.

    Your pathetic analogy between the effect of the weight, and the effect of the retina is typical of the idiotic. The FACTS are Leonard did go on to have 7 more fights over 15 years after the operation. Hearns NEVER fought at Welter again.

    Try harder next time.