I Hate Sugar Ray Leonard - come here if you also want to hate

what a dork. "the 79-82 Leonard was amazing" blah blah blah!

 

I quite like Leonard, a great boxer, easy to watch and a head to head problem for most at 147 / 154.

However, in my opinion he gets over rated as a P4P ATG.

In a 40 fight career Leonard only had 12 title fights, losing 3 and 1 draw. 3 of these title fights were against Duran and 2 against Hearns.

The second and third fights with Duran were meaningless due to Duran's condition and age; Duran was fully motivated and conditioned for the first fight, not so for the rematch. Leonard barely got past Hearns the first time and admits himself that Hearns deserved the win second time around.

Although his win over Hagler is worthy due to the fact he hadn't fought in around 5 years, I didn't like the way he was allowed to just come out of retirement and walk straight into a world title fight at a weight he'd never boxed at. It's also fair to say that Hagler was past his best and the win itself is controversial, with it being so close.

His post Hagler achievements are also suspect. He was allowed to fight for the light heavyweight title without ever fighting at the weight. That's just wrong; if you can't make the weight, then you shouldn't be able to fight for a belt at that weight. It makes a mockery of weight divisions.

It also bothers me that Leonard is often credited as the first ever 5 weight champ in history; he wasn't. The fact is that Hearns was the first ever 5 weight champ having beaten Kinchen for the super middle weight belt 4 days earlier.

In my opinion Leonard's ATG position should be lower than Hearns.

Hearns achieved more, had a longer career, fought in more title fights and post 160 fought a higher level of opposition. Hearns also made weight for every belt he fought for and has the distinction of being the first ever 4 weight and 5 weight champ in history. He was also the first ever super middle weight champ and the first ever WBO champ. Hearns' win over Virgil Hill trumps any of Leonard's wins at the higher weights.

These are just my opinions, of course, and as mentioned, I do like Leonard, I think he's one of the great welters.

However I also believe that he gets remembered a little too fondly by most and that his ATG standing is too high.

 

Judging by shallow boxrecing it seems impossible 2 rank Hearns over Leonard cuz after all "Leonard beat Hearns and beat teh man who beat Hearns".
However, when 1 cares bout d trus n facts, such as some of what u typed n some of wot u dident, 1 understands that any version of Leonard that ever existed wud hev lost 2 Hagler if hi fot d Hagler det Hearns fot end ander d seim condishens (d usual condishens).

Olso, Leonard beat Hearns only because Hearns was 2 drained against him.
I will b surprised if some day it will b proven that there was no hidden stipulation in d contract of their 1st fight that forced Hearns 2 come in at a 146 or lower w8 (I now hi woz 145 in d weigh in) + n obligation that Hearns will never disclose this stipulation .
@ d very least Leonard got in2 hiz hed in order 2 meik him want 2 show hi ken wei less dan 146.
Hearns was quoted telling he weid in sow low , b/c hi wonted 2 show det hi hez no problem meiking 147 .

Benitez , Duran (in d rematch) , Hearns (in both fights) , Kalule and possibly Hagler ez wel wer ol dreind 2 des vs Leonard.
very fiu taims du i c d contract stipuleishens 4d Hagler fight :
1) heavier thicker gloves
2) bigger ring
3) shorter duration 4d fight

I wudent b surprised if Leonard secretly signed Hagler 2 carry him as well wich explains Hagler's unwillingness 2 fyte d ryte fyte

There already were and will b contracts containing secret parts.

 

Well, I don't know anything about any secret clauses in the contracts.

I'm not sure about the weight draining with Hearns and Hagler, either, but Duran 2 at New Orleans and Lalonde, for sure.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to rubbish Leonard, he was great, I just think his achievements are a little over rated and his popular ATG ranking too high, particularly when compared to Hearns.

His win over Benitez is great, Kalule is also a good win. Snatching victory from an exhausted Hearns is also impressive, he worked hard for it. These, I think, are really Leonard's best wins. Holding his own with a very motivated and highly experienced prime Duran also proves Leonard's worth as a fighter. Duran was one of the best and Montreal was probably Duran at his very best. These things place Leonard amongst the great welters, at least for me.

It's the rest of it that bothers me. Fights 2 and 3 with Duran don't compare with the first fight, it just wasn't the same Duran. With Hagler although Leonard had been inactive for about 4 years, which is significant, Hagler was old and battle worn; Hearns definitely fought a better version of Hagler and Leonard did get the advantage of a larger ring, etc, for what it's worth. Lalonde is not overly impressive, in spite of any size diference and he should never have been able to lay claim to a light heavy weight belt; they fought at super middle. Finally, he didn't deserve the draw in Hearns 2.

It's fair to say that Leonard was past his best against Norris, but he was still only about 33 and it counts against him. Most great fighters have a lot left at 33. I don't really hold the Camacho loss against him, though, he was way past it and should never have bothered.

It's a great career, for sure and who knows what more he may have achieved if not for the 4 year lay off; that was probably his prime. However I can't see that Leonard's career is better than Hearns. Hearns achieved more, had more title fights and fought in more weight classes against better opposition (better at the higher weights, anyway).

I'm not sure where I'd place Leonard amongst the ATG's, I don't really know enough about every single fighter in contention. However I would always place him close to Hearns and probably at least one place below him.

 

:deal

 

He was.

Almost as great as the disciplined, iron-chinned Terry Norris.

 

:rofl

 

I can't rate him that high.
But he was great. Top 30 maybe.

 

well if u match the two head to head it was no contest

achievementwise at the same weight it's no contest

if u want to compare them chin to chin man to man it was no contest becuz Terry took Ray's best but Ray couldnt do the same

thats two knockdowns for Terry to Ray's none

u want to knock Terry's chin, dork?

you can only do so at the expense of Ray's :smoke

u want to brag about Ray over Hagler, i should be able to do the same with Terry's win over Ray

and u know what else? despite the odds being the same n both fights, it wasnt even close between Ray & Terry

and I still dont see Floyd having been whipped at four yrs past 34 Ray's age when Terry)

 

If it wasn`t for,Jackson,Mullings,Brown,Rosenblatt and Boudani. Norris would be considered and ATG !!