Is Sugar Ray Leonard overrated?

Not so McVey Leonard only agreed to fight Duran if Duran guaranteed a return match if he had lost 5 months later.

The Hearns that Leonard fought had been knocked out by Hagler and Barkley previously. Leonard thought he was over the hill but learned otherwise when Hearns schooled him.

 

Over heavily shopworn versions of them. Leonard can claim prime scalps of Benitez and Hearns. Near enough prime Duran - their second bout.

 

Fully agree :good

 

So what exactly is your definition of a long prime? Leonard's debut was in 77, he won his first title in 79 and beat Hagler in 87, thats 8 years. I don't believe or care about his eye problem excuses keeping him out of the ring for certain periods, that was just part of his cherry picking modus operandi.

So lets see, here is a guy that had a measly 40 fights, lost 3, it should have definitely been 4 if you discount the gifted draw against Tommy, and possibly 5 depending on your take on the scoring of the Hagler fight. As far as I see it he is a good example of why ATG status has become the same as p4p status, fukking worthless.

It is an insult to the ACTUAL all time greats, particularly the " genuine " Sugar Ray.

 

You are wrong in this instance Mac. Leonard had it in the contract for the Duran fight that in the event of him losing he could call for a rematch anytime within a certain period, and he waited until the latest moment to demand it.

Of course that doesn't justify Duran going on the pi ss for 3 months and getting badly out of shape. But it is another example of Leonard seeking every advantage before even climbing into the ring.

Wasn't he the first fighter to take a leech ( lawyer ) with him into fight negotiations? A guy by the name of Mike Trainer I believe.

 

Hearns never lost to Leonard a second time, officially or unofficially.

 

No.
Sugar Ray Leonard beats everyone at welterweight, he's top 4 all time in terms of ability (SRR, SRL, Ali, RJJ - no order).

He had 15 fights from 79'-81'. This is where he completed most of his legacy and fought monstrous guys.
People mistakenly measure longevity by no. of years at the top. This is absurd.

He lost to one of the pressure fighting GOATs in history (Duran) because Sugar Ray is not going to ever beat him by fighting the fight that Duran is trying to impose, in the same way Mayweather was not going to ever win against Castillo if he went to war almost.
Ray has the ability to outpoint more than anyone in history other than Hearns in the welterweight division. He has the ability to find the right shots.

Ray beat GOAT level guys in terms of ability.

 

And during that time he lost.

Even Tyson freaks can claim with some justification he was " unbeatable " from 86 - 88.

Furthermore Hearns was far from a monster at Welter by the time Leonard fought him, as evidenced by him NEVER attempting to make 147 again. 3 months later he fought at 10 lbs more than he weighed for Leonard, and within 8 months he fought McCracken at Middle.

Hearns being weight drained for Leonard is not merely an excuse, any fool can tell just by looking at the weights for Tommy's subsequent fights, he had problems at 147.

 

Manny Steward loves making excuses when his fighters underperform-- has he ever claimed that Hearns was weight-drained?

And, btw http://www.boxingforum24.com/showthread.php?t=60449

 

Hearns came in at 145 pounds for the Leonard fight.
A guy struggling to make weight you'd expect to be no less than 146 1/2.

 

I think Hearns was legit on the night he fought Leonard. steward was full of **** as usual. Hearns problem was that he was an incomplete fighter who didn't know how to deal with adversity at the time. He was sort of like a young Wlad going into the Purrity fight.

 

Funny how you have mentioned Steward, and excuses. Sounds very much like fanboy agenda to me. I'll just let the scales of Tommy's further 24 year career do the talking, thanks all the same.

 

Hearns had no reason to stay at welter.
Straight after the fight Leonard's adviser Mike Trainer was saying a rematch would be unlikely and Leonard was looking elsewhere or to retire.
Hearns was open to a rematch.

Hearns went up and won titles. He never had any reason to go back to welter.
That doesn't prove that he couldn't have stayed there/

 

Literally the definition of longevity, no?

Cramming 15 top level fights into three years is extremely impressive. It's not longevity though.