Sugar Ray Leonard circa 1986 v Floyd Mayweather 2007

I'm going to go with Floyd b/c he has the much better record, is more battle tested, and did much more with his career. We already know Leonard doesnt fare well with adept movers like Floyd b/c of what happened in the Norris fight.

 

agreed.

both are great fighters. It's just that Floyd is greater.

It's like comparing Brett Favre with Tom Brady. Both have super bowl trophies but Tom has 7 to Leonard's one.

therefore using simple logic, Floyd is 7 times greater than Leonard and like Terry Norris, would box & frustrate Leonard for a UD in 12.

 

Hagler was shot so we throw that out.

It's like trying to give larry Holmes credit for beating Ali. BIG DEAL, right?

it's something Leonard fans bring up only to help his credibility.

Duran was a lightweight who beat Leonard and what glory is there in beating a lightweight anyways???

It's not as if ray beat Terry Norris

He got a young Thomas Hearns years before he peaked but that's about all

and I never thought much of Benitez anyways

Whereas Floyd has beat EVERYONE. everyone from Canelo to 8X champ Pac.

Can Leonard say that?

and can he say he wasnt thoroughly whipped by Norris???

We all saw it

Like Norris - Leonard, this would not be a competitive fight.

 

since when is a general sports fan opinion of value???

Leonard himself said he took that fight ONLY because Hagler had declined. That is why he never faced marvin's prime and that's why we have to throw it out

But I can see why YOU would want to use Marvin's name, because it helps give credibility to a guy with a 36 - 3 - 1 record and little in the way of accomplishments.

Certainly, he cant be compared with Mayweather!

 

This is tongue and cheek....right? Somebody que John McEnroe "You can't be serious!"

 

it's based on evidence. Had Ray Leonard conquered Norris as he was supposed to, then I would favor Leonard over Floyd.

but alas, he does not possess such a win and was horrifically beaten

therefore, Floyd wins

 

Oh OK.

 

then it looks like your panel was wrong!

Hagler's peak was several years earlier when Leonard was curiously missing even tho his specialist cleared him to take the fight, he just wouldnt fight

unless the opponent's name was Kevin Howard

If Hagler wasn't washed up, then Hagler would have been far from retired

i dont know how much longer you can keep up this game of pretend but let's face facts:
Floyd, like Norris, would box Leonard's ears off

 

You have no credibility.

We know that you’re Red Rooster who hates Ray.

We know you have an obsession with the Norris fight.

Nobody cares about the Norris fight. Why? Because Ray was washed, and Floyd didn’t fight like Norris. And those two things just make your point completely irrelevant.

Floyd’s unbeaten record is also irrelevant here.

All the matters is their attributes and characteristics, and how they’d have matched up stylistically.

More battle tested?

Well certainly not against the calibre of fighters who Ray fought.

Floyd never fought a prime ATG in is entire career.

Ray would had to have been favoured.

He was just as fast, he was better offensively, and he had much more firepower.

Ray would have taken all of Floyd’s usual advantages away.

In this fight, Ray would have had two different avenues to victory, whereas Floyd would only have had the one.

Ray would have been made the favourite across the board.

 

White bomber actually thinks you’re being serious.

Ha!

 

Log off you clown.

I mean you’re obviously just trolling at this point.

This is ban worthy.

 

Are opinions used in court when trying to prove a case?

remember, this is real life

that's why I rely on evidence physical and circumstantial which are much more useful than opinions when trying to prove a case