Sugar Ray Leonard was Better than Sugar Ray Robinson

Actually i wouldn't class Hearns as an ATG Welterweight people overrate his standing at Welterweight, he has a good win over Cuevas but there isn't much else there. He made a grand total of 3 title defences before losing to Leonard, he then moved up to Jr Middleweight his best weight class IMO and had the best wins of his career vs Benitez, Duran.

I don't think Hearns did anywhere near enough to warrant being called an ATG Welterweight, H2H you could argue he rates highly as a Welterweight but i rate him H2H alot higher at Jr Middleweight which was his best weight as i said IMO.

 

Dancing round the ring doesn't mean Leonard has better footwork, Leonard used his footwork primarily for defence. Robinson had excellent timing when he used his footwork and used it to set up his offence and vicious combinations.

Leonard had more wasted motion that doesn't equal to being better

 

I'm not saying i disagree but i think alot of hype regarding Hearns's standing at Welterweight is due to the eye test, but looking at his resume it's not that great in all honesty. Yes he has the good win over Cuevas but then what else ? his 3 title defences was against Pablo Baez, Luis Primera, Randy Shields, not exactly household names although Shields was a tough opponent.

What i'm saying is i think it's more to do with Hearns's H2H ability rather than his actual resume at Welterweight why people rate him highly at Welterweight. But in all honesty i think he was better at Jr Middleweight and i rate him more highly at that weightclass.

 

Leonard's record was 40-3-1. Robinsons record before retiring was 131–3–1–1 and as far as I can see a number of those were against better quality competition than what Leonard faced, in an era where the rules were a lot rougher than what they were in Leonard's time. I think Robinson getting 91 more wins with the same number of loses qualifies as him being better than Leonard.

Now whether or not Robinsons competition would beat Leonard's, dunno on that one. I ain't that knowledgeable on them. What I do know is that based on the footage we see of both Sugar Rays against top competition, Robinson had closer fights and won them more convincingly than what Leonard managed to do.

 

Again, you're comparing resumes, not in-ring ability. Just having wins over greats doesn't mean you would win against another great. Holmes' Heavyweight greatness didn't prevent Spinks from beating him, Ross's Welterweight greatness didn't stop an Armstrong who was coming up from Featherweight from beating him, nor did Leonard's Welterweight greatness stop Duran from beating him, I shouldn't even have to explain this. We're comparing specific fighters and we should be judging their respective ability and styles, as well as how that would affect the other fighter, not their stats. Armstrong's welterweight reign was mostly against Lightweights, by the way.

Duran is just as fast as Robinson, and if he is not, then it's a very small gap, if Leonard wasn't fast enough for an in-shape Duran in Montreal, Robinson wouldn't be either. It's a myth that Leonard fell victim to Duran's mind games, he just couldn't keep him away from him. Leonard was just as an excellent a Boxer as Robinson was, he was also better on the inside, faster, and maybe even better defensively. The gap between them is hugely overstated, Leonard was very much his equal in most aspects. What makes Robinson the overall superior fighter is his offensive capability, aka his power, precision, set ups, combinations, and timing. This is what would help him beat Duran. Otherwise, he and Leonard are equal, whether it is in Ring IQ, toughness, defense, mobility and counter-punching.

 

All true. Should be noted, though, that even though he didn't have that many top level fights at WW, Hearns looked nigh invincible below 160 bar the fight against Leonard. Don't know who has two destructions to equal Cuevas and Duran on his record. And Armstrong's best weight classes were FW and LW. He wasn't the force at WW that he was p4p and a bit on the slide when Robinson got to him.

 

Well you're basing your whole argument on Duran's H2H ability at Welterweight on one fight, yes Duran looked good vs Leonard who fought flat footed as Duran got into his head at press conference goading him into a brawl. But he got embarrassed in the rematch and was forced to quit.

I also don't know what you mean i keep comparing resumes ? i just said that it's not clear H2H wise Duran or Hearns are better than Armstrong or Gavilan.

This is the original quote from the OP.

"Tommy Hearns, Roberto Duran and Marvin Hagler were all better than everyone that Robinson beat"

There was no indication on what he meant other than his opinion that they were "better". But i would argue that Duran or Hearns are better than Armstrong or Gavilan H2H wise, but i know for certain they aren't better regarding resume at Welterweight.

Not really a myth Leonard fought flat footed after round 2 and got mauled along the ropes in their 1st fight, the 2nd time around Leonard's back never touched the ropes and he kept it in centre of the ring using his footwork and frustrated Duran making him quit.

Robinson may not dance around the ring quite like Leonard, but he has better offensive capabilities when he uses his footwork Leonard mostly uses it for defence. And i believe he could get Duran's respect more than Leonard did who had to beat Duran primarily fighting a defensive fight using his footwork.

 

Fair comment about Armstrong but he did make 18 title defences at Welterweight and beat the great Barney Ross.

As for Hearns i think overall he gets a tad overrated at Welterweight but i think Jr Middleweight hes top 5 for me.

 

Time for you to pee in a cup...something's wrong!

 

This is a H2H thread, so of course I'm using arguably the best Welterweight version of Duran here, and not the version from New Orleans, who clearly had something going wrong with him.

Because the only thing you've done is compare resumes and how good the guys each fighter beat were, not the respective fighter's actual abillity and their styles. That's not H2H.

Then he literally said ''This is talking about their in ring abilities.'' in the next sentance. Funny how you didn't mention that one.

He clearly meant it H2H, he even responded to me confirming that in this thread. All these match ups are close from a H2H standpoint anyway, so pick who you want to pick between them, but do it using actual in-ring ability here, resume is almost a non factor here.

It is a myth, it's been debunked many times. Dundee and Leonard himself considered the latter to be stronger, faster, bigger and smarter than Duran, and even the harder puncher. Leonard literally said ''they all think I'm going to run. I'm not. I'm not changing my style at all, he'll be beaten to the punch''. Leonard was a hard hitting and tactical boxer-puncher, he was never an Ali like fighter at his core, despite the similarities. He planned to go full throttle when he would hurt Duran to finish him off, but would fight from a distance at first. That's what Leonard always did.

Leonard was dancing at first, staying on the outside and trying to catch Duran with traps and counter-punches, and would then move away, but he barely managed to hit Duran that entire round anyway, his defense was too good. Leonard fighting at center ring and on the outside worked for 2 rounds, before the inevitable happened and Duran had him on wobbly legs, Leonard was almost primarily defending from round 2-4 and got the crap beaten out of him. Then he went on the offensive and went toe to toe, guess what happened. He started winning rounds. When he would go on the defensive again due to exhaustion or something else entirely, Duran would pummel him almost at will. He literally couldn't get the guy off of him for the entire fight, Duran was just too good, so his only option was to fight back. But Duran was just flat out better, so he won the fight. That version of Duran would beat any Leonard. Then Leonard and Dundee changed the narrative and said that he fought the wrong fight, despite the fact that him fighting the ''right fight'' had him on bambi legs, and him fighting the ''wrong fight'' actually made the fight competitive and had Duran in trouble at times. But the willing press went along with it.

As far as the match up goes, Robinson's offensive ability could very well win him the fight against Duran. If Duran fights the wrong fight, and tries to make it a technical and tactical fight, then Robinson might even stop him, that's playing right into his hands, and Robinson could at times produce that Hearns level power. But if he would fight him the way he did Leonard, he might even win, and if not, then it would be an incredibly close fight. Leonard was most likely stronger than Robinson, better on the inside, and faster. Duran surely has the ability to close the distance, bully him on the inside, and beat him up. World class footwork can leave a fighter very vulnerable when taken away, and since Duran would take it away from Robinson at multiple points in the fight, it would be disastrous. And Robinson surely wouldn't hit a fighter as defensively great as Duran the way he hit LaMotta. That nasty right handed body shot, and those ruthless combinations, they simply wouldn't land as freguently. Duran even managed to succesfully avoid Leonard's combinations and flurries midway through them when once he'd get the rhythm. But Robinson had a great chin, he might have gotten dropped, but he would survive. At one point or another he would eventually land a killer combination, and when it would, then Duran might not have fought back the way he did against Leonard, maybe he'd actually get overwhelmed and not manage to avoid them, maybe he would just have too much respect for his power. But that is very difficult to know. It is an incredibly close match up, about as 50-50 as it gets, both could win. Robinson would most certainly not win as easily as you think.

 

Most of Armstrongs WW defences was against LWs. No shame in that in a p4p sense since he was effectively a LW himself when making them, but since he didn't defend against very many ranked WW it doesn't contribute as much to his WW status.

Hearns had a pretty thin WW resume in an ATG perspective, but he just looked so sensational in the way he beat guys that he's given a h2h status that isn't warranted by the number of quality wins he had. That he looked every bit as sensational during his not very extensive stint at 154 solidifies this view for many. But, yeah, in terms of number of wins against ranked opp he's beaten by quite a few WWs.

 

Well that sounds like an excuse to me was there something wrong with Duran vs Benitez and Laing aswell ? maybe Leonard just went in with a better gameplan and Duran was frustrated and quit ? we don't really have to go deep into it. I'm not saying Duran was at his absolute best because he ballooned up in weight in between 1st and 2nd fights but guess what that's on him no excuses. Leonard came in better prepared with a good gameplan and out smarted Duran and made him quit end of.

And yet i keep saying i don't necessarily agree Duran or Hearns are better H2H fighters than Gavilan or Armstrong, i think i've said this atleast 3 times without bringing up resumes yet you keep saying the samething.

I would say at the time Robinson and Leonard both fought Duran/Armstrong that Duran was a better H2H fighter at that point because Armstrong was a bit past his best. But overall looking at their careers i wouldn't say it's clear cut either way who's the better H2H fighter overall.

Gavilan as i said has one of the best chins of all time and i think he matches up very well vs Hearns at Welterweight, again i don't think it's clear cut either way who would win at Welterweight at their absolute best.

Overall i don't agree that resume doesn't have anything to do with H2H ability, i think resume does have some type of factor when judging fighters regarding their H2H ability, because judging on who fighters beat we can match them up that way regarding stylistic match ups

Yes i understand the point you're making about "fighters on their best night" but realistically you're pitting your whole argument on one fight Duran had at Welterweight. Armstrong won 18 world title fights at Welterweight so of course H2H we have to take that into consideration.

Addressed this already.

Your other posts are very long and i haven't got time to break it all down as it's late here and i need to sleep, but i'll just point out a few things then i'm done with this topic because i don't like long drawn out debates.

I don't think Robinson would beat Duran "easily" but i think he should be the clear favourite. I don't agree with your assessment that it's a 50/50 fight. I think Robinson has the style, speed, boxing skills, footwork, to outbox Duran and keep him honest with his power. Would it be an easy fight ? no not all but i make Robinson a clear favourite.

As for Duran/Leonard i can understand where you're coming from but i still think Leonard had a better gameplan in the 2nd fight and used his footwork alot better staying off the ropes and keeping the fight in the centre of the ring.

If we are being totally fair we could say Duran was not at his best in the 2nd fight but Leonard had a better gameplan in the 2nd fight ? i think that's a fair assessment.

And that's me done with this topic goodnight.