Can Hearn's Be Ranked Over Leonard?

Why the **** you using past prime performances to make the arguement? Leonard beat Hearns in his prime, and then beat the man that stopped him inside 4-5 rounds. It's easy.

 

So Hearns gets credit for the Leonard rematch (FINE), but Leonard doesn't get credit for Duran 3 despite Duran just pasting Barkley (the same year as Hearns-Leonard 2), who ko'd Hearns the year before Hearns beat Leonard. Swings and roundabouts

 

There is no arguement, full stop.

Leonard beat Hearns by stoppage, and then beat Hagler, who did a demolition job over a good version of Tommy. Leonard also held wins of his own over Benitez and Duran, arguably the two best names on Hearns resume. The reason this question is even being taken into consideration is due to the amount of disdain there is for Ray on Eastside.

 

What an awesome post!!!!! Big Hearns fan here. These insights are very informative. I really wish Hearns had rematches with Leonard and Hagler during his peak. He had the ability to turn a fight around with his awesome talent. He is a very determined fighter when he wants to be. Leonard 2 for example ,the Barkley fight,I think he was shot(if it were that same year could have been a different story,just needs to keep his guard up).. It did seem like his chin improved as he went up in weight. I do see hagler and Leonard beating him 7 times out of 10 though,but ya never know..

 

Many think that Hagler beat Leonard. If you had read my post thoroughly, you would already know this.

 

Leonard also has a clear, wide loss to Duran on his resume. His win over Duran in Montreal was via quit-job in a fight that was actually closer than Leonard-Duran 1 was.

Hearns pasted Duran. Most dominant win between any of the Fab 4 + Benitez matchups.

The Hagler that faced Hearns was far better than the one who faced Leonard. Regardless, many thought that the older Hagler beat Leonard anyways.

Both of them beat Benitez in similar fashion.

Again, if you had read my previous post, you wouldn't be saying this things.

 

Let's give Leonard credit for Duran 3 then. Then let's remember that Duran was almost 39 years old and fighting how many divisions above his natural one? The man was done.

Then let's remember that a year after Leonard's "stunning victory in Duran III" he got punished by Terry Norris. I'm assuming he was shot, right?

Don't belittle my argument because it doesn't fit your vision of Ray Leonard's godliness. I also think that Leonard should be rated above him, but there's no place for childishness here.

 

I will absolutely guarantee it.

 

NO . Hearns was stopped twice in his prime.

 

Tommy had already outgrown the welters and hadnet reached his prime until the Duran fight. It was a little like when Louis met Schmeling; he just didnt have the experience at the time but in a return match, the results were completely different. That's how it would have been 84-86 Hearns Leonard.

Let's remember that strength, not skill decided Leonard-Hearns 1. and it was Tommy that showed ALL the skill! 1984 wuld have been a compleetly different matter because now Tommy had the edge in both.

Leonard didnt want that so he waited for the opposition to soften up Tommy in a very similar way he did with Hagler. This means that yes Hearns ranks higher than Leonard.

Also, the Hagler that Tommy faced was far superior to the mediocrity and mockery that Leonard faced. Hagler simply had no life in him.

Tommy also has many more fights than Leonard and also aced Duran, who defeated Leonard. Leonard also showed a glaring weakness in his inability to deal with fast boxers like Terry Norris causing irreparible damage the way Foreman did with Frazier.

Yes, Tommy's chin was not the best but neither was leonard's. we saw it as early as the Rodriguez fight, the Geraldo fight, Duran and Howard fights and to shorten this post, end with the Camacho fight. and Ray didnt even have that many fights-under 40. Imagine if he hadnt such an irregular career and actually faced some decent competition like Nunn, Jackson, McCallum, prime Hagler

 

Leonard carefully managed his career but I still rate him a little above Hearns, you can't defeat age (most of the time anyway Mr Hopkins and Foreman) and younger quality fighters did expose Leonard later in his career.

 

Leonard was 35 and hadnt fought for nearly two years when he faced Norris.That fight proved nothing.Decent competition? Benitez,Duran ,Hearns,Hagler,Kalule.?What are they journeymen?
Leonard had a good chin ,better than Hearns.Your post is so biased its not worth getting uptight about .

 

Make that one year. You're exaggerating the length of time. Think I can't count?

What about Leonard's edge in experience? You cant say because he hadnt faced off lately against top notch fighters he couldnt adjust to Norris. How did you arrive to that conclusion? :huh

Think about this; Leonard hadnt fought ANYONE prior to the Hagler fight over 3 years and only Kevin Howard in five years. You can throw in Bruce Finch but that would only strengthen my argument.

No, I'm afraid that the problem was not Leonard's experience but rather Terry's fierce, unyeilding attack and blistering punches that intmidated Leonard. Not to mention that Leonard didnt have the best chin (like I said)And besides, Terry was at a disadvantage when it came to experience.

 

Norris is one overated fighter,who made his name beating men past their prime .Why does everything you post end up with you sucking his rectum?
I thought this was supposed to be Leonard V Hearns? Take Norris's nuts off your chin fan boy.

 

I'm just telling the truth-Norris was a better fighter than Ray. If it upsets people here that is regrettable but unavoidable but look at the bright side, we got something better!

and another thing; when Norris lost you never heard any excuses like you did with Leonard. WIth leonard it was always one excuse of another, the eye accompanied with more phony comebacks.

I wouldnt even worry over the fact Terry humiliated him anyways becuz Ray Leonard was just a runner. A good runner but just a runner.

Norris tho was a lot better than that and the difference between them was amazing! he made his name by beating a guy that hadnt lost in 11 years.

I believe Tim Ryan and Steve Farhood when they say Ray fought the perfect fight prior to the Norris fight. but he could never do it with Norris. He whipped Leonard in a historic upset. he did it convincingly. so convincingly it made Ray think he was washed up and caused him to retire.