Could Ray Leonard have achieved greatness above welterweight?

:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

 

When it comes to ranking them as ATGs, its not close, and i think Ray could probably hold a mw title longer than Nunn and eventually have the better reign.

However i do agree with you that in a hth matchup Nunn is all wrong for Leonard. I think even Leonard knew this.. As i never heard him once mention Nunns name.. Even though they were both champs in that same time... Dont even think a younger Ray (without the layoff) could have ever beat Nunn at Mw.. Dont know if he stops leonard though, Nunn showed flashes of power, but he was also known to be a slapper too and not always intrested in trying to knock a guy out... BUt outside of Nunn i see him being able to beat the most or all the other elite mws.. Think he edges Kalamby,Mccallum,Graham would also beat Benn,Eubank,Barkley a fight with him and Jackson would be risky but he should take that one too.
A James TOney at 100% might beat Leonard:think But now that i think about it that would never happen... Ray ws into making mandos and taking on whoever when he first became champ.. But Even if Ray wouldnt have took a layoff he never wouldn have fought all these guys, he was all about super fights. Hed rematch Benitez,give a 3rd match with Duran sooner, Fight Hagler a couple times, and maybe a triology with Hearns depending on how the others turned out... He might have sneaked in one of the other guys. Or maybe called out Curry to move up (before he lost to Honeyghan).

 

By 1984, the two best fighters were Hagler and Hearns and that INCLUDES Ray

Seeing him in the Howard fight I know ray wouldnt be a match for either man especially if they start out fast

as for Mike, Mike was too slick, too quick, and would make Ray leonard sick

Mike was as slick as they come. also a southpaw that could bang. as Ray showed in the Norris fight, he cant defend against the uppercut.

few can in fact. Even the mighty Hagler in his prime had problems defending against it. If you note the rematch with Obel, Marvin got caught in the first two rounds till he got in Obel's chest

Ray keeps at a distance and couldnt get near Mike anyway (Mike's slippery style would confuse Ray and cause him to freeze up and become stationary)so Mike would just hit him at will till he went down which in my estimation would go further then round 8 at most

However I wouldnt be surprised if it ended much sooner. Mike just makes people look bad. (Kalambay, Tate, Parker, Toney)

ray has a better chance against a more conventional fighter like mcCallum (good technical fighter but fights more flatfooted and is a bit stiff) but also solid, doesnt bruise or discourage easy and hard to down. Ray could win on points concievably but I wouldnt bet on it, just like most other people

 

Michael Nunn was so slick that his chin managed to make consistent contact with the fists of Juan Roldan,Marlon Starling and in the gift decision he received against Victor Cordoba.:roll:


Nunn had speed and consistency and nothing much else.He was a pitty-pat slapper with a truly awful jab,who continually gave away his height and reach and literally fought down to the level of his opponents.Basically,a more athletically gifted version of Paul Williams.Though Williams has more heart than Nunn

 

Herans would have murdered Leonard at 154 there would have been no triology, thats why he had 0 plans for that fight,or McCallum even the Curry fight could have been made at 147 or even Pryor at 140 or 147,and he didnt want Nunn at 160 or 82 thru 85 Hagler.Ray was boxing's 1st politiscian he perfected it, he never planned to fight any of them just happended Hagler beat Hearns and didnt want to give him a rematch and SRL watched Hagler fight the Mugabi fight and he thought that was the time and chance to strike he does what opportunsist do just fighters like RJJ and Mayweather misuse the method to duck all fights....

 

Later in his career there are some truths to this... But bottom line your comment somes off as Boxing Blasphemy!! To compare his dodging to Floyd and Jones us ridiculous.. Your talking about a fighter who has fought more elite great fighters in a shorter time frame than just about anyone i can think of... Benitez,DUran 2x,Hearns then moved up amd beat Kalule who was one hellova fighter and considered the Real Jm champ, not to mention all running thru all the excellent contenders on the way up.

And Leonard ducking Pryor is a myth and a wise tale,, at the time Leonard had bigger money to make and bigger fish to fry... When Leonard was champ they offered Pryor a fight but he wanted more money... And although considered a very good fighter at the time, hardly anyone thought he would do well vs SRL.. You have to remember this was before Pryor stopped Arguello and was looked at as a pfp elite, thats why Aruello altough aging on moving up was considered the favorite. At the time Pryor was not considered to be a huge threat to Leonard... At the time this would be like a Tim Bradley accusing Manny pacquiao of ducking him, while he had fights with Cotto,Hatton,Mosley,Margo etc etc brewing.

I do agree that Hearns would have beat Leonard at 154 but to say murdered, like if it would be a mismatch is crazy.. How could that be a mis match when Leonard had just kod him a couple years before at Welter... And fought another competetive draw with Hearns at Mw later in the decade, i agree Hearns deserved it but it was still kind of close and Leonard almost knocked him out in the last ronnd.. Probably would have reapeated the frist fight if it was scheduled for 15.

As for Mccallum the timing was off for them to have fought, Leonard was already retired with a detached retina, back when Mccallum first won the tiltle during his mw reign. Same with Curry who was just working his way up the rankings when Leonard retired. and wouldnt have generated any intrest at the time, it took Curry and Mccallum about another 2 years before they started making a name for tjemselves. Neither made sense or Cents$$$ at the time...

You also make it sound like Leonard was cherry picking Hagler... Now thats truly hilarious, as Leonard had been off around 5 years, had never fought at MW, And going against an atg who was still considerd PFP the best fighter in the world.. Everyone including myself though Hagler was gonna kill him..... One of the greatest wins in the last 30 years., and you are criticizing itatsch

As for Nunn you did get that one right,, Leonard never even brought up Nunns name, but Hearns didnt either. They were being buisness smart why take on a Super talent like Nunn who probably would have beat both of them (at the time) , when they could fight eachoter in a rematch for double or triple the money?.. Leonard did cherry pick lalonde and made some crazy demands and sholdnt have been able to fight for 2 titles.. against the least talented LH... But hey he earned the right, fought the and beat the gretest fighters of his generation, and overall ended up with the best record in the matchups.

 

Go back to the drawing board.

 

I would have liked for Leonard to move up to 154 after Hearns I and then stay there for a while before moving up to middle and having a couple of tune-up fights and then taking on Hagler in 84-85.

At 154, I think he beats the same guys he did at 147. He looked very natural at 154, lost practically nothing of his speed. No way Hearns hangs with him over 15 in a rematch either. Duran and Benitez would be soundly outpointed. If he then moved up and faced Hagler after a couple of tune-ups in the mid 80's... Anyone's guess. Win or lose, it would be close enough and a good enough effort to cement his greatness I think.

If he stayed on at 154 to the late 80's, things would have been very interesting. Jackson wouldn't be easy, and Currry and McCallum would be as tough as they come. He beats Jackson but those other two are very close. I think he might have split a series with one of them.

 

Are you talking late 80s around the time he fought Hagker? That Leonard was still a geat fighter but on the decline.. Curry had a few good years at JM , he was beatiing McCallum before he ran into a bomb, even after that ko loss he seemed to bounce back,, I think Curry would give him all he wanted and maybe even take a slight lead going into the mid rounds, I can even see him suprising Leonard with a Knockdown...But Leonard always had a great B plan if he was having trouble. I always admired Leonard's ability to show greatnesss and turn it on when he had too, ,when pushed to a corner his horns would come out.:fire. His ability to dig deep and turn things around is what made him an elite atg like. If he was a quarterback or NBA player he would ne the ultimate clutch player.

Around the tenth he would turn it on,,... He would trade toe to toe with the harder punching Curry, and get the better of it... Hed have him weary and hurt .. In the next round Leonard finishes him.. Although Leonard was known for his flashy combos,boxinng ability he had one of the best killer instincts and always new the perfect time to turn it on... Leonard KO 11


Late 80s Leonard vs MCcallum? Well if your talking about the Leonard that Fought Hagler.. i think ill go with SRL even thouigh Hagler was on the sllide or if you think Leonardd lost.. IMO Leonard was still a great fighter, he didnt have the same power he did at WW,and lost a step, and his chin went from Great to good.
I still think he has enough to win a close decision over Mccallum.. Mccallum wins share of rounds and some are close, but leonard still had legs and he would use every inch of that ring, and use his speed to get the better of most exchanges.. Somewhat close but decisive decision ofr Leonard 116-113 decision... This version of Leonard is still beter than the Graham who gave Mccallum al he wanted .


In each fight after the Hagler win.. I notice that Leonards lost some bounce in his legs and he didnt get around the ring like before. speed.
Still had blistering hand speed but not like before.. He was also getting hit more. Even the awkward,not to quick Lalonde didnt have a whole lot of trouble finding him... And although Hearns was ahead in the first fight, he seemed to find this SRL version easier to hit, at times he couldnt miss with the jab... SRL also didnt let go of his hands the way he use too, seemed to fight moe in spurts. He did look physically a little stronger than in the Hagler fight and was throwing harder punches. Think it had to do with sitting on his punches more.

^^^ I think MCcallum would take a razor close decision over the 89 Leonard. I think he would counter the less mobile Leonard in this fight with more success..And be the more buzy fighter... Leonard would still have some big rounds though, and a late surge that would sway one of the scorecards his way... McClalluum Split decison.

 

I agree that Leonard did nothing post-Hagler to rate him alongside Nunn, Kalambay or McCallum.
In fact, the Hagler result and performance stands out as an anomaly in a series of shaky or disappointing fights after 1982.
Howard, Lalonde, Hearns 2, Duran 3, Norris, Camacho ..... horrible fights/performances.

 

I'm talking about a Leonard that never went into hiatus. Like how Ali would have been in the late 60's early 70's if not for the exile. If Leonard went up to 154 and took on Curry, Jackson and McCallum around the mid 80's he should be at the peak of his abilities.

 

I think McCallum would beat Leonard comfortably around this time. Leonard had just lost too much of his sharpness and speed to get away with his technical flaws against a guy like McCallum.

 

If he'd carried on straight after the Bruce Finch fight,he'd have been a force at Light Middle. He and Hearns would have had another war,which Tommy would win,narrowly. Not sure about full middleweight,as he would n't have beaten Hagler,at this point.

 

Actually,Leonard DID duck Hagler for the better part of 6 years.He openly discussed the possibility of the fight for those years,but didn't challenge Hagler until he saw how shot Hagler was against Mugabi.

 

Ray was never great above welt. He had a great win vs. Hagler, which was more about Ray knowing when to fight Hagler and getting the mental advantage with gloves and ring size and all that. The inactivity of Hagler fighting only 2 times since the Hearns fight 2 years before helped Ray. The Hagler who fought Hearns would not have lost to a comebacking Ray. Hagler was too sharp then. Hagler was not a guy with all his fights to be inactive. Ray was great because of welterweight. Hearns actually built his legacy more moving up and had more of a great career at many weight classes, which is why the 1989 fight with Ray should have been a loss for Ray. Tommy fought well for Ray in 1989, but that was not Tommy at his best either. Ray got him to fight low in weight. Tommy fought really well against Virgil Hill in 1991. More confortable weight.