Could Ray Leonard have achieved greatness above welterweight?

yeh it's the truth; after a 3 year layoff due to a detached retina the man came back and defeat marvin hagler. leonard himself was as shot to **** as hagler since the fight was clearly very evenly matched.

leonard never challenged anyone in the previous 3 years, he had a detached retina. from 82 to 87 he had 1 fight. so i'm gonna say hagler should have beaten a shot to **** WW.

afterwars is irrelevant because none of the fights mean anything.

after foreman knockecd out norton, ali said he thought it would be easy because he saw how slow he was. what a blatant cherry pick that was by ali atsch

 

I'm delighted that you admitted that they were evenly matched because Hagler was actually the 3-1 betting favorite going into the fight.Leonard's detached retina was so bad,that he fought Kevin Howard 3 months AFTER the surgery.atschLeonard was so shot to **** when he fought Hagler that he ko'd a much bigger Donnie Lalonde and drew with still formidable Tommy Hearns AFTER he fought Hagler.atsch. Yeah,really shot to **** Leonard.atschObviously not prime,but nowhere near close to shot to **** like Hagler was(which Leonard knew).

 

anyone seeing the fight can see they were evenly matched it's not about admitting anything, it's using your eyes.

howard was his 1 fight in a 5 year period!

lol a win over lalonde for two divisional belts means jack **** to me. a draw with hearns is debatable at best and leonard himself admits he classes it as a hearns victory. the truth is, since the surger and aside from 2 controversial fights with hagler and hearns, leonard achieved nothing of not. from 1982 he had 2 meaningful fights both of which were close and both of which he failed to be dominant. if we are to describe hagler as shot to **** then i'm saying leonard was shot to **** (which hagler knew when he chose to fight an old inactive WW who had suffered a detached retina)

 

It may not mean jack **** to you,but it certainly proves Leonard wasn't shot to **** as you claim.Definitely past his best,but certainly not "shot to ****".Hagler was the one dying to fight Leonard all along.Leonard was doing the avoiding for the better part of 6 years.Hagler wasn't the one that has openly discussed in public fighting a fighter when he did when the opponent looked so beatable as Leonard did upon viewing Hagler-Mugabi.Funny how you wrote "Hagler chose to fight an old inactive ww who had suffered a detached retina,"when A.that detached retina didn't prevent Leonard from fighting Kevin Howard just MONTHS following the surgery.B.Hagler was at least 2 years OLDER than Leonard.C.Hagler was inactive at that point,too(although clearly not as inactive as Leonard)fighting about once a year for 3 years running.And Hearns may have deserved the decision(I believed that,too).But it also proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that Leonard was NOT shot to **** as you claim,as Hagler was when they fought.And Leonard knew it.

 

I erred about the date concerning Leonard's surgery because I simply don't remember its exact date.But I am certain that his detached retina surgery took place BEFORE the Howard fight and certainly didn't prevent him from fighting Howard.

 

Had hagler fought lalonde next followed by duran and hearns at smw how do you think he'd have faired?

A shot to **** holyfield beat valuev. A shot to **** tyson beat nielsen. A shot to **** langford beat wills I could carry on and on.

Hagler knew this when fought a semi retired welterweight.

Maybe you rate leonard higher than me, I dunno, but a run of 3 fights at smw against people who didn't belong in the weight class means nothing about how shot he was. A guy dragged down to smw, a career lightweight and a man he'd already knocked out lol. You might think it's a great run proving leonard still had it but he was untested in a new division that's the truth.

What meaningful fight do you think leonard clearly won since 82?

 

I NEVER said it was a great run.NEVER.I've no idea where you got that from.I wrote the fact that Leonard knocked out Lalonde and drew with Hearns AFTER the Hagler fight proves he WAS NOT shot to **** as you claimed.I rate Leonard as the best welterweight I've personally ever seen in my lifetime even though I hate his guts.Hagler wanted Leonard all along,as soon as Leonard started teasing a whole bunch of people about a proposed fight at least 6 years before they actually fought.Leonard fought a shot semiretired middleweight when he fought Hagler and he knew it because he verbally and publicly admitted it later upon watching Hagler's poor performance against Mugabi.And because Leonard drew against a man that he knocked out at welter clearly does NOT indicate he was shot especially since said fighter was still formidable.It was clear to anyone with 2 eyes that Leonard was closer to his prime when they fought than Hagler was.Even against slowpoke Roldan Hagler was looking slow and easy to hit.In fact,Larry Merchant even admitted after that fight that he saw the 1st signs of slippage.****,Mugabi gave Hagler all kinds of problems that a Hagler from a few years before would not have had.

 

So leonard's run of 2 wins and a draw proves he wasn't shot but haglers run of victories proves he was shot?

Answer my question, which meaningful victory die leonard decisively attain from 1982 onwards?

He got a controversial victory against an aged hagler and then did nothing until a controversial draw with hearns. There is a very good argument he lost both these fights.

He beat lalonde and duran at smw is that better than beating mugabi at mw in your opinion?

How do you think hagler does against the same smw opposition that leonard fought?

My argument is that leonard was every bit as shot as hagler was plus he had only 1 non title fight in 5 years.

 

Maybe briefly at Light Middle , but not above that.imo.

 

Leonard wasntshot at all. The only reason he looked good as he did was cuz Hagler was shot and Ray knew all about it. That's why you can hear the commentators mention it during the fight "Sugar Ray said he was counting on the slowness of hagler. he said Hagler had lost a lot of speed"

Funny how fans dont ever bring that up. and they dont bring it up cuz they dont like to. It cheapens the win

Fact is, Ray had plenty of chances. Its not as tho his eye ever kept him out of action

He fought some guy in 84. he couldve fought Marvin two months after that. he was just scared Marvin would knock him out just like he was afraid Nunn would knock him out and chose Duran cuz he knew Duran was soft

eye had nothing to do with it. he was just chicken

any decent fighter with speed couldve whipped him, just like Norris

 

I agree with you Clint

Being shot is when you got no legs and throw like your gloves are loaded with cement. someone like Hagler or Ali from the Jimmy Young fight

as anyone with eyes can see, this doesnt even describe Leonard from the uno mas fight as he laid combination after combination on Duran and won every round, not to mention his legs were fresh as daisies

He just couldnt do it with Terry Norris, that is why luftcrazy is upset cuz Noris made a fool of him and he's fabricating to cover it up

as for Hagler, luftcrazy wasnt even around when all the talk about the decline of the marvelous one began 3 years before

Ray wanted to come out and challenge him then too. that's why he made the sudden comeback. The fire of Hagler which was once seen as a raging inferno no other fighter would dare go near, was now seen as a formidable but not so impossibly unbeatable fighter but Ray lost his heart becuz the way Howard floored him made him think twice. Think about waiting a few more years till Hagler comes down to his level

 

If you claim that Leonard was as shot as Hagler then you'd be clearly wrong.Leonard didn't have ANY meaningful victories after 82.Interestingly put on your part considering we're debating Leonard's "victory" over Hagler in 87.But you answered that one yourself.And he looked pretty good against Hearns who was still formidable,which demonstrated that he wasn't nowhere near shot to **** as you claimed before.Have you ever actually seen the Hagler-Mugabi fight?If you have,then you would have known that Marvin,normally a pinpoint puncher,was missing Mugabi,a slugger(albeit fast handed one)with utter regularity.And Leonard even commented about how Hagler couldn't land and he was FINALLY begging his manager to get a Hagler fight.And if you know anything about Mugabi,then you would know that he accomplished nothing after Hagler(even though he was top ranked at middleweight going into the Hagler fight) and was even ko'd in his very next fight by nobody.Now,one could argue that Hagler ruined Mugabi,maybe yes,maybe no.But we do know that,as I mentioned before,he accomplished nothing after that fight.As far as Lalonde is concerned,Hagler looked so shitty and hittable against Mugabi that alot was possible at that point.Would Lalonde ever knock Hagler out.Nope.Hagler had one of the greatest chins ever.But considering how shot to **** Hagler was looking against Mugabi, and later Leonard,Lalonde may have given him a decent scrap at that point in time.Lalonde beat Hagler?I don't believe so.But Hagler was shot and Leonard knew it.That's the only reason Leonard challenged him when he did.

 

I'm getting old,man,but do you remember when Merchant made that comment about Hagler starting to show slippage against Roldan?What makes me insanely crazy is when people make Leonard's "victory" over Hagler as if its some kind of great victory even though Hagler's looking like absolute shite against Mugabi is the reason that Leonard decided to fight him when he did-AND HE EVEN ADMITS IT.****ing pathetic.

 

At that point in time,it was obvious about the eye thing.What,test his eye against Kevin Howard,but because Marvin was a bigger puncher,avoid him?What absolute mother****ing bull****.atschASTONISHING!!

 

By the time he rematched Hamsho that was the talk. I still have the New York Post edition written by Izenberg

After the Roldan fight headlines read from Internation Boxing read "not so Marvlous" and "Is Marvin slipping"

This is common knowledge. You could see it reflected in the fan letters as well

No coincidence Leonard would try making a 1984 comeback. He thought Marvin was at half strength and based upon the fantasy comeback he read in the publications in which he would knock out Pryor in 4, win a close decision over champion Curry, and box Hagler silly for a points win, believed he was the one who would do the deed

His problem was he lacked the confidence in himself to make the actual fight. You could see he wanted to but was afraid. And the Howard fight made him that much more afraid

Following the Mugabi fight-another three years, you could see he was more confident and shortly after made his announcement public

I actually had the opportunity to watch Hagler in sparring March '87 in Palm Springs. I put up a photo in 07 or 08 on Eastside showing inside the tent becuz John Thomas kept taunting saying I had no such evidence. So no one can say I was fabricating when I say the Weaver triplets mopped the floor with a useless, and impotent Hagler that spent most the time covering from flurries or missing and falling into the ropes. He was that bad and I thought "he can't possibly have a future in the sport"