I've been watching Floyd and Leonard's early fights lately. Both had great amateur careers. Obviously, they were both incredibly talented fighters. But who would you say was more talented?
I dont know about talented. I'm not sure what that means exactlly. Boxing is in large part a skill. Not entirely (look at Deon Wilder) but in large part. I think SRL was the bigger man and a very talented guy but Mayweather might be the best defensive fighter who ever fought. People dont like Mayweather the person or maybe found his defensive first style boring and so look for reasons to low ball his skills and accomplishments. Credit where credit is due though. The guy was a defensive master. Against guys his size he was all but unbeatable. If Mayweather was not the best defensively he definitely way up there. His defense, at his best, was practically impenetrable by fighters his size.
SRl fought bigger and better guys until he lost. We found out what SRl's best was. Mayweather decided to preserve his 0 instead so we don't know what his true cap is. People assume Mayweather would win in fantasy matchups simply because he hasn't lost and I think that mystifies how good Mayweather actually is for some people.
Mayweather's ring IQ, great defense and dedication kept him in the game longer and was able to perform well even as he got older. However, based on overall talent in their prime I think SRL was better. He had it all: fast handspeed, good footwork, exceptional defense, intelligent, adaptable, and great offense (combinations and finishing skills).
I dont assume Matweather would win because he never lost. I'd take Matweather to win because I dont think Sugar Ray would penetrate his defense. Both are excellent fighters. Leonard a little bigger and more versatile. Mayweather would make it a snooze fest but probably prevail. They are both great. I concede this is all conjecture like all these mythical matchups.
I do not see that. Floyd was probably better at keeping the 0 by handpicking at the right times. He didn't fight the competitors Leonard did. That is the flaw of Floyd's career and what lacks about it. What is interesting is that he used the Leonard rulebook on how to handpick the way Ray did with Hagler and Lalonde and Hearns 2 and Duran 3, yet he used it in his prime years, Ray only did when he came back for Hagler in his cherry on the top of his career era. Floyd's thinking? Know when to fight guys to get the advantage. It means everything. Ray proved more. If Floyd was better we will never really know. He handpicked a little too much to test himself the way Ray did-or most other greats for that matter. You have to fight the best to prove you are in that upper level with guys who dug down deep. With Ray we knew he was great and dug down deep to win.
I think that Floyd Money Mayweather looked vulnerable in his title fight against Oscar De La Hoya, or was it just a bad night, everyone has one in their respective careers. Leonard in the 1st Roberto Duran fight in 1980.
No. What separates Leonard from many other greats is his resume and his wins against those greats. Benitez,Duran,Hearns and Hagler were the cream of the crop at any era. After beating Benitez,Duran and Hearns, Ray could retire at 25 and be seen as a legend with 34 fights. He was lucky to have the greats he fought, but he beat them and took them on. He actually fought and took punches from all of them at points. He proved his heart.
