Best boxer in last 30 yrs - `Sugar`Ray Leonard

Ezz, you say SRL should barely be above Hearns, but then have Ray at 1 but then can't find room for Hearns in the top 7? Not saying he deffo belongs, but just found it odd after your comments.

 

But yes, Leonards 1.

 

Even from the last 30 years only duran has de jesus 3,palamino,leonard,cuevas,moore and barkley as big wins,with a tremendous showing against prime hagler,castro,paz and camacho...
L eonard has super wins against benitez,duran,hearns,kalule and hagler,plus a great showing v lalonde. Leonards wins are against better opposition overall (durans leonard win excepted),but robertos are mainly above his best weight,over a longer time period and past prime as well...
I guess its down to who you think LOOKS more impressive???

 

Hearns should be on that list. Just an oversight.

My point really is that Leonard and Hearns were very, very close in ability.

Had Hearns been around in 12 round championship days I think he'd have been even better.

I'm not sure I'd even pick Robinson over Tommy in a 10 round fight.

 

As if you ever cared about arguments in a discussion regarding Ray Leonard.

 

**** i gotta go now, but im gunna be home in a few hours. Tommy Hearns does not beat Ray Robinson, they both fought in 15 round days, that's where im doing this. People talk about Hearns being a great puncher, true, one of the very finest and elite level there. People talk about him being a great boxer, true in a sense, he could box, but his defense was not great. For the first half of the fight with Leonard he was doing well on offense whilst sticking to the jab to start everything. I think to beat Robinson you must be offensive so that can mean good for Tommy, a defensive fighter cant beat SRR for me, theres no defence for the greatest, most devastating calculated attacks to body and head of all-time. Anyhow, you look at Hearn's sole defeat at welter, SRL got to him, FACT. Now Leonard has aspects to his game that are possibly unparalelled, but he was not the hunter of prey that was Sugar Ray Robinson was, arguably there was never one as effective as he. Robinson would stop Tommy Hearns, if Hearns would try to move and box, the stoppage is a foregone conclusion imo.

 

Well, Hagler was better and ranks higher at his weightclass than PBF was at any of his and his wins over Duran and Hearns are better than any on PBF´s resume. But when you take into account that Floyd´s best weight was at sfw and he still fouhgt up to jmw, winning titles at each weightclass even though he was the smaller fighter in every fight. He also never lost. Yeah, he cherry-picked but he still fought some of the best at his weightclasses. P4p I think there could be made an argument to put him above Hagler. I don´t have any of them in my Top30 p4p and I never went past that but I can see an argument for it - I neither have Hearns, Jones, Hopkins inside those Top30.

 

No offence here Butch, but you do seem to only mention mainstream famous boxers. Do you not think that Carlos Monzon or Alexis Arguello have a case to be rated above Julio Cesar Chavez? I cannot see why anyone would have Chavez over Monzon.

 

teeto

15 rounds and Robinson wins. Definitely. Over 10 then Hearns has a chance.

Of course Robinson was almost on a par with Tommy in terms of punching power. Ray often gets overlooked in greatest punchers debates but he was right up there. IMO the second best puncher at 147.

 

I don't believe keeping the zero means anything, so I don't even count that. Look at the fighters who had losses on the record (Robinson, Ali, Whitaker), look at guys who have kept the zero (Mayweather, Calzaghe, Ricardo Lopez). The undefeated guys are all quality fighters, but it definitely does not indicate they are better than guys with losses.

Mayweather is a great fighter and achieved great things, but although this is not always the case, I think this is one instance where resume makes this a no-brainer. Hagler's wins over Hearns and Duran are all better than anything on Mayweather's record. Hagler was more dominant at one division, and I think he was better h2h, as the only man I would fancy to beat Hagler in history at middleweight is Monzon. I wouldn't have Mayweather as 2nd best in any division he fought in, except super-featherweight (behind Arguello) but sfw is one of the modern sub-divisions.

 

I never said PBF is better than Hagler. I said there could be made an argument fot him to rank higher p4p. And I still think so.

Well, h2h I don´t give a thought if the guys are too far apart in weight. Yeah Hagler has the better wins but Floyd fighting mostly fighters who were bigger than him and Hagler´s biggest win were against smaller men evens it out quite a bit I think.

 

I meant h2h at their own weights

 

Well, doesn´t change anything. Firstly it isn´t about h2h, secondly I never cared much about the divisions below lw - with a few exceptions - and I´m not really schooled at the history of sfw. So, I can´t comment on that.

 

If we go back slightly more than 30 years we also catch the tail end of two totally awesome fighters,monzon and ali. I would say that monzon and ali have better resumes and cases than all the chavezs',pbfs',jones',hoppos and such like. I think whitaker is the main p4p guy to rival these due to his all round skills.
With regard to thomas hearns,i think he was without a doubt one of the best of the past 30 years,and definately talent wise....I feel that he would have surprised many if he ever shared a ring with SRR,in fact i think the possibility exists that robinson is stopped,robinson never fought a puncher boxer like tommy,wheras hearns fought a comparable welter to SRR in SRL.....

 

It isn't only h2h of course, but it's always something to consider, as this is indicative of ability. I have Mayweather 2nd of all-time at sfw behind Arguello.