Best Fighters of the 1980's, 1-10

I think we need to bump Sal Sanchez for Tyson.

 

It depends on how you define things. What exactly does "best" mean?

Best fighter over the entire course of the 80s? Probably Chavez, who never lost in the 80s. Galaxy would be up there too.

Best fighter over a significant number of years in the 80s? Holmes, Spinks, Hagler, McCallum, Holyfield, Nelson are some of the best.

Best fighter for just a few years in the 80s? Tyson, Sanchez, Chang, maybe Curry.

Best wins of the 80s? Probably Leonard.

 

They were?? What particular ones? I don't recall any of this and i near read the print off them.

 

you are quite familiar with them. that's where you get all your material

so why the big act?

 

actually, three years before the leonard fight even took place

got sudden memory loss?

your alzheimer's acting up?

 

The quality of Leonard's biggest wins in the 80s - Duran, Hearns and Hagler - is greater than that of any other fighter that decade. If that's the sole criteria to judge who was the best, then he's no. 1. Marketing and media image shouldn't detract from those victories. They were all remarkable by any standard.

Personally, I put Leonard at no. 2 behind Hagler (despite beating him) as Hagler was the best champion of the decade and deserves the no. 1 spot for his consistency, longevity and dominance as champion. And for the way he crushed Hearns. Also, if you think Hagler actually beat Leonard (I don't, by the way) then it becomes a no-brainer to put Hagler at the top.

But I wouldn't strongly argue against Leonard as number 1. In many ways, he was the fighter of the decade.

 

I think Hearns fought a lot of guys in the 1980s to be rated wherever he can be. He fought Cuevas 80, Leonard 81, Benitez 82, Duran 84, Hagler 85 3 and 4 titles 87 5 in 88 Leonard 89.. I don't see how Hagler should go over Hearns specifically because of that one fight, unless Hagler can match the other wins Hearns had. If Hagler went up and beat Spinks. I could see consideration separate from their fight, but I don't see why Hearns cannot be ranked above Marvin. Look at all the hall of fame guys he fought in the 1980s. I did not put Hill into the equation. Say Leonard fought only Hearns in 1981 and beat him and retired without fighting Duran or Benitez. Leonard should be ranked over Hearns just on that? Then you dismiss Hearns being active in the whole decade, and keep this in mind. Hearns is the only fab 4 member who fought every year of the 1980s. Hagler didn't fight in 88, 89, Leonard not in 83,85, 86, Duran not in 85. I had to give Ray the 1980s as best fighter maybe, but he stole it like he stole rounds with Hagler.

 

Likewise.

I suppose it boils down to what guides the qualitative assessment made in forming such lists (and I'm not a frequent list-builder). I mentioned in an earlier post that I had based my list on a combination of achievements, recognition, further founded upon consistency and perenniality.

So, I have favored those boxers who were not only standouts for the decade but also performed regularly for the larger part of those 10 years. The level of opposition, and the manner/style of victory also has to play a part. For this reason, Hagler is top because he enters the '80s by taking the Middleweight title and forging himself the undisputed champion at 160, defending it successfully 12 times, blowing out everyone but Duran, who he beats over the distance.

Leonard scores highly for two critical bouts in '80 and '81. TKOs to boot and Kalule isn't a bad win either. But let's not forget that he lost a critical match in his prime, as well, against a legendary Lightweight. This is Leonard's most significant contribution to the '80s.

Then nothing of consequence for five years and - already - a certain part of the criteria I am using, in relation to presence throughout the decade, is blown. Perhaps this is where the problem lies because, while I view the retirement as a lack of contribution to the period, it's this lay-off, which seems to underpin Leonard's returns and legendary status. 'Lay-off' was next to being a terminal illness back in the '80s.

Still - his comebacks only include four bouts over three years, at the back-end of the decade; seemingly, to tidy up some loose ends. All bouts (other than Lalonde), which could have better served his legacy, if they had been contested 4 to 5 years earlier. Either way, it really depends on what one thinks about his performances in those three years of comebacks. Granted, they look good on paper. Big names. But I don't rate the fights and their results particularly highly, for the reasons stated earlier.

Leonard wasn't interested in competing with the serious up-and-comers of the late '80s, preferring to retire again, after Hagler, and then come back again to compete at 160 but in the Super Middleweight division, instead. It all seemed to me like he was marking his piece of territory for the sake of historical image and, to my mind, not as successfully as the results on paper would suggest.

As implied earlier, I don't entirely rule him out of my list but the criteria I am using does not make him an automatic entry and a tailer-ender, at best.

 

Awwwww no proof? redrascal might be more apt.

 

Given that i couldn't find a way to score that fight for Hagler if i tried i have no worries at all with those media (and expert) scores. I also see guys like McGrain, Bojak and numerous others aligning with how i see the fight and am more than comfortable with my stance. Hagler was simply outboxed.

I thought Leonard put on a more impressive performance. He was up against great odds and history as well but Leonard had not even been fighting. The guy had one bout in the middle of a 5 year period and no warm up fight. Let me know if anyone has come off such a level of inactivity to beat a reigning top level ATG two weight divisions up from his best weight.

Don't get me wrong, Spinks win was enormous but for me Ray pips it.

You aren't going back on your stance that Hagler completely ruined Mugabi to suit the current debate are you?

Yes Hagler had slipped noticeably and no i would not rate him less formidable than Thomas. He had lost a lot of sting however. Leonard hadn't even been fighting and was slipping up two divisions so lets take that little fact into account too.

I'm sure i would not be alone in thinking it a candidate as the best win of the 80's. My exact words were "It may well be the greatest win of the 80's."

 

I think to say Hagler was 'simply outboxed' by Leonard would be an exercise in overstatement.

 

Many great observers have said the similar.

Ray Arcel - It was a case of brains over brawn. Leonard had too much mental energy for Hagler. He outsmarted him and outpunched him".

Admittedly he goes a step further than i went by saying he outpunched him as well.

 

I've also got a bombshell or two regarding Leonard - Duran II in coming days.

 

Don't forget that Spinks actually gave a reamtch. That's huge.

 

I have a great deal of regard for Arcel and he's absolutely correct to have used the term 'outsmarted'. Because, Leonard certainly did outsmart... ...the audience.