ray leonard was the pacquiao of his time....very talented and capable....but needed stipulations to win.
Not even an argument, watch some of Robinsons fights, I'm a Leonard fan but he wouldn't get off with Robinson, not even close.
I was not denigrating SRLs resume, by the way. It is one of the greatest of all time. He fought all the other great fighters of his day. That was a great thing about the great fighters that came up in the 70s and early 80s, like Hearns, Duran, Hagler, Benitez, Pryor, Arguello, Zarate, Gomez, Sanchez, et al. They wanted to test themselves against the best, even if it meant they would not end up with an undefeated record. Some fighters of today see the undefeated record as the be all and end all.
Robinson fought 27 times against Hall of Famers, he beat 10 hall of famers, many of them multiple times. Any one who picked Leonard- I hope you get in a car accident tonight.
What he said. It's almost embarrassing to ask such a question. let's see, SSR fought 200 fights in an era of 8 weight divisions and SRL fought 40 fights in an era of multi-weight and multi-titles. Who do you think would have the better resume?
The problem with this agrument is the same as when Jeffries is discussed at an ATG heavyweight. SRR had 200 fights, so he was bound to have a few off nights. SRL had 40, do you think if he fought another 160 fights he might have lost a few he shouldn't have? My answer is an emphatic yes. Same as Jeffries he fought 23 fights and he's on some peoples Top 10 heavylist, but he simply didn't have enough fights to make anyone's top 10 list even if he won on those fights, which of course he didn't because he lost to Johnson.
Thank you I have way more respect for those who put it on the line more and risk upsets just to prove a point. i dont like legacies built on fantasy hype and matchups. 80s got so much hype