Bruce Finch Title Shot in 1982 ?

Finch was ranked 6th by The Ring and better than that by the WBC and WBA. Leonard's previous fight was Hearns not that much earlier. They all have filler fights like these, can't fight the best every fight i guess.

But he had strung some wins together and being number 6 in the Ring ratings was respectable.

 

It was just a soft defence. Leonard was coming off the Hearns fight so took an easy one.

 

From 1979 to 1981, Ray Leonard had beaten Wilfred Benitez, Thomas Hearns, Ayoub Kalule and fought Duran twice, along with beating a few contenders in between in 22 months. A softer touch was justified.

 

Or indeed multiple. It's funny tho, SRL's competition is so high a guy one spot off the top 5 (Ring) stands out like dog *****.

 

I maintain that Leonard had the best run of anyone within the shortest amount of time in history, save for perhaps maybe one or two people that some might think of. Within just 22 months he beat Benitez, Hearns, Duran, and moved up to take a belt in a higher class from an undefeated champion. Today we sit around for literally YEARS waiting for the best to fight the best. Floyd vs Pac is a case in point. Leonard gave us regular meetings with ATG's just months apart.

 

It was an amazing run, that's for sure. 4 Superfights as they called them.

 

I guess Leonard wanted an easy payday after the very taxing Hearns fight. I agree, Finch had done nothing to warrant a title shot. After Leonard destroyed him he got a few more paydays as a steppingstone for Donald Curry, Tommy Ayers, and, I believe, one Elio Diaz, then was done.

 

Just about every great champion we can ever think of fought at least one or several undeserving challengers.. Especially either following or before tough fights.

 

Make one realize just what a cnut Floyd is.:good

 

I think my point on Finch's rating of 6 by The Ring is being slightly missed. Below is the top 10 under SRL, as rated by Ring which is a respected rating.

Look at those above Finch. SRL had just beaten top dog Hearns. Number 2 Stafford was booked for after the Finch fight. Number 3 Cuevas had just been beaten by Stafford, which had earned Roger his shot. Number 4 Duran was out for obvious reasons. Number 5 Milt McCory had had about 16 fights and there's no way Kronk were throwing him in with SRL at this stage.

So on deeper inspection Finch was both deserving and a decent defense. That he seems like a weak defense is due to SRL being so strong and a division that dropped off a bit after the 4 or 5. It was a huge gap from Duran to Finch for example.


Thomas Hearns
Roger Stafford
Pipino Cuevas
Roberto Duran
Milton McCrory
Bruce Finch
Randy Shields
Adolfo Viruet
Colin Jones
Bobby Joe Young

 

It was an understandably reasonable defense against a well rated contender and at a time when fighting those ranked above him wasn't practical for the very reasons you gave. It was certainly more justifiable than Norris fighting Luis Santana THREE times along with Pat Lawlor and the rest of that dire lot he faced ( and sometimes even lost to. )

 

Absolutely. On really close inspection the defense is a very solid one. I'm not saying Finch is any great shakes of course but he was legitimately well inside the top 10.