Describe Sugar Ray Leonard in one word

Highly debateable.

I personally have Duran ONE PLACE above Leonard on my list & the only reasons for that were Ray`s unnecessary retirements & the amount of fights both men had, nothing to do with ability.

 

Well said

 

2-1 up?, Duran won the fight that mattered.

 

You need to settle with the hate towards Leonard from people. Take it like a man.

 

Duran, historically and physically speaking, had no business ever beating a great WW in Leonard. But he did -in the fight that mattered the most. Duran was a LW. Research that and tell me the last time that a natural LW champion defeated a natural WW champion.

 

Sure, ability is one measure. Leonard was a great fighter whom I rank very high as a WW. However, while I respect most opinions, I really just can't bring myself to respect the opinion that there is anything highly debatable about Duran's greatness as a fighter overshadowing Leonard's.

 

Thats because Duran is a fighters fighter, while Leonard is not.

 

A fighter's fighter does not ***** and moan with excuses every time they have a bad night.

 

Just telling it like it is, Robbi. :good

 

Wow. The rematch held no significance whatsoever.

 

I'm happy such a knowledgeable poster like you, Stonehands, would feel the need to tell me **** I already know. I give Duran all the credit in the world for moving up to 147lbs and beating arguably the second best Welterweight of all time. I'm not trying to downplay the accomplishments of a great fighter like Duran, but he does get a lot of free passes for stuff. Robbi calls me out saying "I need to take it like a man". Perhaps I'd rather try and even stuff out instead.

Sure, The Brawl in Montreal was indeed the most significant of the three fights, but the rematch was very important also. People like to either completely disregard the fact Duran quit after being out boxed for long periods, or they just regurgitate the same excuses. "He was out partying". Yeah, okay. :verysad It wasn't as if Duran had faded over night, he just got outboxed, just like he did when he fought another cutie in Benitez.

Duran actually gets more credit for going the distance with Hagler, than Leonard did for beating the same man, albeit a slightly faded version, after a three year lay off after suffering a detached retina.

Can someone explain to me the logic in all of this?

 

Don't pay it no mind, he's probably one of those Duran fans who thinks Duran would beat Tommy Hearns in a pound for pound sense.

 

I'll no doubt get shouted down by the Classic members for even daring to oppose the greatness of Roberto Duran, but I don't care too much. I'm not saying anything outlandish, only that Leonard did indeed avenge his defeat, and accomplished enough, I think, in his career to avoid being called a con.

Comments like that aren't fair, especially when we're discussing the best fighter of the 1980s.

 

False

 

This is the kind of **** I'm talking about.

Leonard may have manipulated his status on occasions, and I can understand why that would rile up a few people, but going as far to call him a con and a fake? When it came down to it, he fought the best fighters that were available and he won more often than not.