Floyd Mayweather vs Ray Leonard...

I didnt say he was a nobody. I said he had slow hands and feet

wins over Nunn & Norris are all that seperate Ray Leonard from greatness and silence the critics

and believe me, he has many! until Sugar can whip this exclusive level of young speedsters, he will never gain universal acceptance as a truly great fighter.

I remember at one time Hagler too had that same problem.

the public said "ok, you knocked out Hamsho you knocked out Sibson but what have you done for us LATELY?"

so long as Hagler was fighting, he had to outshine his previous performances, and with a rapidly declining Hagler, there was a lot of doubt he could do it against Hearns especially after the Duran wipeout

he would ne going up against a man younger, and faster and at his peak

and it's only becuz Hagler is extra extra great that he pulled it off the way he did

and Leonard should have done the same against young Norris but as you can ee, we are talking two different species; one who can, Hagler, and the other who needs his hand held by only taking bouts with walking punching bags - Leonard

aint no way Leonard can beat this level of fighter, are you kidding me, FLOYD? Floyd has never lost a fight

and even your talking point that "who has Floyd fought" makes no difference either becuz who had Terry fought before he made swiss cheese of Leonard?

even so, Floyd has done more, he's been in there with better people

It's Ray's ONE division agsint Floyd's FOUR divisions. it's really no comparison

 

well, do u agree or dissagree? it really cant be argued since he had several chances but never took it.

 

Ray was just a runner?


Why don't you go away and do some research on Marvin.

He wanted a rematch and hung around boxing for a year. (his words)

When it didn't materialise he moved to Italy.


Once again, yes, when Ray fought Marvin, he knew full well that Marvin was past his best.

But so was he. He'd only fought once in five years, and it was his first fight at MW.

Why can't you see that?

It wasn't the 81 version of Ray from the Hearns fight, who'd gained weight. It was the 87 version.


Both guys were past their best.


But it was still a great win for Ray.

 

Floyd's had some scares in his career.

If he'd have fought ATG guys in their primes, like Ray did, then that zero might not be there today.

Think about it.

 

Great point Loudon. Imagine if Ray cooly ducked Benitez, Hearns, Duran and Hagler... And stayed safely retired after detached retinas... He too could have a zero like Floyd !!

 

I understand. it was a great win for Berbick too

let's stop playing these games of yours. These games have gone on long enough and I'm too old for games

I laid out 5 facts which u chose to ignore, w/o responding to then have the nerve to tell me to "do my research"

what do you think first hand observations (sparring sessions) are?

quotes from the actual fight?

stripped of two belts doesnt mean anything to you?

Please try to follow my example and let your heart be filled with truth

 

Yeah IMAGINE THAT! Imagine if he ducked Benitez; he'd have no title :rofl

that's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard OMG!

wayne, do us all a favor and get a brain and stop embarassing yourself

 

Just watched a video entitled the Top 5 Dirtiest Fighters Mr Norris is NO 4.!

 

Hey?!?

He is not the only one. Please, when you call someone an an imbecile, always include me in it.

"Tkanhs"...

 

The name you chose is "Foxy 01" and you are throwing around these implications.

Foxy 01.

You and Red Roosters point of view is done. I claim victory for everyone who disagrees with your viewpoints on here because we have been able to rebutt every point the two of you have made at every level, multiple times. The two of you have been reduced to insults. You have been trapped by your own logic and you are so "smart" that you cannot see that every point you stand on has been made mute by your own counterpoints.

I wanted to help you see the light but, as it stands now, I am just happy that you have been exposed to it. You can close you eyes and ears and scream all day at the wall that Mayweather has a better resume that Sugar Ray Leonard but it does not stand. If any one wants proof of its standing they can go back and read the last few pages and judge for themselves.

Now, I am pretty much sure that you two being as predictable as the rising of the Sun will come back with all kinds of "interesting" things to say...but, I would rather every perspective made here by me and most of the posters on this thread do the debating from this point on.

Peace,
J

P.S,

I learned a ton of facts about these two fighters from this debate. Thank you for the inspiration to do research. Makes me a better boxing fan.

 

I wouldnt argue that he was a dirty fighter but top five I really cant say

Ray Leonard was every bit as dirty in his fight with Hagler, hitting him with a groin shot in the 4th, and flagrant hitting after the bell, rd. 7

why dont you mention that?

still, it cant be argued that Leonard was brilliant in his dethroning of Hagler, no matter how shot he was, and Norris was even more brilliant when he dominated Leonard. all props must be given

 

Foxy Just ignore him. He's bitter. when he says that he claims victory it really means just the opposite

 

Difference being Leonard was coming out of a 3 years retirement to fight at a weight he had never contended at against the reigning world champion, a man who is regarded as a top 4 midddleweight of all time.
When he fought Norris he was coming out of 2 years retirement was 34 years old and Norris was 23.
Spot the difference?

How many times was Leonard dsq'd?


NONE

How many times was Norris?

THREE

 

now that's what I call RATIONALIZATION!

Are you saying that Ray becuz of his layoff was so rusty that he could not control where his shots where landing or that the layoff affected his hearing and couldnt hear the bell?

and,,, RAY LEONARD get DISQUALIFIED? surely you jest. Ray Leonard would not so much as have a single point deducted for any fouls that any other fighter would get. Ray Leonard was the pampered son of royalty

a groin shot in the forth and several shots after the belll ending round 7, a round he could not clearly win on his own

I could just see Ray's fans not knowing who had won the round until the late punches then saying "Leonard's round!"

"Yeah man, that was Leonard's round!"

comparing that with Norris, yes I admit he was a dirty fighter as was Hector Camacho, probably dirtier in his early days

but let's face that fact, did Terry need extra tactics such as groin shots or hitting after the bell to wina fight?

no, he was good enough to win without them. His fights were never close like Leonard's. so if you dominate another fighter, as Norris did with Leonard, foul tactics are not necessary. It's just Terry's nature (as with Camacho) to be that way

another instance in which I saw a fighter use foul tactics in a close fight was Jeff Chandler in a rematch with Oscar Muniz. Oscar gve Jeff all he could handle and in the end, probably hastened his departure from boxing. However, Oscarhad many facial cuts above and below his eye, a nasty cut on his nose. Opening the 7th round, Jeff took his glove and pulled apart Oscar's cut over the eye (probably at the request of his corner). When the two men broke, the ref took Oscar over to the Doctor and the bout was stopped

But Terry, being as good as he was, would never have to resort to to that. He just likes fighting dirty