What if Ray Leonard upon winning the middleweight title from Hagler, decided to defend it? This would have been the most admirable course of action for him. Any fighter with real integrity would have taken. I do not believe in all this jumping in between weight classes every time you spot a tomato can champion. I think a fair question to ask is how far could he have gone? The performance against Hagler was his most impressive so there's no reason he could not have competed at this weight no matter what kind of condition Hagler was at at the time. I see his first logical challenge as Kalmabay whose style reminds me very much of leonard's. However, before taking any of the top contenders I can see Ray making a less risky defense against say, the recently pummelled James Kinchen which he definitely should win. After that the mandatory with Kalambay. Realistically this is a 50/50 fight. Kalambay can box but so can Ray leonard. Kalambay can't hurt leonard so this fight goes the distance. The question this comes down to is who is the better middleweight? If getting by Kalambay successfully, I see one more big payday for leonard against the up and coming Micheal Nunn in 1988's big fight of the year. Sorry but there is no way Sugar Ray makes it out of this one. I remember the head to head article in which two selected Nunn the winnder, the other two Ray Leonard. But in reality this is a mismatch. Micheal Nunn is his nightmare come true, a young fighter with Terry Norris caliber speed that probably could have taken both Leonard and Lalonde on the same night. Nunn could easily catch him with that left uppercut and it took a demanding pressure fighter just to barely slow him, which ray Leonard was not. He'd have to rely on speed and skill over an opponent with inferior reflexes and have to stay away but even so, you saw what he did to the equally slick Kalambay. Once you hurt Ray Leonard you own him and Mike would get that respect early (ala Hector Camacho and Terry Norris) I think Mike can blow him out early (leonard not the most durable middleweight out there) and ends his short title reign.
Leonard was not the same fighter and would not have taken the young up and coming guys on. He's have done the same as Marvin and fought once or twice a year at most against older big name fighters. The natural fight was a rematch with Hagler.
The likes of Nunn or Kalambay could well have been a fly in the ointment for Leonard. Hagler too for that matter. Frankly, like you say I think Nunn would be all wrong for Leonard at that point of his career.
I don't think that it was his initial intention to continue fighting upon beating Hagler. He got the win, and one by one, other tempting opportunities came about. I highly doubt that when he returned to the ring in 1987, that he imagined he'd be facing Roberto Duran or Tommy Hearns again.
he's the guy in my picure, a cult hero from the peak Hagler days, the days when Leonard most feared to come out and fight.
Oh sure, taking three years off only to come out of retirement, fighting for the first time ever at 160 lbs and defeats one of the most feared middleweights of all time. Then takes 18 months off, and faces a prime lightheavyweight titlist, by stopping him in the 9th round, after making a bloddy mess out of him.. Next, he faces one of his archrivals 6 months later, who is also an all time great, and has since fought more actively and captured a number of titles in multiple classes. Leonard arguably loses, but only after going 12 rounds and having his fair share of moments. Later that year, he outboxes a man who once defeated him, and was coming off of a career win over a reigning middleweight titlist in his prime......... Yeah Leonard really did himself a lot of good by hiding in the form of fighting in spurts against elite opposition rather than keeping active against mediocrities............
