Is Sugar Ray Leonard overrated?

You completely misinterpreted what I wrote. I said "after Kalule" with no mention of what happened chronologically in his career. "After" is used as in "the next best win." That's where his resume drops off.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The only missing piece missing from his resume when he retired in '82 was Hagler, and he got that later.

He did most of what he needed to between '79 and '82

Last night I was reading an old article in 'Big book of Boxing' where Jeff Ryan fantasizes about "What would have happened if Sugar Ray Leonard hadn't retired."

It was written in early '84. It includes a few defenses, a win over Pryor, a third fight with Duran (for Duran's WBA Junior Middleweight Title) and culmunates with decisioning Hagler (easier than what happened in reality).

Beating Hagler was the legacy sealer and he did it.

He also got the rubber match win over Duran.

Who cares if Jones got better wins over the course of his career compared to Ray beating Kalule.

It is what Leonard did over the course of his career compared to what Jones did over the course of his career that matters.

Over the course of his career, Leonard pretty much beat the guys guys he needed to beat.

Conversely, Jones didn't even beat, or even fight many guys he should have fought to further enhance his legacy - guys like Darius, M., McClellan, etc.

 

See my post above. I wasn't talking about anything chronologically.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Leonard beating Hearns was a superfight of two guys who held titles.

They both had far superior resumes at the time they fought than either Jones or Hopkins had when they fought in '93 - the were both fighting for their first World title.

 

I question whether you were around when Hagler fought Leonard.

Nobody had Hearns above Hagler before Hagler/Leonard.

Also, the significance of Leonard/Hearns I far outweighs the significance of Jones/Hopkins I because of the timing.

It was built into a superfight because it was the definition of a superfight - two guys at the same weight who have cleaned out everyone else in the division, fighting to settle who is number 1.

Jones and Hopkins were just establishing themselves as potential world titlists.

At the end of '86 Hagler was Number 1 at Middleweight

If at the end of '87, Hearns was number 1 at MW and Hagler was #2 it was because Hearns had won a portion of the vacant Middleweight title, Sugar Ray had vacated his titles, and Hagler not yet announced his retirement.

 

He was inactive.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

You can also add the S / Welter title he won from Kalule to that list.

This is what you ACTUALLY wrote, and you specifically named the following fighters.

I simply told you with the time span Jones spent at Middle, and S / Middle ( 3 yrs 1 month ) the logistics, and negotiations to fight either of the Brits, or the Irish Collins would have made it non viable. Again, so perhaps YOU can grasp it this time, he and McClellan agreed not to fight each other due to their friendship, so that leaves Nunn, Rochi, and Dariusz. The same applies to the Pole fighting out of Germany, which he seemed as equally reluctant to leave as Jones was the US. So you can write that one off, leaving you with Nunn and Rochi.

Once again Leonard used his retired status much like Mayweather, to cherry pick. He could have made fights with the guys he avoided much easier than Jones could have with Benn, Eubank, Collins or Dariusz, and that's for sure.

I can't see why you make such a big deal out of Leonard beating Duran to justify your opinion of his legacy. He had already lost to the guy for fuks sake.

 

Do I have too say it again? It was a much better timed fight against guys who weren't clearly better.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

It would appear you are on a par with your idiot Aussie mate at back tracking on the stuff you write, so let me remind you.

A SPLIT DECISION loss is NOT " clearly beaten "

Plus, NO ONE with a brain would consider Duran losing to ANY Welterweight a disgrace, when you consider both his size and the weights he fought at lower than 147.

Unlike you fan boys with your excuses for your heroes Duran doesn't need any excuses for his defeats. Everything accomplished above 135 was a bonus.

P.S. And all achieved without the need of a single catch weight fight. :rofl:rofl:rofl

 

I believe that rating a guy's overall career depends as much or more on who he beat and when than skill level displayed in a given fight.

Anyway, it's very subjectve to claim Jones and Hopkins showed more skill when they fought than Leonard and Hearns showed in their first fight.

 

I didn't claim that they showed more skill. These fights are both A1 in terms of skill though. Take your pick.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

He beat Tarver already. Leonard never beat Norris. Stop it.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

And it's absolute **** outside of those fights.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Leonard not facing the guys that were top of the WW division (Curry and Starling) when he himself was inactive can't possibly be held against him. Jones not facing several of the top guys in his division when he was active is another thing completely.

It's a bit the same with Leonard not facing McCallum, Kalambay etc. Leonard wasn't active at MW more than one fight and no one is claiming he was a great MW. Only that he has one great win at MW.

Jones legacy, on the other hand, rests to a large part on his time as a LHW champ and during that time he didn't face two of the top guys in the same division.

But as I said, I don't hold this very much against Jones. While his resume would of course have been even stronger with those names on it, the simple fact is that you can't face everyone. And Jones easily dealt with many contenders and several titlist as it was.

But Leonard not facing Starling and Curry carry even less weight with me (none), since he wasn't active when they were truly relevant.

Kalambay, McCallum etc would be highly relevant if Leonard had any claim at being a MW champ after Hagler and if that played a part in how people rank him. But he didn't and they don't.

I really can't be clearer than that. So I won't try.

His loss plays a part in how I rate Leonard as does his win five months later. As simple as that really. I don't make more excuses for one of the fights than a do for the other. They both have a win and a loss to each other during a short timespan. That's the long and short of it. (But I'm sure you have tons of reason the first fight should count much more than the second, at the same time that you label those who argue the opposite as pathetic fanboys. )

Now I won't waste anymore time on this, since it hasn't really gone anywhere from the start and just seems to be an attempt from you to try and wrestle some pride back after being slapped around by me and JohnThomas in another thread. So bye, bye.

 

Uh...not really. Here's a list of Top 10 contenders that Leonard beat on the way up:

* Pete Ranzany
* Randy Shields
* Johnny Gant
* Armando Muniz
* Tony Chiaverini (154lbs)
* Davey Boy Green
* Andy Price
* Adolfo Viruet
* Willie "Fireball" Rodriguez (future Top 10 @ 140lbs), 2nd pro fight.

* Marcos Geraldo gave Hagler a tough fight, Fernand Marcotte was a middleweight, and Floyd Mayweather operated near the fringes of contention for a while.

That's a good collection of guys to face in the space of 25 fights.