Ray Leonard: Best Fighter of the 80's?

Norris was too good a fighter, always would be. His speed was just sick

Sugar could have better prepared for that fight if only he had stepped up his level of comp. too many repeats against overweight, over the hill fighters. the only fresh faces were that of Lalonde & Howard


one does not prepare for a Terry Norris by fighting pudgy uninspired 38 yr olds. Sugar needed a slick, quick Micheal Nunn, one of the most athletic, agile & dangerous fighters at the time (S. Kalambay will attest to this). a tall, 6-2 southpaw who at the time had been showing moves never before seen.

IMO, this was the kind of fight Sugar needed. not only to prove his worth, but also to adjust to the new speed levels that were until then only evident in Hector Camacho

does this mean Sugar would have fared better against the likes of Norris? probably not. In fact, he probably would have lost to Nunn, and even been knocked out by that big left hand

However, he would have won my admiration by stepping up his game instead of subjecting the public to more meaningless matches on top of his already thin resume

 

"The MW crown was only 2nd the the HW crown"

- It sure as hell wasn't when Hagler was the champion.


A poor era of middleweights that was stated as being so at the time, and history still hasn't shown it to be anything more than that.Fortunately for Hagler, he left the game just as there was some serious, genuine talent coming through at the division.



And it doesn't matter what Hopkins reasons for moving up were, because he still did it.He could have cried robbery, packed his bags and ****ed off to Italy to make a series of horrible movies, but he didn't.

 

yes, I put Leonard at top.... 2-1 over Duran, 1-0 over Benitez, 1-1 with Hearns (according to Leonard), 1-0 over Hagler after a 5 year rest.
I watched the Leonard - Hagler fight a few times. to me it looked like a walk in the park for Leonard, not sure why all of the controversy.
Beating Lalonde to become the first 4 and 5 division winner seemed more of a publicity stunt than a historic accomplishment to me. I think it was more important in historical perspective beating members of the fab four.

 

maybe the talent just stood out more becuz the lack of just one dominanant force

During Hagler's reign pre Duran, Hearns, Hagler was on the cover of every boxing mag out there, even more so than Holmes and widely acknowledged as p4p #1 following the Sibson fight in 1983

hence your statement is invalid, perhaps due to resentment & bitterness

Hopkins never achieved the same lofty status b/c he couldnt beat Jones, a more advanced fighter but who began his pro career at same time

Bernard did himself a favor by moving up to find easier targets

 

You've made your fair share of purposefully outlandish statements in the past, but the suggestion that Hagler's era of stiffs and jokers were superior to the crop that emerged towards the end of the decade probably tops the lot of them.


Your trolling has become far too contrived and predictable at this point, littleredrooster.Watching you still attempting to ply your craft is as painful as watching Terry Norris stumble and bumble his way around the ring against Laurent Boudouani (Terry was only 31, but he had yet to meet an opponent of Boudouani's intelligence and timing).

 

how would you know any of them were stiffs? I didnt exactly see Leonard proclaim them stiffs on HBO while commenting from ringside. you think that had something to do with sidelining his career? why not just tell him "hey buddy you could use a tough fight. youve been challenging too many stiffs so why not try ME on for size?"

I didnt see any of that coming from Leonard

also, I clearly remember Hearns twice backing out claiming different reasons each time

so which of those two fighters claimed Marvin was fighting stiffs?

your claim that the quality of division SUDDENLY improved dramatically as Hagler retired atsch:rofl

SOME PEOPLE!

run it around the block a couple of times and see if you dont find anything screwy with it

and he calls ME the crazy one

your problem stems from the inability to accept facts that Norris easily humbled Leonard in a head to head matchup, in a fight that mattered, and that, it WASNT close, and that Leonard was shown to be supremely overrated becuz of it! :yep

if u ask me, Leonard shouldve stayed in bed. mebbe had he taken more quality fights with fighters like Nunn instead of stumble bums & tired repeats (Hearns, Duran) ,, sloppy leftovers (Hagler), he wouldve been better prepared for the SPEED personified that was Terry Norris

and we all know that speed was to Leonard what kryptonite was to Superman. Neither had any defense against it

its too bad Leonard didnt have what it took to successfully take on a speedster like Norris. had he done it you could all say he took on all comers and had what it took to deal with all styles

but he couldnt. He couldnt handle Norris and he couldnt face a prime Hagler

instead all we got were excuses followed by a piece of crap packaged as a superfight

as for Hopkins, he was okay but never reached elite status. never feared, his talents just somewhat above the competition in his division (probably the worst since the dawn of man)

I dont think I'm going to get too many arguments with that

 

Norris, I mean Rooster. You must rank JJ as THE all time great at jr. middle based on what he did to your idol the indomitable Terry Norris ? Keith Mullings right there too , just wondering ?

 

Hagler just made the division look weak , you can say the same for most domiate champs, they do not fight that many other champs because they do not even let them get a belt, so they go from champs to contenders.

Plus there was no SMW division at the time and Hagler cleaned house.

 

You should be able to see how good a fighter is even if he can't win a title because of an even greater and dominant champ in the way.Shouldn't matter that he's just a contender.

I can see that Hamsho and Sibson were superior to Caveman Lee by watching them even in efforts where they all get the **** beat out of them, for instance.Watch more of them in winning efforts and it becomes even more apparent.

 

becuz Green, Ranzany & Finch were stiffs

Hagler was shot by then & great in rep only

Kalule, another slow, stiff European (like Green)

all of the above were stiff, & slow. no speed

unlike Norris - speed, skill, brains, & guts

Benitez - not much speed, not much power, not much fire. just a lot of cutes

all you're left with is Duran, an ex lightweight. 29 yrs old at that

like I said, thin

 

Jackson on account of his win over Norris on his way up, has to rank near the top

Ray leonard couldnt do the same becuz he is no Julian Jackson. he was just a runner

I been telling people that. he doesnt know how to take the fight to a guy like Norris. Look at the trouble he had with Bonds. Norris had the style to turn Sugar from sweet to sour which is why you dont see any Micheal nunn's on his thin resume