Ray Leonard: Best Fighter of the 80's?

Could have gotten it, too.Unfortunately, he seemed to be more bark than actual bite and turned down the immense opportunity/pleasure of being able to share the same ring with Ray Leonard.

 

Cherry picker because he had the balls to try something Hagler didn't?

It's amazing that Leonard gets so much stick for challenging guys far bigger than him, while Hagler gets no stick for not challenging bigger guys at all.

Leonard only fought one guy smaller than him (whom Hagler also fought), while Hagler's biggest win is against a natural WW/JMW. Leonard fought Kalule (before Hearns incidentally), Hagler and LaLonde while Hagler never faced anyone above MW. And yet Leonard is the one getting stick - for not facing Pryor.

This really is stupid beyond belief.

Can anyone with a straight face say that Leonard didn't take on greater challenges than Hagler did?

 

You misunderstood. I'm just holding Hagler to the same standards people here are holding Leonard.

By any sane standards Hagler had a brilliant career, but according to the standards Leonard are held to he ducked McCallum (and why not effing Benitez while you're at it) as well as Kalambay, and should have stepped up to face a prime Spinks and also a CW title holder, without being "sneaky" enough to face him at a catch-weight. If he, well into his 30's, had insisted on facing the guy at 180 it would be a mark of shame never to forget.:yep

 

I don't think I have really given him stick for not facing Pryor , I have voiced an opion that Pryor would of been better looking on his record than finch or bonds and a harder fight. Also I never mentioned kalule:huh

 

I agree with you on the weight jumping part and the present day view. At the end of the day he fought the best about at his weight even if some of them were moving up in weight.

 

And in Hagler's defense, he was barely over five feet tall and a natural lightweight, in all honesty.It was only out of a desire to beat Monzon's record that he found himself as a middleweight in the first place.

 

Again: it wasn't meant as critique of Hagler, merely to show how absurd standards Leonard are held to here by applying them to Hagler.

I think Hagler had an outstanding reign.

 

You could have voiced a similar opinion on every main fighter of the decade (or ever for that matter), but you choose to voice it on Leonard. Isn't that a funny coincidence with you being a Hagler fan and all.:yep

The thing that separates Leonard from others is not that he took softer fights in between facing greats like Benitez, Duran and Hearns, but rather that he fought guys like those three within a time-span of two years. And incidentally, jumped up to 154 to take on an undefeated title holder for good measure before facing Hearns. Funny how rarely that is mentioned.

The opposition Leonard faced is literally second to none considering the relatively small amount of fights he had, and still he gets stick at every opportunity. It's like a collective mental disease.

 

I suggest you like leonard as much as I like hagler

 

No, I probably don't. He wouldn't make my top 5 favourite fighters, perhaps not my top 10.

I just have this thing against rampant stupidity. Call it a quirk if you will. And the debates on Leonard on here are about as lucid and intelligent as your average debate on evolution in the lounge.

 

I don't think I have knocked him that much, he did do what he could at certain times to gain an advantage for himself and I believe I used the words cherry picker and clever about those situations that not exactly a terrible attack on him

 

I mentioned it in my original post, what about the contenders he fought on his way up the ladder?

 

leonard was not the only fighter I voiced a what if opinion on

 

I think it is. To call a WW who's only had one fight in 5 years calling out a dominant MW champion a "cherrypicker" only because the champion has slipped a bit is quite terrible by any standard. You should call him the only fighter in boxing history to do a thing like that, no matter pulling it off.

Same with a 32-year old Leonard calling out younger LHW beltholder. Yes, it had been more even impressive if not for the catch-weight, and Lalonde definitely wasn't a great fighter by any means, but taking on someone younger who is that much bigger is always a challenge.

And the only thing you have to say about the fact that he faced Benitez, Duranx2, Kalule and Hearns within a time-frame of two years, is that he didn't face Pryor as well.

That's really taking the "half empty" logic to absurd heights.