Ray Leonard - Smoke and Mirrors?

Hagler was also a natural Middleweight fighting a past prime Duran, while Leonard was a Welterweight fighting a prime Duran. In short, Hagler was the biggest of the Big 4, so his wins over Hearns and Duran shouldn't be counted as much as Leonard's. And given the fact that Leonard, the natural WW, beat the natural MW Hagler(I had it pretty clear, others didn't), I'd say in a P4P sense, he clearly reigns supreme over Hagler, though Duran, due to his size and accomplishments at LW likely deserves the top spot among the 4 in a P4P sense.

 

Leonard never dominated Duran, Hagler or Hearns. Some people will debate this no doubt. And rightly so. But if you look at all the fights they had against each other, they seldom dominated each other. Hearns' knockout of Duran was probably the most domintant win. Leonard was competitive against Duran when they fought in Montreal, Hearns was ahead when he was stopped by Leonard, and Duran done well on the scorecards against Hagler. It all depends on someones take on what exactly is being "dominant".

Leonard has a win over a Hearns and a debatable draw in their rematch. But if you edit out the 14th round of the first fight, which secured the win, Leonard never done well against Hearns. He was outboxed at long range over the vast majority of both fights. But the greatness inside Leonard was evident when he stopped Hearns when behind on points.

I've never been a Leonard fan. Certainly not when it comes to continually retiring and coming back; making his wins look better, especially after he retired after the Hagler upset. The two WBC titles won against Lalonde is embarrassing. IMO Leonard isn't a five weight world champion.

That said, I'm not biased towards him.

 

Great article Russell. I've never had much faith in leonard as a fighter. I hold the belief that Leonard is of the smoke and mirrors catagory and even worse, run and live to fight another day.

The way he dodged fighters, especially Hagler sickens me and drops his stock considerably in my view. Other observers are much kinder in thier assessment of him, even bending over backwards to excuse him every time he has a bad performance or doesnt win convincingly enough.

There really no way you can excuse him for ducking rematches. Duran gave him one 6 months after winning. Why did Ray have to wait almost ten years to give Duran one? There's nothing worse than cowardice and ray leonard was just too scared to give Tommy a return match hence the excuse "I wont give Tommy a rematch unless he admits he couldnt continue in his fight with me" This kind of remark was admonished by Farhood himself who is no small fan of leonard's.

Of course I cannot allow myself to give credit where it is not due. There is no reason to. So what if he give Tommy a rematch by 89? The fight was no longer in demand. Hearns was barely marketable following his near disaster with Kinchen. He resembled a man at death's door and quite frankly, what fighter wouldn't be brave enough to face him at that time? Even Ray leonard or should I say, ESPECIALLY Ray Leonard would be happy to fight him.

The truth is Ray Leonard should have been taking on McCallum, Nunn and Jackson instead of beaten up broken down Hearns. If he wants to prove that he and not Hagler was the true fighter of the decade, why shouldnt he prove himself against the hot fighters the way Hagler often did? The fact that he left the title alone without making a defense is acknowledgement to me of his inability to defend it.

I was fascinated by the prospect of watching ray Leonard and see if he could successfully compete with the younger, hungrier, quicker fighters. My suspicions were that Ray had been timing the decline of the other fighters, waiting for major signs of deterioration.

Would he be as successful against Norris as he was against ancient legends or would he become embarrassed by the youngster as I suspected he would?

A Hagler rematch was no longer of import. All that seperated Ray from greatness was a win over a younger faster opponent like Norris, the next generation of elite champions. If he could pull it off, he would finally have my unquestioned loyalty as a fight fan but if he failed then my suspicions would be confirmed. My thoughts were that Ray had better look to his laurels because this would become a route.

What I suspected in the first Hearns fight rounds 8-12 came up again in the Norris fight-another huge floundering and a dissapointment. Leonard looked like a bust but Norris was brilliant and had the solution for every move Ray could come up with and by the third, Terry put Sugar Ray in a cage. My point had been proven in overwhelming fashion.

 

Finally a man with some integrity!

 

He dodged Hagler? He was willing to fight Hagler. The fight not coming off was as much Hagler's fault as it was Leonard's. The entire problem was both camps agreeing the weight division. Hagler was a natural middleweight and Leonard the same at welterweight.

Leonard fought one fight at 154lbs against Kalule, but was still a natural welterweight. 154lbs was his limit in 1982, ho higher. Hagler argued that he couldn't get down to 154lbs without seriously weakening himself. During late 81, Hagler managed to weigh-in 157lbs against Hamsho, only three pounds above the jr middleweight limit.

The case can be argued that Hagler dodged Leonard. But in reality nobody avoided the fight. Stalemate

But Hagler's biggest admirer, Rooster, can't handle and come to terms with Leonard being victorious against his favourite years later.

 

Because I stated my own personal feelings about Leonard that suits you're baised views on him, doesn't mean I'm here to be anti Leonard. Unlike yourself who doesn't even rank him inside the top 10 "greatest fighters of the last 30 years"

 

hearns should of got a rematch when leanord lost he got a remach so fast and didnt even earn the victory, the only reason hearns even got a rematch was cause leanord thought he was washed up

 

I've always been puzzled as to why/how Leonard was able to negotiate everything in his favor...ring size etc. against Hagler.....I realize Hagler wanted that fight pretty bad, but he really should've had all the leverage. Refusing the rematch was pretty lame as well.

 

Hagler never dodged Ray Leonard. I saw for myself how Ray turned away each time marvin asked for a fight-proof positive he never wanted any part of Hagler at the height of his powers. He wanted old, sickly, slow, hittable, mediocre marvin. Ray knew that prime for prime he could never compete with him.

And Hagler losing to leonard doesnt bother me because I know how and why the fight came about as it did. I also know Ray is not fighter of the decade. No fighter who is that choosey about taking fights could ever be. In addtition, he wasnt active for the entire decade the way Roy Jones was in his or Monzon was in his or Duran.

WIth Roy there is no doubt he is hands down fighter of the 90's. Can you say that about Ray? he only had four big fights, two of which he lost and two which he won. And when you consider his fight with Norris, it is proof he cant really fight and never would have done well with the likes of Nunn, Jackson, Hagler, McCallum. That's why he took the fight with Hagler so late and took fights with Hearns and Duran instead of McCallum and Nunn.

Greats must be willing to take chances with their careers and not be so risk averse.

 

Now, if we're being consistent, then the argument that the first of the Leonard-Duran fights was the "most important" should also apply to the first of the Leonard-Hearns fights.

 

Yeah but outside of the fab 4, hagler has wins over vito, bennie, sibson, minter and hamsho. They are better than the other guys that leonard fought, except for benitez.

 

Wow what a pathetic thread and for the most part some pathetic responses. Amazing how much hate Leonard gets for WINNING. Jealousy.