Sugar Ray Leonard: best P4P since Robinson, best welterweight ever, or neither??

Terry Norris has Sugar Ray Leonard's name on his resume, but most of us widely consider that version of Ray to be shot and therefore makes the victory a lot less impressive.

Sugar Ray Leonard was past his best when he defeated Marvin Hagler. I don't think there was any evidence suggest to Marvin was a shot fighter, and he was a natural middleweight whereas Ray had been campaigning at welterweight. In addition, Leonard was coming off a lay off.

 

It seems to me that the reason you discredit Sugar Ray's victory is because you considered that version of Marvin Hagler to be shot. If that's the case, I disagree with you.

 

...I think someone should write a letter to Bedlam on behalf of Rooster and request that they suspend computer privileges.

 

Look here, I saw Marvin in training I told you this but you skipped right over it. What's the matter did you forget? The fact that Marvin couldnt hit 3 sparring partners is nothing to sneeze at! When I saw it I felt that Marvin didnt belong in the ring and that his days as champion were numbered. Believe me I know shot when I see it even if the rest of you, especially you followers of leonard dont. Keep in mind that I didnt know how much longer he planned to be around or what kind of condition Leonard was in.

 

Alright then tell me who said leonard was shot going into the Norris fight. Give me his name and I'll check it out to see if it's true. If what you are saying is true then why was Ray the favorite going in? You honestly don't expect me to believe he was shot just because you say so.

I saw the end his last fight where Tim Ryan told him "an absolutely masterful performance" and on the cover of KO magazine "Can Sugar Ray actually lose?"
not to mention inside an article being congradulated by Farhood who said "Sugar Ray fought the perfect fight"

Where is your evidence???

When you're on your toes for 12 rounds straight, your legs show no signs of aging, you show no signs of wear or slowing, you don't lose a round, then you are not shot!

This content is protected

said Ray was shot at the conclusion of the last Duran fight? In fact he played with Duran, mocked him, taunted him, humiliated him, daring him to strike.

Unlike your assessment of the Hagler-Leonard fight, I found that no one was going against Ray to win so how is it that Leonard becomes shot after losing??

Now it's your turn. So you don't think there's any evidence Hagler was shot. Go to the 6th round of the fight and listen to the comments the last 20 seconds of the round: Tim Ryan "Sugar Ray said Hagler had lost a lot of speed and said he was counting on the slowness of Hagler"

I know you've heard it before but like the liar you are you still tell me "I don't think there was any evidence to suggest Marvin was a shot fighter"

Not only that but Ray was seen on television by yours truly days before the fight walking up to juan Roldan then telling him "thanks for softening him up for me buddy"

Need I say more?

Of course you are oblivious to this fact and if you're a leonard fan like yourself you'd want to be.

What else now? That's right, Hagler lost two of his belts entering the ring as WBC middleweight champ, not undisputed champion as he'd been the previous 6 years. And why should he if he' not planning to continue fighting. Why fight the organizations who've taken your belts as he'd been known for doing when you're about to retire?

Like I said Ray could have taken this fight before but he was smart and didnt because he knew when it came to Hagler, Leonard would always be second best. Hagler and now Hearns were the two best fighters when they met and leonard wouldn't make ANY noise about coming out of retirement.

 

I like your factors, but your telling me a win is better than a loss?. The Hagler who Leonard fought wasn't a million miles away from the one of three years earlier. He certainly slowed down and was more hittable. I could also argue the case that Duran had momentum going into his fight with Hagler, something Leonard never had at all. His previous fight was three years earlier and his showing against Howard was average. Leonard had one fight in five years, was dropped by a mediocre jr middleweight, factors which wouldn't give any fighters confidence going into a superfight. Both Duran and Leonard had never fought at middleweight prior to facing Hagler. Evens. Leonard being naturally bigger probably means he has a slight advantage. We can go round in circles about this, but Leonard won, Duran never. And most observers had Duran winning 5-6 rounds against Hagler over 15. Who's to say Leonard would not have beaten Hagler over 15? Thats just speculation. Considering Hagler's being 'shot' to some in hindsight he might have been blowing as much as Leonard down the stretch of a 15 rounder. And Leonard managed to get a second wind on a couple of ocassions, thus it's hard to argue he would have gained another.


End of the day, Leonard won and Duran never. The biggest factor for me is that Duran wasn't rusty, Leonard was going in. Yes, he did keep in shape for about a year before the first bell rang against Hagler, but no their is no substitute for the real thing.

 

Robbi. I disagree all over the place.

 

No problems. I liked your reply. Short and sweet. Sometimes an in-depth reply looks good on paper, but a short one can be as equally effective.

I'm sure you don't see my views as outright ridiculous even though you disagree, just like yours aint either.


Both great efforts by Leonard and Duran. That we can agree on.

 

Well, I don't want to bore the forum by repeating myself. I think that you know why I hold that Duran's surprisingly competitive loss outshined Leonard's controversial win.

I respect your positions always, but your post falls short in my opinion for many reasons. Among them these:

1. A win isn't per se better than a loss. If Butterbean fought Holmes for only 4 rounds and won, that is less impressive than Holmes' gallant loss to Spinks in the rematch. Given the circumstances of the two Hagler fights, I don't see how anyone cannot have serious pause when making comparisons about which performance was more courageous or impressive. Intelligent minds may differ, but to just say Duran lost, end of story, tells me that someone smokes too much marijuana.

2. Mike Trainer took a hard line on behalf of Leonard in negotiations with the Petronelli's over the 12 vs. 15 rounds. The Petronelli's believed that if they pushed the issue, the fight would have been off and Leonard would have run around saying "Hey, who's ducking who?"

Leonard collapsed in the ring at the final bell. There is no way he would have went 15. He knew it, his people knew it, and you know it. Hagler regrets that and the three other major, major concessions that he made. And he should. He was right when he said that all that's in his skull is a boxing glove.

Duran didn't give a **** about concessions. He fought a dominant and near-prime undisputed Middleweight Champion of the world and never averted his gaze from that bald head. See, there's a big difference, fight fans.

3. There is nothing "Evens" about your statement that both Duran and Leonard never fought as MWs before Hagler. Leonard had plenty of time to preserve himself, study, and train like a Spartan for his great mission -and he jumped up only 13 pounds in weight (and part of that was natural growth)! A full-grown, fully matured Duran was 135. He was fighting 25 pounds over that. "Evens" my butt!

All together now:
Duran didn't give a **** about a "larger ring" and "pillow gloves" and "3 less rounds" and "Hagler getting old and slowing down" and his "corner yelling scripts" and "riding bicycles" in a boxing ring.

Again!
Duran didn't give a **** about a "larger ring" and "pillow gloves" and "3 less rounds" and "Hagler slowing down" and his "corner yelling scripts" and "riding bicycles" in a boxing ring.

One more time, fight fans!
Duran didn't give a **** about a "larger ring" and "pillow gloves" and "3 less rounds" and "Hagler slowing down" and his "corner yelling scripts" and "riding bicycles" in a boxing ring.


...See what you made me too Robbi? I didn't want to bore the forum by repeating myself and you go and make a liar out of me.

 

^ Cant argue wth that

 

^ uh-oh

 

You can't argue with an OC like Rooster per anything to do with Leonard mate, he's a riot

Might pick out a few points meself when i come back with some food :yep

 

Mr. Chicken isn't going anywhere near this. He skillfully ducks around the facts the way Sugar ducks live opponents. Truthfully, I don't expect him back.

 

I think he just can't be arsed arguing with you on this particular topic. Maybe he and i should do some tag teaming.

 

I like this post a lot upon going back and inspecting.