Was SRL ...

I don´t know now from where I have that, but I´m sure, that I read an article from where I knew that. I don´t look at a fighter´s record and say "Ah, 2 SD´s in his hometown, 1 draw = 2 robberies and 1 big robbery...", because sometimes it is inverse (latest example that I spontaneous remember is the Chagaev- Ruiz- fight, Chagaev won with 3 or 4 rounds, and later when the referee annunciated the SD, I was really "perplex", but like I wrote, perhaps I search in the near future something about that, Laguna and Ortiz should have won their fights with Locche, Nicolino was just too passive to win...

 

Rumour has it the product explodes with a dominant dose of sugar as well (as milk)

 

Whitaker never took De La Hoya to school, far from it. And the knockdown was as good as a slip. Action replays between rounds showed that De La Hoya was clearly losing his balance and on his way down before Whitaker's punch inside landed. But it was correctly scored a knockdown as the punch was part of the reason he went down. De La Hoya was up immediately shaking his head in disbelief as he knew he was down a point.

I'd be embarassed to even mention such a knockdown as part of a schooling arguement.

Close fight, no robbery.

 

Agreed. Hearns wasn't coming back with anything, and had been seriously wobbled the round before. Thats the difference between Leonard-Hearns and De La Hoya-Quartey.

After De La Hoya knocked Quartey down at the start of the 12th, he followed up the knockdown with a serious assualt on Quartey against the ropes. Referee Mitch Halpern kept his eye on the action, and looked to be ready to jump in and stop the fight. But he knew Quartey had his senses about him, and was firing back. It was a very wise piece of refereeing, as many others would have been fooled by De La Hoya's volume of punches and halted proceedings. Lets not forget, prior to the assualt on the ropes Quartey was knocked down seconds before. Which would give a referee a stronger case to stop the fight.

Halpern was a great referee, and it showed during the 12th round of De La Hoya-Quartey.

 

you're ignorant. How can a fighter be inconsistent with 13 defenses-successful defenses compared with leonard's 4? Explain that to us please.

 

I think he's referring to the fact that Griffith had a propensity to drop the odd fight to guys like Paret,Rodriguez,and struggle against a Gasper Ortega even though he was clearly a better fighter than all three.

Not to mention his non-title fight losses to Hurricane Carter,Don Fullmer or Manual Gonzalez which basically shows that whilst he was an excellent fighter for whatever reason he wasn't always at his best against fighters he should be favoured to beat.

Hence Luigi saying he was inconsistent.

Pretty obvious I would of thought.

 

Yeah but common sense goes out the pen when the name SRL and Rooster interact.

 

Ross was very, very good in most aspects of the game- and great in quite a few, but he wasn't a big puncher. He could score the occasional knockdown with one well-timed shot, or get an occasional stoppage through accumulation, but he wasn't a hitter, by any stretch of the imagination.

Leonard, on the other hand, could hit hard, when so inclined (witness what he did to Ranzany, Price, Green, et al), plus, his technique, for the most part, was just as good as Ross', both on offense and on defense.

 

That was a horrible score indeed, but i would like to point out that Chagaev seemed more to be the "hometown" fighter than Ruiz. The crowd cheered at Chagaev's punches, not Ruiz'. Maybe that one judge still had a little 'King' in him.

 

I think Tommy had stamina issues. He'd been icing virtually everyone up until that point and Leonard was a good 15-round fighter. Tommy's inexperience (together with Leonard's storming finish) was the main factor.

 

So some nobody fan that sometimes watches boxing from a distance is right while Emmanuel Steward who has made a living for the past several decades actually being involved in the sport and working with several Hall of Famers and World Class fighters is wrong? How can you be this biased and expect anyone to take you seriously in any discussion on Sugar Ray Leonard?

 

No one does. That's why he has multiple identities.

 

If you don't want to have your own opinions then don't have them. Repeat whatever Emmanuel Steward says. Be a mindless drone. I don't care. We all know that you agree with Steward because you like Leonard. You are appealing to an authority figure to back you up because you are a Leonard fan. In the end, you still picked an opinion to agree with. I don't do that. I form my OWN opinion.

 

I just have one identity.

You, on the other hand, appear to have several. Whenever Ray Leonard is criticized, several posters with identical positions quickly show up to defend Leonard. I'm new here, but I doubt others haven't come to the same conclusion.

PM me if you know the inside stuff on this clown. I'm up for gossip.

 

:yep