Was Sugar Ray Leonard overrated ?

Very few fighters in history could have turned around a fight against an opponent like Hearns, who was so superior in height, reach, power and equal in skills. Leonard was the rare type of fighter with both amazing skills and amazing warrior attributes.

 

Just like Floyd today, Leonard was a fighter that always found a way to win. He had Manny's punch, Floyd's speed, and Cotto's jab. Leonard could put you down with a jab. It's safe to say his only losses close to his prime was the rematch with Hearns and the loss to Duran are the only ones considered to have beat a prime Sugar Ray Leonard.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd2UOFou0Uw[/ame]

 

Who's doing the rating? Leonard was a great, if relatively inactive, fighter. Similar to Michael Spinks, he achieved a shitload in a short number of fights.

He was a versatile fighter who could pretty much do it all. Box and move on his toes, box flat-footed in circles, press the issue. He had speed, power, defense, toughness, and terrific finishing skills.

Pryor deserves the majority of the blame for it not happening, rather than Leonard.

It was a good business move though for Pryor to reject that fight, build up his name on network TV in exciting title defenses, and then get a big payday against Arguello.

 

I do not think he is overrated.

He lost in his prime only to Duran (avenged) and Hearns (even if judges saw it as a draw). His fight with Hagler was close, and if someone really likes Hagler he could score it for him.

There were a lot of good fighters in his era, he fought the best of them, winning with everyone he faced. I think Ali would make a better case to be overrated.

 

He didnt ****ing loose to hagler. Hagler lost the fight himself. There would be many rounds where hagler was winning the first minute and he would let leonard outwork him the last half. SRL outlanded him.

 

:thumbsup

 

leonard is the best fighter i've seen in my lifetime. the reason why is because ray was the complete package.

he had great speed, great reflexes, when he had a man hurt he was a brilliant finisher, he had a great chin but most importantly he could adapt to the styles of other fighters and he was brilliant at fighting in adversity. when a fighter faces adversity, thats when you see who the real great fighters are.

 

He is sheer class. He had the ability , the knowledge and the charisma. His resume rivals almost anyone for quality of wins. H2H he is a monster with great chin , speed and power . Maybe the greatest finisher of all time.

 

:rofl

 

i would not say overrated but he was pretty close to it,:think

 

what does that make of pacquiao:think:rofl

 

The 2nd Hearns fight was nowhere near Leonard's 'prime'.

 

It was nowhere near either guy's prime. It was held at a nursing home. Somebody came in and wiped slobber off of Ray's chin and changed Tommy's corner bedpan in the 6th and 9th rounds, respectively.

 

He only had about 40 fights and beat some good/great names. Hearns, Hagler(debatable but that's still a win), Duran, Benitez, to name a few. He got brought up pretty tough too but still had great success on his way up. Not overrated but incredibly talented and deserves all the praise he gets.

 

Hearns was a stylistic nightmare for him yet Leonard still pulled off a win in the first fight(Hearns deserved the second fight). That itself shows you how special Ray Leonard was. Leonard was a ****in warrior and anyone who studies his career like I do knows what the hell I'm talking about especially when he had the fro. He may have been flashy at times but he came to fight and even though he ran from Hagler at times he still stood is ground and traded sometimes. Anyone who says SRL wasn't a warrior doesn't know what they're talking about and I feel that strongly about that.