What was the reaction to Leonard fighting Donny Lalonde?

Tommys two light heavyweight title wins look ever more impressive over time. Hill made 20 odd defences...Andries was no pushover 3 time champ....Lalonde was a 1 armed fighter...Ray really struggled it was touch and go for a couple of rounds..in the end the movie ended with the hero overcoming adversity ended it in his flashy style...but the 2 title thing was a farce as was Hearns WBO belt...although on paper Hearns-Kinchen was the strongest matchup in SM history at that point.

 

The WBC existed. (LOL)

Regarding Hearns, I'm not complaining that there was a super middleweight division for him to pick up a title.

I'm complaining there were no belts for him at super middleweight to win, so he and Kronk propped up a couple guys who were thinking about starting a new org and helped them do it so Hearns could win in a new belt.

Say what you want about Leonard, he never helped invent a new sanctioning body that ... prior to Obel cancelling on Hearns ... had no champs and no ratings in any division ... so he could pick up another belt.

 

On paper, Hearns had been KOed in three rounds in his previous fight. And Kinchen was floored and lost to a journeyman at that weight the year prior.

The strongest matchup to date was the superstar who won the world middleweight title in his previous fight over Hagler facing off against the reigning WBC light heavyweight champion.

Kinchen never won anything. And Hearns was coming off a KO loss. And the WBO didn't exist.

But somehow, that adds up to the best matchup and the most legit title?

There's a lot of the rewriting of history going on here.

 

The Robinson fights you mentioned were signed over-the-weight non-title bouts. In the Holly Mims write-up, it even mentions he was drinking before the weigh-in specifically so he would come in over the weight.

In the past, non-title fights for a champ were over-the-weight fights. That was the case when Leonard fought Lalonde in 1988.

And if a heavyweight champ wanted to fight a non-title fight, it had to be an exhibition, since there's no weight limit at heavyweight.

It was pretty simple to follow.

But after the Tommy Morrison-Tim Tomaschek WBO fight in the 90s, the wheels came off and I lost track. Who knows what the rules are now.

 

He was the least of all the champions. A good right hand, but not much else. limited. Eddie Davis and Stewart, after Stewart lost to Hill and was on the way down and Davis and both losing to Marvin Johnson.

Hearns was looking for a fight after Barkley could not have a rematch due to eye surgery, so he moved up and he wanted a big fight.

There is no way you can make what Ray did legitimate. He did not deserve either title he won.

 

He wanted the belt? So what.. He was not worthy of fighting for it and neither was Ray. Bash Ray? I rank him one of the top 10 if not 5 fighters ever. But in that fight he did not deserve either belt.

 

Most people assumed Tommy made a mistake and got careless. He was still the first 4 time champion at that time and that was big in boxing, and people thought he would beat Barkley in the rematch.. Ray had not fought in a year. He picked Hagler and it was a great win on paper, but he outsmarted Marvin and won the fight. He was a bit overrated because of that win in fights after that-s his later stugggles demonstrated. He really studied Hagler and had a great style for him. Good thing he was hurt by Quincy Taylor as he says so he boxed.

No matter what, the fight with Hearns and Kinchen is what happens in boxing all the time, and what Ray did is not common.. Fighters fight for the vacant titles at times.. Regardless of when they were created. Fighting for two titles on one night at different weights? Ridiculous. Not fair.

 

Two titles in one night is not possible really. It should not be-ever. No exception. And catchweights should not be legal in a fight for a title. It is cheating and being bigger than boxing. So if Ray would have told Tyson at the time to weigh in at 168, he could have won the supermiddleweight, light heavyweight, cruiserweight and heavyweight titles if he beat a weakened 168 pound Tyson? And that would be legit? Same thing really on a smaller scale.

 

Just rewatched Leonard-Lalonde. What a scrap.

 

Ray didn't tell Lalonde to do anything.

The Super Middleweight limit is 168. Donny Lalonde wanted to win the Super Middleweight title. So he made the weight. You can't come in overweight and win a title.

Mike Tyson didn't want to win the super middleweight title in 1988 and made no effort to do so. So your example is ridiculous. So was your 175-pounder challenging a 135-pounder example yesterday.

No light heavyweight champs want to win the Lightweight belt. But a Light Heavyweight champ wanted to win a super middleweight belt, and all he had to do was lose four pounds off his last fight. Dropping four or five pounds is not that "insane" of a move.

If you think requiring boxers to actually make weight is 'cheating,' that's up to you to deal with.

Everything I said yesterday is correct. I'm kind of argued out on this.

In answer to the question posed in the first post, at the time, people appreciated Leonard's win.

Nobody knew what the WBO was when Hearns fought for that belt a couple days earlier. I have video news reports from that week. Most just said Hearns won the North American title. They'd heard of that. And most thought Hearns looked awful.

I followed boxing back then, and I had no idea Hearns was even fighting that week, until I saw Charlie Steiner's highlights of Hearns getting knocked around during the Leonard-Lalonde prefight on ESPN.

Hearns-Kinchen wasn't a widely seen or promoted.

 

Now you just sound crazy.

I'm not arguing with crazy today.

 

Ive liked most your posts on this thread and we arent disagreeing now.

I was merely pointing out when Hearns-Kinchen took place it was at that point on paper the strongest title match up in 168lbs history..which it was .......srl-lalonde which i agree was even stronger took place days after Hearns-Kitchen.Therefore my point is valid...unless in your household you annually renember the vinnie curto-chong pal park series

The WBO may not have existed before but it still exists now unlike the contrived charade of a fighter winning 2 divisional world titles...1 for a vacant title the other title against a guy not even rated in the top 5 of his division like lalonde (williams,hill,Andries ,czyz and Moorerbeing the top 5).....that said in bulk i agree with 95% of what youve argued here and argued magnificently thoroughly enjoyed all your posts.

 

Crazy when someone does not agree with you? That is logical. Ray did not deserve either of those titles. That was a joke of a fight and not legit as for the titles. The fight was good. Donny couldn't miss with his right and Ray showed rust and slippage. Hearns vs. Kinchen was and Kinchen was the NABF champion at the time. He fought at 168.. Everyone thought because Hearns struggled in his fight with Kinchen and Ray would bull through Tommy. Tommy in 1989 had more experience than Ray, like it or not. He fought the whole decade in tough fights when Ray was commentating with Merchant.

 

You know what I mean. The Leonard/Lalonde fight should not have been a championship fight because Lalonde was not at his best and Ray set him up to lose and to win those two titles in one night. It was not fair and it made Ray look bigger than boxing. You cannot win two titles in one night. You have to pick one and not have a weight clause. And that was a catchweight. 168..

You did not follow boxing too well if you don't remember that. I remember on October 18, 1988, watching ESPN and they showed a clip of Tommy boxing Barkley in round 3 of the fight with the words which were close to "not good news for Hearns on his 30th birthday. His title fight is called off because of Obelmejias rib injury" Something like that. If someone has the ESPN news for that night, it is there. And that was a national sports channel.

No, I seem to recall the NABF title being at stake and the WBO news coming out soon after. I read absolutely how the newly formed WBO would be the title which Hearns and James Kinchen will fight for on Nov. 4, 1988. Absolutely.

Again, like I stated. If all the belts were vacant from 168 to heavyweight. Ray could have fought for all of them and won 4 titles in one night. It is the same thing and not possible. How does that make me crazy to state that. And saying Ray was one of the best ever, yet saying he does not deserve those titles is crazy? No that is how I feel.

 

After I heard that Ray and Donny had signed up for this one, I felt that The Sugarman,in spite of being the better fighter,would suffer due to his inaction over the previous year and a half. I clearly forgot that Leonard's longer spell of inactivity preceeding the Marvin Hagler bout did n't exactly do him any harm !!

Exellent finishing by Ray.