Who Would Beat A Prime Leonard At Welterweight?

Poor Harry Brown....

 

Leonard was a far smarter fighter as well.

 

KHAN?????

 

I have now seen it all

 

Hard to pick against him. He could more or less do it all

His only weakness: facing slick boxers with fast hands

 

No welter in history was "far better" than SRL.....not even SRR.

 

Couldn't stand Sugar Ray then and like him no better now.

Some toss-ups in the list, maybe, but I would not lay hard cash on any Welter in history to beat him in his heyday.

 

SRR, Mayweather

 

Of course, silly statement to put out there, is it they are not conversed on SRL achievement's or just dont like him ?
On point buddy, there are very few if any fighters that I will knowling put down or cuss, because " I don't like em " always seems very immature and childless to do so. stay safe buddy.

 

Robinson=far better
but is not a "put down ' or "cuss '
Robinson far better than maybe all welter weight champion
look at records. never lost any fight to any fighter at Welterweight class & while fight so many contender & former champ & champion of 'future". so many.

 

Ray Robinson, and only Ray Robinson, beats the mature, mentally confident version of Leonard after Montreal.
The fighters Leonard beat in their primes , Hearns and Benitez, defeat the vast majority of welterweights in history.
The Duran Leonard fought in Montreal ko's most welterweights in history, some shockingly easy.
Yet Leonard won the last five rounds of that fight. It Set up what happened in New Orleans in Duran's mind. After all. If you know you fought the absolute best fight possible. Yet your opponent is still coming at you in the end, it has to set some self doubt, even sub consciously. Thus the results of New Orleans.
Only a prime ready to fight Ray Robinson beat prime Leonard after Montreal.
But if we look at both fighters on film , it would be a MAJOR challenge for the 1st "Sugar". One I wouldn't bet the house he wins.......

 

I agree. I get that Leonard is a bit smarmy and not to many's taste. I much prefer Hagler or Hearns.

But the level of bias against him all the time is ridiculous. His title fights and run to the title gives him one of the best resumes in welter history. Then there's the eye test. He absolutely had it all. Stamina, chin, heart, power, speed, mentality, skills, array of punches, ring generalship, strength. He was at least B+ in all of them.

Only the very elite give him an argument. And very few of them run the gauntlet of talent Ray ran, while gaining experience, without picking up a loss. It's good to see a fair post on the man. I'm staggered that, on a board with so much knowledge, the perception of the man as a fighter is so skewed.

 

Thank you for seeing the talent of the fighter. And Not allowing a personal dislike of the fighters behavior outside the ring blind you to the fighter inside the ring.
Ray Leonard was the 2ND greatest " Sugar Ray " in history. Meaning he belongs as the 2nd greatest welterweight in history.
Where the original "Sugar Ray" wins the debate is longevity and consistency only.
But if we judge on who he beat, Ray Leonard beat even better fighters than Ray Robinson.