Why did Sugar Ray Leonard have so few fights?

I don't think it is that terrible. One loss in his prime to Duran and then two losses in his final two fights when wellllll past his best, even then Norris and Camacho are quality opponants.

Stack that against wins over Hearns, Hagler, Duran, Benitez. Also remember he retired between 82-84 due to eye injury, had a brief comeback bout and then retired again until 1987 before his comeback to fight Hagler. Those are a few years he could have had another 5-8 fights.

He then retired again in 1991 after losing to Norris and it was not until 1997 he fought Camacho.

So basically quality not quantity but if he had stayed active during those two periods of retirement he probably would have a few more wins (and maybe losses!).

 

i dont think he was built for durability and unlikely he could have a long successful career like Mayweather.

He couldnt handle speed, so was matched with fighters lacking mobility; (Green, Kalule, Lalonde)

and even though Hagler was years past his prime, I am of the majority opinion that Leonard didnt actually deserve the win and have his actual record at 35 - 4 - 1

 

-He was fastracted to the WBC 147 title because of his olympic reputation and willingness to fight tough competition earlly on in his professional career
-He unified.
- He got an eye injury and retired
- His reputation was such that when he came back he could get major fights without tuneups
- He beat Hagler then cherry picked

His record does not look horrible to anyone who can read between the lines

Quality over quantity

For example, Tony Fuligani had a glossy 38-1-1 record before facing Bert Cooper. Did it mean anything really? No. Because he fought mostly stiffs before Cooper knocked him out with one punch.

 

Since the HW division wasn't as hot as it had been the 20 years leading up to his prime, he made a lot more money in those fights than he would have made if he was a little older or a little younger.

That allowed him a level of distraction that wasn't possible for the other three who weren't tapped as the next big thing.

 

Because of his eye injury. Also, he pretty much cleared his competition for the most part, so he didn't really need to.

 

Echoing the quality over quantity points ... I'd add the fact he made significantly more coin than anyone else in the Fab 4, maybe more than any non-HW boxer in recent memory not named Ali, Holmes or Tyson. With that much in the bank - and also having taken top quality opposition, no bums - the need to leave a legacy of a high number of bouts drops quite a bit. With a net worth of $120 million, why risk it?

 

Is there a fighter since Leonard who’d go 36-3-1 against his opposition? Then if there is, what would Leonard’s record be against that fighters opponents?

 

Ultimately , He just didn't have that will to always fight in him like Hearns, Duran, Hagler did.
Played the in and out of retirement game WAY too long

 

100% his eye injury. He was on top of the world, the best P4P star in the sport, a cross over star doing commercials and generating insane amounts of money unheard of in the lower weight classes .. at the age of 26, just entering his physical prime and training for a title defense he detached his retina, then an injury risking blindness in the eye .. at the point he had bout thirty three fights in five years, pretty active ... the eye was the career changer ... he had one fight in the next five years. After upsetting Hagler and the world he picked his spots over the next handful of years and earned astronomical money on his own terms .. along the way he ws an egomaniac, he played games, he made opponents jump through hoops to fight him on his terms as he was always the biggest name and alienated many people with his behavior and antics .. that aside, I feel he was the best P4P fighter since Robinson and Charles ..he had it all, incomparable speed, two handed power, insane defense but not afraid to trade and get hit, a very solid chin, insane physical conditioning , stone cold killer instinct , all the ego in the world and moxie, the ability to come from behind and overcome ...

 

Very few fighters can make the claim they beat four HOF fighters who were in or pretty close to their prime(Hagler the exception}.
The fact that he had a long lay off and still beat Hagler at a weight he never fought at is simply amazing.
The fact he beat Hearns who was huge as a welter an unbeaten was amazing.
The fact he beat Benitez who had never tasted defeat was amazing.
The fact that he made the toughest boxer in all of boxing QUIT was incredible especially considering he had earlier lost to him.

 

His eye injuries and multiple retirements. I can't think of an atg with more retirements than Leonard. Also calling 36-3-1 a "terrible" record is confusing to me. I mean you should never judge a boxer based on their paper record but instead on who they beat, what they achieved, longevity, the context behind their victories and losses, etc. But even so I absolutely fail to see how 36-3-1 is terrible. If that's terrible then I'm pretty sure you'd faint if you saw a boxer with a record of 75-32-61 before you could realise that boxer was one of the greatest and most influential of all time.

 

future generations wont be as familiar with Leonard's opposition as they are with the opposition of future superstars, as if they were alive in 1979 - 1981 so they arent going to catch on

 

Respectfully I think your posts on this thread are supporting your last point ..

 

His career was very much stop and start but he still achieved greatness in spite of that. One of the best pound for pound boxers ever and at least the second best welterweight of all time.