Why was Leonard vs Lalonde for World Titles at TWO different weights?

I think you'd have to be a special type of character to even consider putting yourself forward to fight for a vacant title in a new division against the champion in the division above at the lower weight class but with both titles on the line. Most people's brains don't even work on that level.

But yes, once he stepped through the ropes Leonard was an ATG tough ******* to go with his ATG ability. He proved his greatness beyond repute as much as any fighter of his era.

 

I understand the consensus . Though I feel he is the 2nd best welter in history and like him. Their are plenty of questionable tactics and business dec he used. But if one looks at the history of most great fighters their are many issues that could be questioned. (Outside maybe J.Louis) From Marciano's cheapness, to Ali's backstabbing J.Frazier, Walkers boozing And most have some domestic issues like, Monzon, Holyfield,Tyson, etc. and htatincludes Leonard also.

 

I agree that most boxers used similar tactics when negotiating from a position of power, whether it was color line business, mob control, management team carefully selecting opposition, or media and fan appeal where SRR SRL DLH Floyd types could dictate terms etc. Louis is my favorite HW (alongside Frazier and Walcott), but even he can be said to have similar. Outside of his first and last defenses I believe he did not face one other non white challenger.

 

Which black challengers should Louis have faced?

 

Not saying they would beat him but several deserved a shot:
Lem Franklin
Elmer Ray
Turkey Thompson
Lee Q Murray
Jack Trammel
Curtis Shepherd

With Franklin and Ray the 2 who probably really deserved a shot

 

he might have been false in character,hell he was for sure,but you'd not fault his ability. Perhaps not top five ATG WW, but surely top ten.

 

Do you not rate him top 5 at WW? I would be interested to see 5 (3) names above him at WW, and I don’t even like SRL

 

Franklin's best chance was in mid-late 1941 when he got as high as #4 in the Ring's ratings, but Louis KO'd two #1 contenders that year (Conn and Nova), both of whom were higher ranked than Franklin. That same year Louis also KO'd Musto, who had beaten Franklin. Franklin then broke his hand fighting Abe Simon, which shelved him for a few months. There was talk that the winner of Pastor-Franklin in early 1942 would get a shot at Louis, but Franklin lost by KO and was never in contention again. Unless you think Louis should have fought Franklin over higher ranked and more deserving contenders in Franklin's small window of opportunity, there's not much of a case for Franklin being avoided.

Ray and most of those others came to prominence during the war (except Trammell who was finished as a contender before Louis even won the title...), when Louis was in the army and not fighting anyone for four years. After the war Walcott rose to be the top contender, beating several of the above in the process and then Louis fought him twice. I don't see any comparison between Louis not fighting specific black challengers because he was fighting higher ranked and more highly regarded men instead (and then serving in WWII) and Ray Leonard wanting the deck stacked in his favour.

 

Oh, without question he was (and probably still is) a hopeless egomaniac and irrepressibly horrible to be around. Not questioning that. I just take exception to those who will go a step further with their distaste for the man and use that as a reason to denigrate the fighter. Never made sense to me.

 

I used to, but I tend to let personality characteristics affect my judgement. On pure ability he was top 5.

 

I never liked him either, although I had him as the winner in the Hagler fight. I thought Hearns kicked his a$$ in their rematch, and was very happy when he lost to Terry Norris and Hector Camacho.
Nowadays I tend to appreciate him a lot more, but I couldn't stand him when he was an active fighter.

 

I am the opposite, I loved him growing up....but now I dislike him as a person and while I think he was great, I don’t really find him enjoyable

 

It was a SHAM....and 99.9% of the boxing fans knew it. And his next 2 defenses were at that weight: The Hearns rematch (6 years after Hearns I) & Duran 3 (9 years after Duran 2).

 

I remember reading a quote (on this forum, I think) about SRR being a dream to negotiate with when he was the challenger but a nightmare when he was champion. Leonard was perhaps the first fighter in history (more so even than Robinson and Ali) who could dictate terms as the challenger.

Hagler wanted recognition and fame and the bigger billing - he'd had an interiority complex in that regard all his career. So he made concessions on the ring size and glove type so he could get the larger purse and better billing on the promotion. His lack of focus on the fight details themselves (plus his crazy decision to box orthodox in the opening rounds) is what cost him the decision. Leonard got the fight details right because he knew he would need every advantage against a naturally bigger and stronger opponent. Hagler went in overconfident and lacking focus and it cost him.