Let's Hear It For Sugar Ray Leonard.

[young griffo]

I've heard Ray Leonard cop a lot of shit on this site and I think it's time to redress the balance.

After all this brilliant boxer provided us with some superb and compelling moments in a brilliant and exciting career yet I feel he's sadly underappreciated on this forum.

This is a man who beat legends like Duran,Hearns,Hagler,and Benitez but has recently began to experience a backlash of sorts which has seen a lot of his fantastic achievements given little respect from his detractors and his standing downgraded by said haters.

Let's hear from some of you Leonard fans,tell us your favourite fights of his,your best memories of his career,where you rank him p4p,or whatever else about him you would like to make comment on.


Please note this thread is only for those people who are appreciative of Leonard's abilities,detractors can feel free vent their dislike of him in other threads but don't hijack this one to push your anti-Leonard agenda's.

[sweet_scientist]

Man your battle stations ....

:bolt

[Icemmann]

I'm not a fan of his but have to give him his due, the guy was a supreme talent and was able to beat some of the biggest name fighters that were around his weight while he was in his prime.

[TBooze]

Brilliant fighter.... horrible person.

[captherp]

Leonard was the reason I started watching anything but heavyweights, which formerly was the only weight class I cared about. I don't know anything about his personal life, but if you're going to knock Leonard for that, how about all the Tyson fans?

In other words, I can watch The Shawshank Redemption and think Tim Robbins gave a hell of a performance in the movie and I can separate the work he does from the leftist jerk I think he is in real life. I don't think one needs to be figured in with the rest.

Leonard at his prime was a master of speed and strategy. I don't see how anyone can take that away from him.

[dmt]

Leonard had everything u'd want in a fighter: speed, reflexes, heart, power, durability and his stamina is under rated at welter. top 15 p4p fighter all time, #3 at welterweight

[achillesthegreat]

When a man beats Benitez, Duran, Hearns and Hagler his record speaks for itself. It's no fluke but people want to pick his record apart so that they can reduce his legacy. It doesn't matter though because he is still arguably the best 147 or P4P in history.

[robert ungurean]

Brilliant fighter.... horrible person.:good

[lillarry]

Leonard was simply the man in the 80s. He fought and beat the best and was one of the most strategic fighters to step into the ring. I dont understand why he gets so much hate.

[Club Fighter]

Leonard is definitely an ATG, i don't understand why so many people hate him.

Mainly because of a gift decision against Hagler.

[TBooze]

Mainly because of a gift decision against Hagler.

Personally it is because he is/was so arrogant and lacked humility.

That does take away from a fighter, who I consider boxing finest of the 80s and #13 in my all-time list.

[enquirer]

Sugar ray leonard was the only member of the fab four to have a victory over all of the others. I would say that in the eighties he was also the only one of the fab four blessed with the highest level of ring smarts/strategy as ray could fight and and adapt with all styles put in front of him...Roberto at the higher weights couldnt cope with a boxer,hearns was slightly vulnerable after hagler,and marvin found it more difficult to cope with boxers as well...Ray showed he could beat boxers,brawlers,box punchers and he showed he could beat you by outboxing or blasting if needed...(see hearns 1.)
People can detract from all of his wins if they wish but beating prime hearns, prime duran and prime benitez at welter (at the time these three had a combined win loss record of something like 144-1 with approx 100 kos.And the solitary loss was avenged twice by duran as well!) And whatever you say about the hagler fight,to come back with one fight in five years and give one of the all time greatest middleweights his first loss in eleven years (37 contests) at his first try at the weight and without a tune up speaks voulumes for rays class....Remember even though it was not prime marvin,it was not in any way prime ray either. It makes me think ray could have taken hagler in his prime as well,surely a worthy scalp for a former welter!....
The scary thing is ray missed his prime years when he could have overtaken the original sugar man.....Maybe sacrilege but as an all round boxer and p4p i cant see any better man than ray...Leaving aside the mans phenomenal speed,reflexes,ring brain,tremendous stamina,durability,killer instinct and boxing skills and you still have his greatest intangible......The never say die will to win and finding a way to do it......
You can leave hagler,tyson,jones,mayweather,monzon,duran,whitaker,holmes,jc chavez spinks and the rest,ray is the greatest boxer since the sixties,his wins over benitez,duran ,hearns and hagler prove this.....Quality not quantity folks....

[Sizzle]

I have Ray Leonard #4 all-time P4P. I also consider him the best Welterweight ever.

I know this seems high, but the reason is because he has so many wins against other fighters I regard very highly - I think Hagler is a top3 middleweight, Hearns is a top10, Duran is the No.1 lightweight and top10 P4P, not to mention Benitez.

He fought the contest of a true warrior Vs Hearns, he made Duran quit in the rematch, personally I had the first 7-7-1, but I'm willing to concede he lost the bout marginally.

I consider Ray Leonard the ultimate fighter when I think about versatility - He was a master boxer, but he was also willing to trade (unlike Mayweather) with some of the most brutal men in the sport. His footwork was among the best you'll ever see in boxing, and there was no attribute he lacked - Speed, power (although perhaps not significantly, it was still there) conditioning, heart, the ability to dictate the pace of a fight...

Above all that, Ray Leonard brought the "Wow" factor to fights - His skill was just scintillating.

I have no problem with him as a person either - Brutally honest. I don't think he lacks respect the way people tend to make out.

[TBooze]

I have Ray Leonard #4 all-time P4P. I also consider him the best Welterweight ever.


Above the original Sugar Ray? Brave and courageous if so...

[Mohak]

Man your battle stations ....

:bolt

:lol:

Does seem like there's a lot of hate towards Leonard.

[McGrain]

I don't like the guy and i'm suspicious of those who do...

But he's some fighter. No-one can, or should ever try to take this away from him.

I rate him all time top ten p4p post war.

[enquirer]

I think people are starting to see past the 'leonard image' (first sqeaky clean pretty boy,then cynical manipulator.) and appreciate him for what he was....The at least best joint welter of all time,in fact on resume at welter he is the best....Folks should compare robinsons resume at welter (not middle.) with rays and see how things stack up......
Rays power of punch is severely underrated by many,especially at welter,the man could crack savagely with both hands....
By the way,sizzle,your post was sizzling like a bacon rasher!!!.
Good to see folks like you and achilles rating leonard arguably the best welter ever....

[enquirer]

Easy Hank. Which gift decisions did he get? He knows he lost the hearns rematch,but both were well past their prime and it was still very close....As for hagler,well you may say the decision was wrong,but gift!!!???? And who cares really,he fought extremely well in all his fights with the fab four,even his loss,draw and the one disputed win....This cannot be said for roberto and yet nobody disputes his obvious greatness...

[achillesthegreat]

Above the original Sugar Ray? Brave and courageous if so...
Too many people think that because Robinson was called Sugar first that this some how means he out ranks Leonard.

So he got the name first, so what! It doesn't mean he is God in comparison to Leonard - not on paper or in the ring.

[enquirer]

I am interested if anyone thinks robinson could duplicate leonards wins over prime benitez, prime duran and prime hearns at welter in the space of two years,then have one fight in five years and come back to dethrone reigning all time great middleweight marvin hagler?
Reasoning as well please...

[McGrain]

I am interested if anyone thinks robinson could duplicate leonards wins over prime benitez, prime duran and prime hearns at welter in the space of two years,then have one fight in five years and come back to dethrone reigning all time great middleweight marvin hagler?
Reasoning as well please...

Well anyone could reproduce Leonards win over Duran - if he shit himself.

[enquirer]

I think ESB has a thousand threads on the excuses for duran in the second fight....Do you think robinson could duplicate the feats of ray 79-87?
Remember champions have fought with broken jaws,hands and various ailments/injuries,duran looked fine on TV.....Ali fought with a broken jaw for 10 rounds as did tommy morrison.....

[My dinner with Conteh]

I don't like the guy and i'm suspicious of those who do...

But he's some fighter. No-one can, or should ever try to take this away from him.

I rate him all time top ten p4p post war.



I'm with you here (apart from the suspicious bit). I've actually adopted him on this forum due to the ridiculously low rating he gets from some people. His personality has always grated on me and he's generally a total prick and an arrogant bore. But a fine, fine fighter. I'll always present a decent argument for him pre-1988, but the Lalonde fight onwards...:dead

[TBooze]

Too many people think that because Robinson was called Sugar first that this some how means he out ranks Leonard.

So he got the name first, so what! It doesn't mean he is God in comparison to Leonard - not on paper or in the ring.

God is a mythical character;) ; Robinson was very real and the finest fighter ever.

[JohnThomas1]

The stoppage in the first Hearns fight was a gift. Leonard was losing the fight big and the referee saved him. The press spun it like Leonard did something remarkable. Heart of a lion, they said. Yet, he wouldn't give Tommy a rematch unless Tommy publicly lied and said the referee should have stopped the fight. Even in winning, Leonard had no class. Heart of a lion? Bullshit. A lion would have given Tommy an immediate rematch.

The decision in the Hagler fight was a gift. Hagler won the fight by at least four rounds. The Associated Press had Hagler up by five points. Then he refused to give Hagler a rematch. Instead he moved up in weight, manipulated the WBC into creating a new weight division for him, and manipulated LaLonde into losing down to 168 lbs where, weight-weakened, LaLonde lost to the more talented fighter. How many fighters have weight divisions created as gifts for their legacy?

The rematch with Hearns was a travesty. Hearns dominated, dropping Leonard twice, and even here one judge scored for Leonard and another called it even. To deny Tommy that win, especially after the way he was fucked over the first time around, was beyond the pale. Yet another gift for Ray Leonard.

Leonard regained his welterweight title because Duran was sick. Duran surrendered the title to Leonard. Not Leonard's fault, but nothing to his credit either. He had zero to do with Duran quitting. He didn't make Duran quit. He didn't get inside Duran's head. Duran was seriously ill and wound up in the hospital. Almost any decent fighter would have the been the recipient of Duran's title under those conditions.

Griffo didn't want the haters in here Hank. Whether you realise or not, that means YOU!!!

It's an appreciation thread.

:D

[quintonjacksonfan]

It's not just who he beat it's when he beat them
Benitez and Hearns were undefeated. Duran and Hagler had not lost in
over 10 years. All 4 fighters were at the pinncale of their career. No one was saying Hagler
was past his prime until Leonard beat him

[McGrain]

He has 5 big names on his resume, the rest of it is not very good and he only had 40 fights, and the excuses ROLL for the big fights he won. That is not the stuff of the GOAT. Not at all. Top 10 maybe, but not the greatest, and not better than the original Sugar Ray.

:good

Now go to the bottom of the page and find my Burley-Hopkins/Top 10 MW thread and bump it please.

[Duodenum]

I was as hard core a hater of SRL as I knew, going into his match with Hagler. But even if you believe Marv was robbed by the decision, the fact remains that Ray performed extremely well against the greatest southpaw champion in boxing history, and one who was acclaimed almost universally as the P4P best in boxing at the time. Donny LaLonde was 28 years old, and coming off a decision win over the rugged Hamsho, and back to back kayo wins over Eddie Davis (retiring Davis), and Leslie Stewart. (LaLonde only had to lose five pounds over six months, from the Stewart match to facing SRL, hardly a strength sapping undertaking.) Ray came off the deck twice to stop LaLonde. His public admission that Hearns was the legitimate winner of their rematch further elevates his standing in my eyes considerably.

Ray Leonard was always in top condition for his benchmark performances, a far better example for aspiring boxers than many other prominent pugilists. I'm satisfied that he made the most of the ability he had, and surpassed what many expected he'd be able to achieve when he started.

While I do not believe his best was the best ever, his best was more than good enough.

[young griffo]

The stoppage in the first Hearns fight was a gift. Leonard was losing the fight big and the referee saved him. The press spun it like Leonard did something remarkable. Heart of a lion, they said. Yet, he wouldn't give Tommy a rematch unless Tommy publicly lied and said the referee should have stopped the fight. Even in winning, Leonard had no class. Heart of a lion? Bullshit. A lion would have given Tommy an immediate rematch.

The decision in the Hagler fight was a gift. Hagler won the fight by at least four rounds. The Associated Press had Hagler up by five points. Then he refused to give Hagler a rematch. Instead he moved up in weight, manipulated the WBC into creating a new weight division for him, and manipulated LaLonde into losing down to 168 lbs where, weight-weakened, LaLonde lost to the more talented fighter. How many fighters have weight divisions created as gifts for their legacy?

The rematch with Hearns was a travesty. Hearns dominated, dropping Leonard twice, and even here one judge scored for Leonard and another called it even. To deny Tommy that win, especially after the way he was fucked over the first time around, was beyond the pale. Yet another gift for Ray Leonard.

Leonard regained his welterweight title because Duran was sick. Duran surrendered the title to Leonard. Not Leonard's fault, but nothing to his credit either. He had zero to do with Duran quitting. He didn't make Duran quit. He didn't get inside Duran's head. Duran was seriously ill and wound up in the hospital. Almost any decent fighter would have the been the recipient of Duran's title under those conditions.
We've all heard this stuff ad nauseum Hank this is for those who want to celebrate the career of this great fighter.
Although I was pleased to see you give Ray (faint) praise for being very talented which proves to me that you're not Red Rooster as some on here allege,as it would be physically impossible for him to give Leonard any credit at all.

[quintonjacksonfan]

How come Hearns did not complain about the stoppage?
Leonard was on his way to a 10-8 or 10-7 round
If it was a 10-7 round the fight would of been a draw going into the 15th round

[TBooze]

The rematch with Hearns was a travesty.

I loathed that arrogant prick Leonard with a passion...

But Leonard/HearnsII was no robbery!

The 10 point must system means at most you can score the fight 113/112 Hearns, thus a draw is hardly a robbery,

What must be remebered about 10 point must is that a fighter has to totally dominate to win a round 10-8 without a knockdown, and Leonard/Hearns was so clear cut... Hearns redeemed himself; but very sadly Leonard won 113/112

[Titan1]

He had all the tools.My favorite fight with Ray was the Bruce Finch fight, but admittedly he got hurt in that fight.I hated what he did later in his career concerning the politics and stuff, but the 77-82 version was pretty genuine.

[SgrRyLeonard]

He fought and beat the best welterweights of his era, and truly earned the name Sugar.

[George W Hedge]

Anybody who knocks srls in ring ability shouldnt be listened to imo.

I rank leonard top 3 or 4 p4p top 2 welter & 1 of the most adaptable boxers who ever lived.

Ray had no weaknesses, masterfull.

:good

[Duodenum]

Anybody who knocks srls in ring ability shouldnt be listened to imo.

I rank leonard top 3 or 4 p4p top 2 welter & 1 of the most adaptable boxers who ever lived.

Ray had no weaknesses, masterfull.

:goodHis key flaws as regards ATG status have to do with a lack of Robinson/Duran/Moore type longevity, and among his technical flaws, Ray did telegraph his punches, something exploited masterfully by the more defensively skilled opponents he faced. However, although there was a ceiling on how high SRL could climb against history's very best, he did make the most of the ability he possessed. SRL was no underachiever, but went as far as he could have gone, which was considerably further than his harshest critics (and sometimes, his staunchest supporters), could have reasonably predicted.

[enquirer]

Who were these 'defensive' boxers who thrived against leonards allegedly 'telegraphed' punches? Did it stop him beating or fighting extremely well against these defensive fighters?

[Duodenum]

Who were these 'defensive' boxers who thrived against leonards allegedly 'telegraphed' punches? Did it stop him beating or fighting extremely well against these defensive fighters?Randy Shields was the first one to pick up on this trait of SRL's. Shields decisioned Ray in the 1973 National AAU light welterweight final, so in their pro rematch, SRL's astute management team left nothing to chance, and arranged for that ten rounder to be held in Ray's Baltimore. There has been some question as to what the scoring might have been on neutral turf, but at home, SRL of course took the decision.

Wilfredo Benitez was the next opponent to exploit SRL's tendency to telegraph punches, but in the weeks leading up to the match, El Radar overtrained, walking up two flights of stairs, instead of his customary single flight. (He also worked much harder on his footwork than usual, playing five full games of hopscotch, instead of his regular two games. By fight time, his legs had no bounce left in them.)

Benitez drove Ray nuts in their 15 rounder, but managed to get himself knocked down by a jab, and then again by an uppercut late in the final round, giving the referee a convenient excuse to render a bullshit stoppage with seven seconds left, even though Ray didn't land any follow-up punches.

In Montreal, Duran finally made Ray pay for his telegraphing, making him miss even more badly than Benitez did. (Any notion that Duran was an unskilled defensive fighter should have been extinguished in Canada.) If you've ever wondered why Ray could never hurt Duran, a large part of that is the fact that Roberto saw everything Ray threw at him coming.

Later, Tommy Hearns was also able to outbox SRL badly, in part by picking up on Ray's attack before it could reach Tommy. Ultimately, it was SRL's body attack that led to Hearns wearing down enough for Ray to stop him, after Tommy had secured an insurmountable lead on the scorecards.

Fortunately for Ray, he boxed during a period when most performers near his weight class weren't as defensively skilled as Shields, Benitez or Duran. (It's because of Pernell Whitaker's combination of toughness, defensive skill, and southpaw stance, that I believe he would have decisioned SRL at least as clearly as Duran did in Montreal. That doesn't necessarily mean that I rate Sweet Pea higher than Ray on an all-time basis, but head-to-head, that would have been an extremely bad matchup for Ray.)

[Titan1]

Randy Shields was the first one to pick up on this trait of SRL's. Shields decisioned Ray in the 1973 National AAU light welterweight final, so in their pro rematch, SRL's astute management team left nothing to chance, and arranged for that ten rounder to be held in Ray's Baltimore. There has been some question as to what the scoring might have been on neutral turf, but at home, SRL of course took the decision.

Wilfredo Benitez was the next opponent to exploit SRL's tendency to telegraph punches, but in the weeks leading up to the match, El Radar overtrained, walking up two flights of stairs, instead of his customary single flight. (He also worked much harder on his footwork than usual, playing five full games of hopscotch, instead of his regular two games. By fight time, his legs had no bounce left in them.)

Benitez drove Ray nuts in their 15 rounder, but managed to get himself knocked down by a jab, and then again by an uppercut late in the final round, giving the referee a convenient excuse to render a bullshit stoppage with seven seconds left, even though Ray didn't land any follow-up punches.

In Montreal, Duran finally made Ray pay for his telegraphing, making him miss even more badly than Benitez did. (Any notion that Duran was an unskilled defensive fighter should have been extinguished in Canada.) If you've ever wondered why Ray could never hurt Duran, a large part of that is the fact that Roberto saw everything Ray threw at him coming.

Later, Tommy Hearns was also able to outbox SRL badly, in part by picking up on Ray's attack before it could reach Tommy. Ultimately, it was SRL's body attack that led to Hearns wearing down enough for Ray to stop him, after Tommy had secured an insurmountable lead on the scorecards.

Fortunately for Ray, he boxed during a period when most performers near his weight class weren't as defensively skilled as Shields, Benitez or Duran. (It's because of Pernell Whitaker's combination of toughness, defensive skill, and southpaw stance, that I believe he would have decisioned SRL at least as clearly as Duran did in Montreal. That doesn't necessarily mean that I rate Sweet Pea higher than Ray on an all-time basis, but head-to-head, that would have been an extremely bad matchup for Ray.)

What were the scorecards for the Leonard-Shields fight, D?

[Muskyrat]

I have Ray Leonard #4 all-time P4P. I also consider him the best Welterweight ever.

I know this seems high, but the reason is because he has so many wins against other fighters I regard very highly - I think Hagler is a top3 middleweight, Hearns is a top10, Duran is the No.1 lightweight and top10 P4P, not to mention Benitez.

He fought the contest of a true warrior Vs Hearns, he made Duran quit in the rematch, personally I had the first 7-7-1, but I'm willing to concede he lost the bout marginally.

I consider Ray Leonard the ultimate fighter when I think about versatility - He was a master boxer, but he was also willing to trade (unlike Mayweather) with some of the most brutal men in the sport. His footwork was among the best you'll ever see in boxing, and there was no attribute he lacked - Speed, power (although perhaps not significantly, it was still there) conditioning, heart, the ability to dictate the pace of a fight...

Above all that, Ray Leonard brought the "Wow" factor to fights - His skill was just scintillating.

I have no problem with him as a person either - Brutally honest. I don't think he lacks respect the way people tend to make out.

agree totally, the way he beat benitez, came back and humiliated duran, went to war with hearns in the first fight make him stand out amongst an already impressive group of welterweights. then to move up throught he divisions so impressively even beatin lalonde at light heavy ffs. thats without mentioning his win against hagler where i reckon he stole enough points early an shaded it make him a definite atg and one of the top p4p's ever.
At welter he had the lot and i also reckon he's possibly the best ever at that weight.

think some of the so called detractors are forgetting his early career and are remembering rematches he had with hearns and duran.
as for his attitude etc outside the ring it makes no difference to his perfomances in the ring and thats what we're sposed to be judging him on in here

[My dinner with Conteh]

Randy Shields was the first one to pick up on this trait of SRL's. Shields decisioned Ray in the 1973 National AAU light welterweight final, so in their pro rematch, SRL's astute management team left nothing to chance, and arranged for that ten rounder to be held in Ray's Baltimore. There has been some question as to what the scoring might have been on neutral turf, but at home, SRL of course took the decision.


Probably took a leaf out of Duran's book concerning the De Jesus rematch: home advantage, home referee, home judges, fighting in scorching afternoon heat, wouldn't let Greg Benitez delay the fight, etc etc.

[My dinner with Conteh]

I enjoyed the Benitez gags nonetheless. :D

[achillesthegreat]

I am usually the one defending Leonard on here but your love for him is pretty ridiculous.

He has 5 big names on his resume, the rest of it is not very good and he only had 40 fights, and the excuses ROLL for the big fights he won. That is not the stuff of the GOAT. Not at all. Top 10 maybe, but not the greatest, and not better than the original Sugar Ray.
It's not love, it's fact.

The 4 names on his record are HUGE.
Roberto Duran
Wilfrdo Benitez
Thomas Hearns
Marvin Hagler

Say those names to yourself then slap yourself for being stupid.

[JohnThomas1]

His key flaws as regards ATG status have to do with a lack of Robinson/Duran/Moore type longevity, and among his technical flaws, Ray did telegraph his punches, something exploited masterfully by the more defensively skilled opponents he faced. However, although there was a ceiling on how high SRL could climb against history's very best, he did make the most of the ability he possessed. SRL was no underachiever, but went as far as he could have gone, which was considerably further than his harshest critics (and sometimes, his staunchest supporters), could have reasonably predicted.

Given that he beat Benitez, Hearns, Duran and Hagler i'd say his ceiling was pretty damn high. You make it sound like he was limited or suspect against pinnacle level fighters. Nothing is farther from the truth. He beat all the great men he faced, and he faced plenty.

[Duodenum]

What were the scorecards for the Leonard-Shields fight, D?For whatever it's worth, this is from boxwreck.com:

According to Referee Tom Kelly: 49-43 SRL
Scored by Judge Ray Klingmeyer:47-44 SRL
Scoring of Judge Harry Cecchini: 48-45 SRL
Footnote: Cecchini refereed the tenth round, after Shields hit Kelly with a punch in the ninth round.

In Randy's previous match, the supposedly featherfisted Benitez dropped Shields for the count in six rounds. Why was Ray not even able to floor Shields where Wilfredo kayoed him cleanly? Simple. Randy saw what Ray was ,sending his way, and was able to avoid it.

If Benitez was on top of his game, he didn't just possess legendary elusiveness, but also equivalent accuracy. This enabled Wilfred to put Shields down and out, where SRL, Hearns and Cuevas failed to do so. At his very best, there was no sign Wilfred's punches were coming beforehand, a much overlooked part of his repertoire.

[Duodenum]

Given that he beat Benitez, Hearns, Duran and Hagler i'd say his ceiling was pretty damn high. You make it sound like he was limited or suspect against pinnacle level fighters. Nothing is farther from the truth. He beat all the great men he faced, and he faced plenty.Once again JT, please bear in mind that I was as hard core a hater of SRL as there could have been, prior to his performance against Hagler, so for me to credit him to the extent I have is actually stunning to those who knew my attitude towards him early on. (Given the fact that he maintained top condition, that he wasn't able to maintain Archie Moore/Roberto Duran type longevity is truly a mystery to me. I can only guess that he failed to evolve new skills to replace the decline of youthful advantages. If Ray had that longevity factor enjoyed by Robinson, Duran and Moore, he should have defeated Terry Norris and Macho Camacho.)

[JohnThomas1]

Once again JT, please bear in mind that I was as hard core a hater of SRL as there could have been, prior to his performance against Hagler, so for me to credit him to the extent I have is actually stunning to those who knew my attitude towards him early on. (Given the fact that he maintained top condition, that he wasn't able to maintain Archie Moore/Roberto Duran type longevity is truly a mystery to me. I can only guess that he failed to evolve new skills to replace the decline of youthful advantages. If Ray had that longevity factor enjoyed by Robinson, Duran and Moore, he should have defeated Terry Norris and Macho Camacho.)

I can give you myriads of fighters in the same boat. Ezzard Charles for one, commonly found in the top 10 P4P. Hagler? He didn't fight on for us to find out. Roberto had some great wins later but copped some very ordinary losses while attaining them. How about Tyson? On the slide unbelievably early. How about your beloved Hawk? Over the hill at 30. The oft flogged Bobby Joe Young sparked him whilst he was younger than the Leonard who fought Norris, with Norris being a far far superior fighter to Young of course. Leonard dwelved in the fast lane too whilst first retired remember. These things certainly don't help later on.

[buddynabuick]

We've all heard this stuff ad nauseum Hank this is for those who want to celebrate the career of this great fighter.
Although I was pleased to see you give Ray (faint) praise for being very talented which proves to me that you're not Red Rooster as some on here allege,as it would be physically impossible for him to give Leonard any credit at all.



Yea Griffo. I saw all of his fights and while he was a great boxer (in every way) his greatest asset was that he was fearless! To me a great fighter is not so much how good (although that helps:yep)he can fight, but rather how willing he is to fight. Salute to Ray (sugar Ray) leonard:good for having the heart/spirit of a warrior.

[buddynabuick]

Anybody who knocks srls in ring ability shouldnt be listened to imo.

I rank leonard top 3 or 4 p4p top 2 welter & 1 of the most adaptable boxers who ever lived.

Ray had no weaknesses, masterfull.

:good


:yep:yep:yep:good

[buddynabuick]

It's not love, it's fact.

The 4 names on his record are HUGE.
Roberto Duran
Wilfrdo Benitez
Thomas Hearns
Marvin Hagler

Say those names to yourself then slap yourself for being stupid.


Why is it when someone likes a fighter he is accused of being in "love" or of wanting to hug said fighters nuts? :roll:

[Holmes' Jab]

The guy was one of the Top 3 WW's ever to lace up the gloves- a class act in the ring, polarised opinions outside of it (let's leave all that aside though and appreciate the fighter). Check out this clip compilation:

[Only registered and activated users can see links] :good

[captherp]

The guy was one of the Top 3 WW's ever to lace up the gloves- a class act in the ring, polarised opinions outside of it (let's leave all that aside though and appreciate the fighter). Check out this clip compilation:

[Only registered and activated users can see links] :good

Man, that was good.

[Sonny Carson]

Ray Robinson wold knock Ray Leonard out with a left hook.

[jonesjrp4p1]

leonard is one of my favorite fighters ever and is one of the best p4p fighters ever.......i think he is underrated on here

[Robbi]

Leonard not only beat other ATG fighters, but he beat most while in their primes, or thereabouts.

Bentiez was without question was in his prime, but some others will see it differently simply because he was beaten on the night. Benitez would come back three years later and win the WBC title at 154lbs against Hope, but never captured the same form prior to meeting Leonard. Verdict: Prime

Duran's most defining performance of his entire career was 5 months before Leonard beat him in New Orleans. Many observers feel that Duran peaked the night he handed Leonard his first defeat via a 15 round decision. When Duran's lightweight reign ended, many feel his prime ended as well. Verdict: Past prime, just.


Hearns was at his brilliant best going into his fight with Leonard. His power and speed packaged together was never quite the same again after he left 147lbs. Some people may debate that he was at his best at 154lbs, as he held wins there against Bentiez and Duran. Nothertheless, its a safer bet to say he was at his very best a division below. Verdict: Prime.


Hagler was arguably "pound for pound" the best fighter in the world. But don't let it fool you. The struggled victory against Mugabi kept him at the top. He was becoming a more stationary target, more flat-footed shall we put it. Still a very damn fine middleweight, but the reflexes and speed were diminishing since he knocked Hearns out two years earlier. Prior to stepping into the ring against Leonard, he had one fight in two years. Verdict: Past prime, 2-4 years.

[redrooster]

I've heard Ray Leonard cop a lot of shit on this site and I think it's time to redress the balance.

After all this brilliant boxer provided us with some superb and compelling moments in a brilliant and exciting career yet I feel he's sadly underappreciated on this forum.

This is a man who beat legends like Duran,Hearns,Hagler,and Benitez but has recently began to experience a backlash of sorts which has seen a lot of his fantastic achievements given little respect from his detractors and his standing downgraded by said haters.

Let's hear from some of you Leonard fans,tell us your favourite fights of his,your best memories of his career,where you rank him p4p,or whatever else about him you would like to make comment on.


Please note this thread is only for those people who are appreciative of Leonard's abilities,detractors can feel free vent their dislike of him in other threads but don't hijack this one to push your anti-Leonard agenda's.

What do you want people to do, lie? It's like having a fat wife who just wants to hear compliments.

Not much to talk about.

An overall career record of 36-3-1 and you want me to lie to you and say he's top ten p4p.

Even tho a poor showing against Norris, as huge an underdog as you can get, reveals how poor strategist he actually was. He couldn't adjust when presented with a young, swift moving opponent who didn't make available to get hit and lost in the most pitiful manner.

even with all that world class experience he had had no clue how do deal with the movement of Norris. This is the guy who's supposed to be on par with the original Sugar Ray?

And why did he have such a hard time with Howard if he was only 27 and at his natural weight? he let someone 2/3 his size back him up throughout and then retire him.


That's not impressive!

On top of that he got floored in the bout which isn't supposed to happen to fighters with great chins.

But predictably, I'm going to get "people are always hating on Leonard" for pointing it out.

I'm also tried of hearing how leonard missed his prime. He wasn't stripped of his title. He wasn't put in prison like Ayala or Tyson or Carter. He wasn't stripped of his license to fight like Ali and he came back on at least 4 other occasions so all that talk about "It's sad how he missed his prime years" is nothing more than propoganda. It's rhetorical.

He didn't "miss" his prime years. he made sure he wasn't available during his prime years. Tell it like it is!! This is the kind of crap only his fans would continually push on the rest of us trying to persuade the rest of us so that he'll finally become acceptable as a legit fighter which he isn't because only an illiegitimate fighter would need this many consessions from opponents of which the sky was the limit.


And besides, if he has no problem coming back in 84-97, then why would he have problems in 1982?

[young griffo]

What do you want people to do, lie? It's like having a fat wife who just wants to hear compliments.

Not much to talk about.

An overall career record of 36-3-1 and you want me to lie to you and say he's top ten p4p.

Even tho a poor showing against Norris, as huge an underdog as you can get, reveals how poor strategist he actually was. He couldn't adjust when presented with a young, swift moving opponent who didn't make available to get hit and lost in the most pitiful manner.

even with all that world class experience he had had no clue how do deal with the movement of Norris. This is the guy who's supposed to be on par with the original Sugar Ray?

And why did he have such a hard time with Howard if he was only 27 and at his natural weight? he let someone 2/3 his size back him up throughout and then retire him.


That's not impressive!

On top of that he got floored in the bout which isn't supposed to happen to fighters with great chins.

But predictably, I'm going to get "people are always hating on Leonard" for pointing it out.

I'm also tried of hearing how leonard missed his prime. He wasn't stripped of his title. He wasn't put in prison like Ayala or Tyson or Carter. He wasn't stripped of his license to fight like Ali and he came back on at least 4 other occasions so all that talk about "It's sad how he missed his prime years" is nothing more than propoganda. It's rhetorical.

He didn't "miss" his prime years. he made sure he wasn't available during his prime years. Tell it like it is!! This is the kind of crap only his fans would continually push on the rest of us trying to persuade the rest of us so that he'll finally become acceptable as a legit fighter which he isn't because only an illiegitimate fighter would need this many consessions from opponents of which the sky was the limit.


And besides, if he has no problem coming back in 84-97, then why would he have problems in 1982?
Go read the first post of this thread again.

This is only for those who wish to show their appreciation of Leonard.

I asked politely for haters not to hi-jack this thread.

THIS MEANS YOU.

SO PLEASE FUCK OFF AND START AN ANTI-LEONARD THREAD ELSEWHERE IF YOU WANT BUT DON'T POLLUTE THIS ONE WITH YOUR GARBAGE.

Thankyou (politeness costs nothing):good

[JohnThomas1]

Go read the first post of this thread again.

This is only for those who wish to show their appreciation of Leonard.

I asked politely for haters not to hi-jack this thread.

THIS MEANS YOU.

SO PLEASE FUCK OFF AND START AN ANTI-LEONARD THREAD ELSEWHERE IF YOU WANT BUT DON'T POLLUTE THIS ONE WITH YOUR GARBAGE.

Thankyou (politeness costs nothing):good


:bowdown


:happy

:D

[redrooster]

Go read the first post of this thread again.

This is only for those who wish to show their appreciation of Leonard.

I asked politely for haters not to hi-jack this thread.

THIS MEANS YOU.

SO PLEASE FUCK OFF AND START AN ANTI-LEONARD THREAD ELSEWHERE IF YOU WANT BUT DON'T POLLUTE THIS ONE WITH YOUR GARBAGE.

Thankyou (politeness costs nothing):good

:roll: Like that's going to work.

By the way, that wasn't polite. You used profanity which means you probably lost your temper but even if you hadn't come across like an ass hole it wouldn't have mattered anyways.

You want me to do something you got to pay me for it. Not that you could ever pay me enough.

I read it and I still don't give a shit. And no I won't fuck off and no it isn't garbage - it's setting the record straight and clearing the air. Do you stay off threads when the subject comes to leonard?

In fact I'm just warming up which is too bad for you. Go have nice cry now :|

[redrooster]

Pea, Robinson went 110-1 at one point and very busy against top notch opposition. Rematches were common against the best of his era. Leonard's accomplishments fade into insignificance when compared with the true Sugarman. You want praise heaped on a fighter save it for Robbie, not leonard.

The fact is, his career was just beginning and 4 years should not be looked at as an enitre career but that's what happens with loyal misguided fans looking for accomplishments that weren't there and saying things like "Imagine if his career hadn't been cut short".

His quitting ways go back towards the beginning of his career. it's a well known fact that he gets easily discouraged whenever he's in a tough fight. this goes back to his early days with fireball rodriguez nearly quitting after the fight. again after roberto whipped him. you could see he already had a track record.

the clincher tho was the first comeback and immediately re-retiring. that confirms the true reason for quitting. His eye was just a front all this time.

It doesn't matter if he didn't take a fight with Hagler because I didn't expect much from him anyways and if you were around at the time you would well remember his extreme hesitance when offered a fight with Marvin. For years the answer was always no, no, no, no, no. Is it any wonder people like me get suspicous of the timing for comebacks?

I really think he was scared shitless of not only defeated but getting seriously hurt. he knew he was a twerp who'd get steamrolled in the middleweight division and even bowed out having made 0 defenses, instead aiming for lalonde.

The sport was infinitely more competitive than it was in the late 80's. At middleweights instead of bangers and brawlers, all you had was stylists. At 174, all you had was Lalonde and ancien retread Marvin Johnson. The time was ripe for Leonard to make a more permanent comeback especially with Marvin retiring.

Which is contrary to how it was when he first left the sport. '82 was a tough year even by boxings standards and too dangerous for a move up to middleweight.

If you weren't around fighting at the time you were a zero in my book. But Leonard with his low remedial standards should have had it easy because the young talent coming up was not that strong. He could have stayed in his division and no one including myself would blame him saying "well he's into defending his title".

Donald was no threat to him and McCrory was even less a threat. Neither knew what they were doing yet so 82 should have been an easy year for him.

BTW, If anyone is waiting for my videos to show up on youtube I am still having a problem as I haven't been able to find what I need to compress the size of the video files which is the main obstacle and couldn't find the right software to do the job but I'll persist until I get them on but will take a while longer.

[mr. magoo]

What do you want people to do, lie? It's like having a fat wife who just wants to hear compliments.

Not much to talk about.

An overall career record of 36-3-1 and you want me to lie to you and say he's top ten p4p.

Even tho a poor showing against Norris, as huge an underdog as you can get, reveals how poor strategist he actually was. He couldn't adjust when presented with a young, swift moving opponent who didn't make available to get hit and lost in the most pitiful manner.

even with all that world class experience he had had no clue how do deal with the movement of Norris. This is the guy who's supposed to be on par with the original Sugar Ray?

And why did he have such a hard time with Howard if he was only 27 and at his natural weight? he let someone 2/3 his size back him up throughout and then retire him.


That's not impressive!

On top of that he got floored in the bout which isn't supposed to happen to fighters with great chins.

But predictably, I'm going to get "people are always hating on Leonard" for pointing it out.

I'm also tried of hearing how leonard missed his prime. He wasn't stripped of his title. He wasn't put in prison like Ayala or Tyson or Carter. He wasn't stripped of his license to fight like Ali and he came back on at least 4 other occasions so all that talk about "It's sad how he missed his prime years" is nothing more than propoganda. It's rhetorical.

He didn't "miss" his prime years. he made sure he wasn't available during his prime years. Tell it like it is!! This is the kind of crap only his fans would continually push on the rest of us trying to persuade the rest of us so that he'll finally become acceptable as a legit fighter which he isn't because only an illiegitimate fighter would need this many consessions from opponents of which the sky was the limit.


And besides, if he has no problem coming back in 84-97, then why would he have problems in 1982?

There's so much crap here, one needs a pair of stilts just to get through it, and I'm not even so sure that would suffice.

[mr. magoo]

It doesn't matter if he didn't take a fight with Hagler because I didn't expect much from him anyways and if you were around at the time you would well remember his extreme hesitance when offered a fight with Marvin. For years the answer was always no, no, no, no, no. Is it any wonder people like me get suspicous of the timing for comebacks?


In many of these bogus posts of yours, you make numerous references to the fact that Hagler was past it, and procede to make the necessary allowences. On the otherhand, you make no concessions for the fact that Leonard hadn't fought in 3 years, and only once in 5 years, plus had never before fought at Hagler's weight. Your approaches are so inconsistant, it amazes me that you can possibly expect anyone to take your posts seriously

[redrooster]

In many of these bogus posts of yours, you make numerous references to the fact that Hagler was past it, and procede to make the necessary allowences. On the otherhand, you make no concessions for the fact that Leonard hadn't fought in 3 years, and only once in 5 years, plus had never before fought at Hagler's weight. Your approaches are so inconsistant, it amazes me that you can possibly expect anyone to take your posts seriously

leonard was much sharper than Hagler that's true so all i have to do is give him credit for looking sharp after 3 yrs of inactivity.

[redrooster]

Put up some peak Camacho vids, not him beating Leonard, noone cares to see that, it is insignificent. See if you can't put up some 130 Camacho.

Sure I will Pea when I get my hands on the right software. I'm not flaking out. I have a legitimate problem that keeps me from uploading and having that damn os vista doesn't help either. I looked into moviemaker first but all it does is record without the compression and I had to return it. then I looked at quicktime pro but didn't meet the system requirements which means I have to keep looking. later on in the evening I'll get back to it.

[redrooster]

What are you even talking about? He didn't quit.



He quit right after his fight with Howard. the fight was too tough for him.

[Drew101]

Hell of a welterweight, who could have stayed with any of the other greats at 147lbs when he was at his best. Beat some pretty solid competition coming up (by and large, in dominant fashion), and, of course, defeated Duran, Benitez, and Hearns when he was champion.

I personally scored the Hagler fight 6-4-2 in favor of Marvin, but, as Duodenum said, Leonard fought a hell of a fight against a Hagler who was still pretty damned good.

Yes, he was lucky to get the draw against Hearns in the rematch, but, even then, he had Hearns in a bad, bad way in the twelth and final round, and it would have been very interesting to see if he could have finished Tommy off if that fight had gone fifteen rounds.

So, all things considered, that's a pretty damned good career, given the limited amount of fights that he had. We can quibble about p4p placement, and his status among the all-time great welterweights, but, the bottom line is that, when he was at his best, he was a hell of a fighter. Simple as that.

[JohnThomas1]

leonard was much sharper than Hagler that's true


Yeah, good honest post, Ray was always faster and sharper here. Unreal speed and sharpness

:good

[acb]

The stoppage in the first Hearns fight was a gift. Leonard was losing the fight big and the referee saved him. The press spun it like Leonard did something remarkable. Heart of a lion, they said. Yet, he wouldn't give Tommy a rematch unless Tommy publicly lied and said the referee should have stopped the fight. Even in winning, Leonard had no class. Heart of a lion? Bullshit. A lion would have given Tommy an immediate rematch.

The decision in the Hagler fight was a gift. Hagler won the fight by at least four rounds. The Associated Press had Hagler up by five points. Then he refused to give Hagler a rematch. Instead he moved up in weight, manipulated the WBC into creating a new weight division for him, and manipulated LaLonde into losing down to 168 lbs where, weight-weakened, LaLonde lost to the more talented fighter. How many fighters have weight divisions created as gifts for their legacy?

The rematch with Hearns was a travesty. Hearns dominated, dropping Leonard twice, and even here one judge scored for Leonard and another called it even. To deny Tommy that win, especially after the way he was fucked over the first time around, was beyond the pale. Yet another gift for Ray Leonard.

Leonard regained his welterweight title because Duran was sick. Duran surrendered the title to Leonard. Not Leonard's fault, but nothing to his credit either. He had zero to do with Duran quitting. He didn't make Duran quit. He didn't get inside Duran's head. Duran was seriously ill and wound up in the hospital. Almost any decent fighter would have the been the recipient of Duran's title under those conditions.

Are there any fights in which SRL won that you do give him credit?

Seems as though you could discredit everything the man did.

[mcvey]

I've heard Ray Leonard cop a lot of shit on this site and I think it's time to redress the balance.

After all this brilliant boxer provided us with some superb and compelling moments in a brilliant and exciting career yet I feel he's sadly underappreciated on this forum.

This is a man who beat legends like Duran,Hearns,Hagler,and Benitez but has recently began to experience a backlash of sorts which has seen a lot of his fantastic achievements given little respect from his detractors and his standing downgraded by said haters.

Let's hear from some of you Leonard fans,tell us your favourite fights of his,your best memories of his career,where you rank him p4p,or whatever else about him you would like to make comment on.


Please note this thread is only for those people who are appreciative of Leonard's abilities,detractors can feel free vent their dislike of him in other threads but don't hijack this one to push your anti-Leonard agenda's.
The guy beat 4 atgs and several very good fighters like Kalule,forget his personality ,he is a top 5 welter no doubt, a great fighter.

[SgrRyLeonard]

Leonard earned the Sugar name and a place among the all time greats.

[redrooster]

He had a nice beginners career, a little less than Sal Sanchez but still not all time great. Let him get up to around 60 fights with 1 loss then we can justify that lofty ranking. A better replacement is Roy Jones.

[redrooster]

This is what I don't get, how you love Jones but hate Leonard despite Leonard having the greater resume, and also getting KO'd past his prime. I don't get it.

Roy Jones was simply a superior talent in every way. No fake retirements are necessary if you're an all time great.

Pea, what do you suppose were the reasons for his many retirements? The eye excuse is good only for one retirement but the first time you come back into the ring then there's reason for suspicion. He wasn't hurting for money either.

[mcvey]

:patsch Oh dear

[Street Lethal]

Ray Leonard was an intelligent and talented boxer. He took a good shot in his prime. He punched with some authority. He won a gold medal, was two-time welterweight champion, middleweight champion, and WBC light heavyweight champion. His trainer was one of the best in the business. Leonard was a shrew businessman.

Having said all that, there are legitimate criticisms that can be made of of Leonard.

It's true that on paper he beat Benitez, Duran twice, Hearns, and Hagler. But it is also a matter of record that Duran outboxed Leonard over 15 rounds, that Leonard regained the title because Duran gave it back, and that Leonard was outboxed by Hearns. Add to these facts the widespread agreement that Hearns really beat Leonard in the rematch and the growing consensus that Leonard didn't really beat Hagler (as Leonard's light dims people are becoming more objective about that fight), and what looks great on paper doesn't look as good in reality.

Some other fights by Leonard are less than impressive. He should have handled LaLonde more easily. Same with Kalule. And he was embarrassed by Norris.

A fair assessment of Leonard's career would conclude that he was a talented welterweight and a superb showman whose legacy is lacking in substantial ways, so substantial that they keep him from ascending the lofty heights of the pound for pound rankings, as well as the very top of the welterweight rankings.

There are many fighters who, on a pound for pound basis, have much more impressive careers. And I can think of several welterweights that deserve to be ranked above him (Robinson, Gavilan, Armstrong, Napoles, Griffith, Whitaker). This includes Roberto Duran, whose clear wins over Palomino and Leonard, won by effective aggression and superior boxing, are more impressive than Leonard's win over Benitez and controversial outings with Duran and Hearns.

Leonard comes in for a lot of criticism because he deserves it. A man can't argue that the criticisms of Leonard are from haters when so many people make the same criticisms of Leonard over and over, even those who appreciate his talent and accomplishments.

[redrooster]

I have another problem which is why does leonard get high praise for being the underdog then winning though in controversial manner yet Norris as big an underdog gets no credit though he wiped the floor with leonard. Seems like reverse discrimination to me.

[Thread Stealer]

I used to dislike Gay Ray but I more or less like him now.

I still like to call him Gay Ray though.

[young griffo]

:roll: Like that's going to work.

By the way, that wasn't polite. You used profanity which means you probably lost your temper but even if you hadn't come across like an ass hole it wouldn't have mattered anyways.

You want me to do something you got to pay me for it. Not that you could ever pay me enough.

I read it and I still don't give a shit. And no I won't fuck off and no it isn't garbage - it's setting the record straight and clearing the air. Do you stay off threads when the subject comes to leonard?

In fact I'm just warming up which is too bad for you. Go have nice cry now :|
I didn't lose my temper but I used blunt terms to get it through to you that your bias and hatred wasn't what I was looking for when I started this thread.

I can read any Leonard thread anytime and get yours,Hanks,or any other haters view whenever I like,but I wanted only to hear from fans this time.

As the threads creator I think that's not too much to ask for but you with your blind hatred and ridiculous arrogance can't let it go and have to have your say even though everyone has heard it all before time and time again.

The fact you have such an in depth knowledge of a fighter you clearly hate (to the point of being able to break his career down round by round looking for incriminating evidence of Leonards frailities) shows the depth of your obsession and that disscussing Ray with you is pointless as your capacity for rational debate is non-existent.

Hell I even saw you gloating about conceiving your child after watching Leonard lose to Camacho,before backing down when you realised how sick that sounded.Really when one guy's suffering brings out an aphrodisiac effect on you you've got serious problems.

Anyway I've expended enough energy on you for one day shitbags,I'm off to rewatch Leonard-Hagler and to bask in Ray's boxing genius.Who knows the missus may even get a tap on the shoulder afterwards:hey

[JohnThomas1]

I didn't lose my temper but I used blunt terms to get it through to you that your bias and hatred wasn't what I was looking for when I started this thread.

I can read any Leonard thread anytime and get yours,Hanks,or any other haters view whenever I like,but I wanted only to hear from fans this time.

As the threads creator I think that's not too much to ask for but you with your blind hatred and ridiculous arrogance can't let it go and have to have your say even though everyone has heard it all before time and time again.

The fact you have such an in depth knowledge of a fighter you clearly hate (to the point of being able to break his career down round by round looking for incriminating evidence of Leonards frailities) shows the depth of your obsession and that disscussing Ray with you is pointless as your capacity for rational debate is non-existent.

Hell I even saw you gloating about conceiving your child after watching Leonard lose to Camacho,before backing down when you realised how sick that sounded.Really when one guy's suffering brings out an aphrodisiac effect on you you've got serious problems.

Anyway I've expended enough energy on you for one day shitbags,I'm off to rewatch Leonard-Hagler and to bask in Ray's boxing genius.Who knows the missus may even get a tap on the shoulder afterwards:hey

Awesome post hahaha

:good

[redrooster]

I didn't lose my temper but I used blunt terms to get it through to you that your bias and hatred wasn't what I was looking for when I started this thread.

I can read any Leonard thread anytime and get yours,Hanks,or any other haters view whenever I like,but I wanted only to hear from fans this time.

As the threads creator I think that's not too much to ask for but you with your blind hatred and ridiculous arrogance can't let it go and have to have your say even though everyone has heard it all before time and time again.

The fact you have such an in depth knowledge of a fighter you clearly hate (to the point of being able to break his career down round by round looking for incriminating evidence of Leonards frailities) shows the depth of your obsession and that disscussing Ray with you is pointless as your capacity for rational debate is non-existent.

Hell I even saw you gloating about conceiving your child after watching Leonard lose to Camacho,before backing down when you realised how sick that sounded.Really when one guy's suffering brings out an aphrodisiac effect on you you've got serious problems.

Anyway I've expended enough energy on you for one day shitbags,I'm off to rewatch Leonard-Hagler and to bask in Ray's boxing genius.Who knows the missus may even get a tap on the shoulder afterwards:hey

show her Macho pounding Ray and you'll come out with triplets like I did. :angel :angel :angel

I really don't have to give a round by round breakdown to find fault with Ray when all I need do is ask reason for his comebacks and watch you all clam up from embarassment.

That's about it from me. So while you're watching another a controversial match with controversial scoring, I'll be watching Norris dominate the lesser of the two Sugar Rays complete with knockdowns and no controversial scoring. :blurp

[Sweet Science]

I have Leonard at #2 in my Welter list and he is more often than not top 5 in my P4P list.

I've wondered why so many people have a problem with him here on ESB. Despite the resevations people have about his personality or attitude outside the ring, this should not affect anyones assessment of him as a fighter. He was top notch, very classy, had underrated power, blinding speed, great skills, a massive heart and could adapt to anything. He would always find a way to win.

I did have him losing the 2nd Hearns fight, a draw was a bit much. However, his win against Hagler was fully justified, Hagler just got outsmarted and outboxed. The man had the ability to win a round in the last 30 seconds, these were not gifts he got from judges, rather, it was a testament to Ray's immense ability and cunning.


Strangley, I find he tends to get more love here in England than he does in the US.

[Street Lethal]

I will address your points, Sweet Pea. I can see you are a fanboy.

What makes you think Leonard made Duran quit in the rematch? Leonard didn't have Duran in any trouble. Duran wasn't cut up. Leonard was only slightly ahead on points when Duran quit. One thing is for sure, it wasn't a knockout, technical or otherwise. Whether he was unprepared or whether he was sick (or both), Duran didn't lose the fight to a man with any superior ability. Duran surrendered the title. People who twist Duran quitting into Leonard making Duran quit prove themselves to be fanboys. Sorry, but it's true. I hear this "Leonard made Duran quit" shit and I know right away that I am dealing with a person who creates convenient truths for themselves.

Hearns had Leonard on the canvas twice and outboxed him in most of the rounds. How you can say a draw was justified is another big chunk of evidence exposing you as a fanboy. Leonard didn't outbox Hagler. No offense, but this exposes your ignorance of how to score fights. What counts for a fight is forward momentum and clean, hard punching. What counts against a fighter is running and making clinches. Hagler was doing the first things. He made the fight. Leonard was doing the second. He was bent on surviving and trying to steal rounds with shoeshining. You were deceived.

LaLonde wasn't much of a fighter, I don't care how big he is. A good little man will beat a ordinary bigger man. Leonard beat LaLonde, but it shouldn't have been close. Didn't LaLonde have Leonard on the canvas? Kalule was a good boxer, but if Leonard was as great as everybody said, he should have had an easier time with Kalule. When Whitaker moved up and beat 53-1 Julio Cesar Vasquez, he won by clear margins. No knockout needed. And Whitaker moved up from lightweight!

Which brings me to this point. "Why does Whitaker deserve to rank above him at WW?" Are you kidding me? Why would anybody need to justify Whitaker's greatness compared to Leonard's? Whitaker defended the world welterweight championship EIGHT times and really never lost the title in the ring, as de la Hoya came up short in a fight the judges gave him. During his reign, Whitaker beat Buddy McGirt and Julio Cesar Chavez (that draw was bullshit). Leonard posted half as many title defenses and his two biggest defenses, against Duran and Hearns, resulted in a loss and a boxing lesson before Hearns lost his legs. Whitaker's fights against McGirt and Chavez weren't close. Leonard was beatable officially and in fact. Whitaker was not.

I never said Duran was ahead in the rematches. But for you to say that Leonard is "easily" better than Duran at welterweight when Duran kicked Leonard's ass at 147 pounds is proof that you cannot judge Leonard's legacy fairly.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Leonard posted half as many title defenses and his two biggest defenses, against Duran and Hearns, resulted in a loss and a boxing lesson before Hearns lost his legs.


Yeah, Hearns losing his legs had nothing to do with the punches he was taking. He seemingly lost his legs in the 6th and 7th too. :good

[Robbi]

Yeah, Hearns losing his legs had nothing to do with the punches he was taking. He seemingly lost his legs in the 6th and 7th too. :good

Is the rumour true that Hearns's legs were actually left back in the locker room by a member of the Kronk team?. Even when they found his legs, which were attached my Steward between rounds, they never done him much good in the end.

[doublesuited]

Sugar Gay is a bum. Imagine what would've happened if someone like Breland or Judah ever faced him.

[Robbi]

Sugar Gay is a bum. Imagine what would've happened if someone like Breland or Judah ever faced him.


Yeah, that would have been some laugh.

[Quick Cash]

Referee Richard Steele made an interesting comment in one of the many HBO features made for Sugar Ray. He said that when Leonard faced Marvin Hagler, he was so surprised that Leonard was holding his own, outboxing the bigger man, pushing him back when he got too close, and then hooking to the head and body. But later on he added that everytime he watched the fight after, it got closer and closer everytime. :D

Now, I've never scored the fight for Marvin. But this quote by Steele certainly rings true for me.

[Street Lethal]

Yeah, Hearns losing his legs had nothing to do with the punches he was taking. He seemingly lost his legs in the 6th and 7th too. :good

You're right. No matter how hard Leonard tried he couldn't put Hearns on the canvas or, in the end, put him away. He needed the referee to do that.

[buzzsaw]

Ray was the King of Boxing in the early 80's. In my lifetime he is still the greatest welter I have ever seen. He was, as others have already posted, the complete package.

[redrooster]

If Leonard were the complete package he wouldn't have major problems with Norris. Ray was a huge favorite.

[JohnThomas1]

If Leonard were the complete package he wouldn't have major problems with Norris. Ray was a huge favorite.

How about Camacho getting whupped by Haugen and Chavez?

[My dinner with Conteh]

You're right. No matter how hard Leonard tried he couldn't put Hearns on the canvas or, in the end, put him away. He needed the referee to do that.


He wouldn't have stopped it if Tommy had the decency to actually punch back instead of looking like a big soft lemon. Hey, Leonard was knocked down twice vs Hearns and had Tommy out on his feet in the last round- I didn't see Hearsn turn anythinga round in the first fight. Hearns had fuck all left. Tommy largely dominated, Leonard turned on the gas, fight was stopped. Nothing else happened. :good

[My dinner with Conteh]

Kalule was a good boxer, but if Leonard was as great as everybody said, he should have had an easier time with Kalule. When Whitaker moved up and beat 53-1 Julio Cesar Vasquez, he won by clear margins. No knockout needed.


Ha ha, how embarrassing is this. "No knockout needed". Leonard even gets stick for being able to finish a guy off. Whitaker receives extras for not being able to break an egg.


Time for a good laugh :lol: :lol: :lol:

[JohnThomas1]

Ha ha, how embarrassing is this. "No knockout needed". Leonard even gets stick for being able to finish a guy off. Whitaker receives extras for not being able to break an egg.


Time for a good laugh :lol: :lol: :lol:
These SRL haters are all out of the same mold, same old same old every dang time. At least variation might make it a little interesting but no, no, no.

[Robbi]

These SRL haters are all out of the same mold, same old same old every dang time. At least variation might make it a little interesting but no, no, no.

JT. If you asked me this "What fighters do you really dislike". I'd probably say Tyson, Hamed, and Leonard. I've never been a Leonard fan at all. Two WBC titles from two different weights won on one night. Maybe thats why. I'd be embarraessed with such history on my record.

To win two titles in two different weight divisions you need to have fought two fights. Just boxing politics, and Leonard sweet talking WBC president, Jose Sulaiman.

But no denying Leonard's greatness. He's probably the greatest fighter since Ali retired as heavyweight champion in 1978. Leonard, Whitaker, and Jones Jr.

[JohnThomas1]

JT. If you asked me this "What fighters do you really dislike". I'd probably say Tyson, Hamed, and Leonard. I've never been a Leonard fan at all. Two WBC titles from two different weights won on one night. Maybe thats why. I'd be embarraessed with such history on my record.


So wins over Hearns, Benitez, Duran and Hagler wouldn't persuade you to swap boxing records because of the two title thing?

But no denying Leonard's greatness. He's probably the greatest fighter since Ali retired as heavyweight champion in 1978.

Many would agree, he's certainly a cut above regarding best collection of wins.

For the record, you are not one of those i was thinking of. You wouldn't consider yourself a hater i don't think.

[Robbi]

So wins over Hearns, Benitez, Duran and Hagler wouldn't persuade you to swap boxing records because of the two title thing?



Many would agree, he's certainly a cut above regarding best collection of wins.

For the record, you are not one of those i was thinking of. You wouldn't consider yourself a hater i don't think.

JT. Not saying you were thinking of me as a hater. Just thought Id let you know I'm not a serious fan, but can see his greatness. I do dislike Leonard, but I would not show it terms of discussing his career and achievements. Unbiased.

I continually stick up for him over the Hagler decision. He won the fight close, but clear in my eyes.

One of smartest fighters in the history of boxing.

[JohnThomas1]

JT. Not saying you were thinking of me as a hater. Just thought Id let you know I'm not a serious fan, but can see his greatness. I do dislike Leonard, but I would not show it terms of discussing his career and achievements. Unbiased.

I continually stick up for him over the Hagler decision. He won the fight close, but clear in my eyes.

One of smartest fighters in the history of boxing.

Fair call mate.

[My dinner with Conteh]

I continually stick up for him over the Hagler decision. He won the fight close, but clear in my eyes.


But that shouldn't count because it was unfair on Hagler. After all, Marv was fighting above his best weight and had only fought once in five years... :yep

[Robbi]

JT. The fabulous four ranked "pound for pound"

1. Roberto Duran
2. Sugar Ray Leonard
3. Marvin Hagler
4. Thomas Hearns

I have Duran ranked number one based on his superb reign as lightweight champion, and being ranked as maybe the greatest lightweight of all time, also moving up and winning titles in three more divisions while past his prime. Some would maybe come to the conclusion he was still in his prime when he moved up and beat Leonard right enough, its arguable. He had more lifes than a cat throughout his career. Especially "no mas" and his devastating KO loss to Hearns.

Leonard never had to comeback from such devastating setbacks, although his win against Hagler after a long layoff takes some beating.

[redrooster]

How about Camacho getting whupped by Haugen and Chavez?

How about him? He was favored against Haugen but not Chavez and in the Haugen fight kept having points deducted allowing Greg into the scoring.

Norris was a long way from needing that kind of situation. He accomplished that easy feat all on his own.

5-10 years earlier Hector certainly would have been favored vs. Chavez but who'd want to take a chance against him? Winning fights came as easily to him as breathing and had a bad habit of never losing. You know I can't give Edwin the fight for winning two rounds. That would be wishful thinking.

[JohnThomas1]

5-10 years earlier Hector certainly would have been favored vs. Chavez but who'd want to take a chance against him?

Oh baby, come in spinner. Yesty you said (and have always beat Leonard up for this fight)

If Leonard were the complete package he wouldn't have major problems with Norris.

Lets gut it shall we. Leonard was 34 against Norris, just a few months off 35. You refuse to accept age or peak quotient as an excuse. Here you tell us Hector would have been favoured vs Chavez 5-10 years earlier. Hector was 30 when he fought Chavez, Leonard 34 vs Norris. You have always told us Camacho was way past it vs Haugen, yet the man was just 29! No such leeway for Leonard. Camacho had 38 fights coming into Haugen, and woe is me SRL had the same number coming into Norris so you can't look for excuses there. Norris it is fair to say is a bit better fighter than Haugen to boot. Truth be told Leonard hard much much harder opponents and fights than Camacho so if anything Leonard should be getting the leeway. One struggles to see how such Redrooster favourites, stalwarts and legends such as Louis "The Lip" Loy, Melvin "The Tank" Paul and Greg "Candyman" Coverson would take more out of him than Hearns, Hagler and Duran out of SRL.

Take up knitting bro, you'd be much better suited (besides the fact that the pic you sent dinner which he posted definitely makes knitting look like you)

:good

[redrooster]

Oh baby, come in spinner. Yesty you said (and have always beat Leonard up for this fight)



Lets gut it shall we. Leonard was 34 against Norris, just a few months off 35. You refuse to accept age or peak quotient as an excuse. Here you tell us Hector would have been favoured vs Chavez 5-10 years earlier. Hector was 30 when he fought Chavez, Leonard 34 vs Norris. You have always told us Camacho was way past it vs Haugen, yet the man was just 29! No such leeway for Leonard. Camacho had 38 fights coming into Haugen, and woe is me SRL had the same number coming into Norris so you can't look for excuses there. Norris it is fair to say is a bit better fighter than Haugen to boot. Truth be told Leonard hard much much harder opponents and fights than Camacho so if anything Leonard should be getting the leeway. One struggles to see how such Redrooster favourites, stalwarts and legends such as Louis "The Lip" Loy, Melvin "The Tank" Paul and Greg "Candyman" Coverson would take more out of him than Hearns, Hagler and Duran out of SRL.

Take up knitting bro, you'd be much better suited (besides the fact that the pic you sent dinner which he posted definitely makes knitting look like you)

:good


Hector's abusive lifestyle brought him down. he's an abusive type of person. Everyone knows it. Even you acknowledged it a couple days ago. Leonard took care of himself staying in shape for Hagler once he found his nerve.

But Ray looked fine for his age similar to Hopkins who was just reaching his peak. How do you explain that?

The only way you can tell a fighters declining is how the legs are working in recent fights. But as we all saw, that wasn't a problem in the uno mas fight. Ray fought the perfect fight as Steve Farhood claimed and you don't fight the perfect fight if you're past your prime. No fighter could do that, not even Hagler.

With Camacho it was different and easy to see he'd become a stationary target which doesn't suit his style well. The prime of Hector Camacho ended after 1987 when he was probably the best fighter in the sport.

I'm not going to pick a winner between Chavez and Camacho but let's just say that a young Camacho would have been the ultimate test and was without doubt the world's best fighter at 130, 135, and judging from what I saw off the Davis fight, 140 as well.

As for comparison between Hector and Ray, lets just Hector put an end to that myth once and for all ending all speculation as well as putting an end to Leonard.

[redrooster]

Now that I think about it, Leonard was a strong favorite over Camacho.
What a mistake that was. I'm betting you didn't hestitate for a moment bragging how Ray was going to mop the floor with loudmouth Hector.

Did you cry after it was over John? It looked as tho the audience was in tears.

[Street Lethal]

He wouldn't have stopped it if Tommy had the decency to actually punch back instead of looking like a big soft lemon.

You haven't seen the fight, have you?

[Street Lethal]

For Ray to be a complete package he would have to be better in several departments.

One department is punching power. Leonard is overrated as a puncher. Hearns, as we all know, doesn't take the best shot in the world, but Leonard, despite hitting Hearns cleanly, couldn't knock his man down or get him out of there. Duran took everything Leonard threw at him with with little to no effect. Duran could take a shot, but he wasn't invincible--and he was a lightweight. DeJesus floored Duran twice and Hearns annihilated the man. Leonard's punches had no effect on Hagler. Marvin walked through Leonard's punching like it was a light breeze. Despite all this, I can still hear commentators talking about Leonard's punching power.

Another department in which Leonard is lacking is defense. Again, the claims that Leonard was a master boxer fall in the face of the record. Hearns had no trouble reaching Ray. In their first fight, he landed almost at will, as Leonard's busted face attests to. Duran had no trouble reaching Leonard in their first fight, either. Several other fights we able to catch Leonard so cleanly they put him on his rump--Howard, Hearns, Norris, even Camacho--even though Leonard's chin was pretty good. Several other fighters wobbled Ray, including lightweight Duran.

Finally, Leonard was lacking offensively. Against both Duran and Hearns he had trouble getting things going. Duran was hitable, but Leonard could barely get any forward momentum going. Most of the time Leonard was against the ropes catching. Leonard looked completely puzzled throughout most of the Hearns fight. Leonard did little offensively against Hagler and Norris, either.

Leonard looks brilliant against second and third tier competition. He looks spectacular knocking out Dave Green. But against the best, Leonard is not the complete package people claim he is. Duran, Hearns, and Hagler all beat him, whether the judges called it that way or not.

[My dinner with Conteh]

You haven't seen the fight, have you?


Was that the one wherein hardly anyone disagreed with the stoppage?

[Street Lethal]

Now that I think about it, Leonard was a strong favorite over Camacho.
What a mistake that was. I'm betting you didn't hestitate for a moment bragging how Ray was going to mop the floor with loudmouth Hector.

Did you cry after it was over John? It looked as tho the audience was in tears.

I used to not know what to think about the Camacho fight, but I now believe it counts against his legacy.

Ray was in his early forties, but, then again, Robinson, Foreman, Duran, Moore and lots of other boxers have been competitive well into the forties. Camacho was a lightweight for the longest time, but here he was at middleweight belting out a widely regard all-time great inside of five rounds. I thought Leonard would do better against Hector and was amazed at how easily Camacho dissected his man. Camacho is not a great puncher either, especially at that weight, but when he caught Leonard cleanly he wobbled him. Given my expectations, and Leonard's reputation, it was a shocking defeat. But then so was the Norris fight.

It makes you wonder what would have happened if Leonard had fought like other great boxers--you know, all the time, instead of sporadically, mostly waiting for big name opponents to get long in the tooth. It didn't seem that he had a long career in him. I think he would have been at the Norris stage a lot sooner had he fought regularly. He took too many hard shots to produce a long career.

[My dinner with Conteh]

One department is punching power. Leonard is overrated as a puncher. Hearns, as we all know, doesn't take the best shot in the world, but Leonard, despite hitting Hearns cleanly, couldn't knock his man down or get him out of there.


Hearns didn't show that much of a soft chin at welter (or 154). Also, Leonard took Tommy's shots better than vice-versa and that was against oe of the biggest welterweight hitters of all-time.

[Street Lethal]

Was that the one wherein hardly anyone disagreed with the stoppage?

The stoppage was very controversial at the time. How old are you?

[My dinner with Conteh]

I used to not know what to think about the Camacho fight, but I now believe it counts against his legacy.


So does Hagler's puny effort in 1987 count against his legacy?

[My dinner with Conteh]

The stoppage was very controversial at the time. How old are you?


I was eight at the time but so what? I've seen the film just like most on here. Oh, let me guess...you were there. Right? Sitting next to Pepping It in Row Z. :good

[Street Lethal]

I was eight at the time but so what? I've seen the film just like most on here. Oh, let me guess...you were there. Right? Sitting next to Pepping It in Row Z. :good

I wasn't there (I wish I had been!). I asked the question because you don't seem to have any knowledge about the reaction to the stoppage. It was controversial. The reason why Ray wouldn't give Tommy a rematch is because Hearns refused to agree with Ray that it was a legitimate stoppage. It was one of Leonard's famous asshole moments. But you were 8, so I understand why you wouldn't remember that.

I didn't mean any offense by asking your age. I just wanted to understand why you would say the thing you said. Now it makes sense.

[My dinner with Conteh]

I wasn't there (I wish I had been!). I asked the question because you don't seem to have any knowledge about the reaction to the stoppage. It was controversial. The reason why Ray wouldn't give Tommy a rematch is because Hearns refused to agree with Ray that it was a legitimate stoppage. It was one of Leonard's famous asshole moments. But you were 8, so I understand why you wouldn't remember that.

I didn't mean any offense by asking your age. I just wanted to understand why you would say the thing you said. Now it makes sense.


Who found the stoppage controversial? Not many. Hearns maybe? Big deal, he's bound to say that. Steward felt the stoppage was fair and Don Dunphy retracted his original statement and thought the stoppage was correct also. Most of the newspapers and mags agreed with the stoppage too.


ps. By the way, if you have as much material from 1981 as me you must have a shitload. :good

[Street Lethal]

So does Hagler's puny effort in 1987 count against his legacy?

No, for two reasons.

Hagler, unlike Leonard, came up through the ranks the hard way. He fought regularly against outstanding opposition. He came through fights against numerous really heavy handed and tough fighters. Hagler was in decline from years of fighting--14 years in fact. His decline was noticable before the Leonard fight.

Hagler beat Leonard. Despite Hagler being in decline, he still had enough left to defeat a talented and big welterweight who had had plenty of time to grow into a middleweight. Leonard had been taking little punishment during those years he was waiting for Hagler to grow old, whereas Hagler had been doing what great champions do--fighting the best fighters in his division.

In many people's eyes, Hagler retired without having lost a fight in over a decade, having defended his title 13 times. His legacy is secure.

[My dinner with Conteh]

Mike Katz: Hearns won rounds, usually the duller ones and usually by close margins. Leonard simply beat up his opponent.


This sums up the fight for me. It wasn't as great as people make out in reality.




Did you know that more of the ringside reporters had Leonard in front? I didn't have him ahead personally, but there you go.

[My dinner with Conteh]

In many people's eyes, Hagler retired without having lost a fight in over a decade, having defended his title 13 times. His legacy is secure.


So's Leonard's. Picking a fault because he wasn't as good as Foreman as a forty three year old. How sad.

[Street Lethal]

Leonard's legacy is problematic for several reasons, not just because he was blown away by a 36 year old former lightweight title claimant.

After his return to the ring after his surgery his career was inconsistent at best:
- poor showing against journeyman Kevin Howard, who knocked him down
- controversial split victory over Hagler (terrible decision)
- beat up a inferior light heavyweight, who knocked him down
- knocked down twice in a draw with Hearns (terrible decision)
- fought a incredibly boring rubbermatch against Duran
- knocked down twice and otherwise dissected by Terry Norris
- knocked out by Hector Camacho inside of five rounds

That's adds up to 7 knockdowns in 7 fights, two unambiguous losses (one a crushing knockout defeat), a controversial draw, a controversial split decision win, and lackluster win, and a controversial stoppage victory.

How does one turn that mess into greatness? You can't, unless you ignore or dress up the record. That's my point. Leonard is overrated and his fanboys get infuriated when people simply point it out.

If we go back to before he retired because of the eye injury, we don't find as much to get excited about as the fanboys seemed to imply:
- best win over Benitez
- overwhelmed byy Duran, the lightweight champion
- regained the title because Duran quit
- outboxed and beat up by Hearns before benefitting from the actions of an incompetent referee

Again, a mixed picture.

The bottomline is that the record is not consistent with the praises. Leonard was a great boxer. Nobody denies that. We people deny is that he is as great a boxer as the fanboys say he is. He's not the best of the so-called fab four, that's for damn sure.

[JohnThomas1]

I was eight at the time but so what? I've seen the film just like most on here. Oh, let me guess...you were there. Right? Sitting next to Pepping It in Row Z. :good

:lol:

[redrooster]

I used to not know what to think about the Camacho fight, but I now believe it counts against his legacy.

Ray was in his early forties, but, then again, Robinson, Foreman, Duran, Moore and lots of other boxers have been competitive well into the forties. Camacho was a lightweight for the longest time, but here he was at middleweight belting out a widely regard all-time great inside of five rounds. I thought Leonard would do better against Hector and was amazed at how easily Camacho dissected his man. Camacho is not a great puncher either, especially at that weight, but when he caught Leonard cleanly he wobbled him. Given my expectations, and Leonard's reputation, it was a shocking defeat. But then so was the Norris fight.

It makes you wonder what would have happened if Leonard had fought like other great boxers--you know, all the time, instead of sporadically, mostly waiting for big name opponents to get long in the tooth. It didn't seem that he had a long career in him. I think he would have been at the Norris stage a lot sooner had he fought regularly. He took too many hard shots to produce a long career.


Very good post Lethal. You bring thought and intelligence to this forum. How i wish that others would follow in your footsteps.

Yes of course it counts against his legacy. We all saw what transpired and shouldn't pretend it never happened. Remember that part of the blame lies with his fans boasting how Leonard was going to beat him. But they underestimated him thinking "this is the guy who goes into a shell when faced with class punchers.., he's a runner, Ray Leonard will give him a boxing lesson and knock out this clown, finishing what Chavez couldn't do".

But Hector sure gave it to the legend that night and lived up to his nickname, the Macho Man. When it's Macho time, you'd better watch out!!

People I talked to afterwards who don't know about my fanaticism, were absolutely shocked over the way Hector came out and what he did to leonard. And these are old people that have been around.

It all comes down to this: they overrated leonard, as they still do today and underrated Hector as they do today, but is now getting a second look for his work at 130.

I think these people had to be in shock at the outcome and especially at the way Hector forced the fight so effectively, punching holes in his hapless foe's anatomy, surprising the world with glimpses of his lost greatness.

With just the little zip he had left and the confidence you'd expect from a Macho Man, this fighting mad tiger had leonard back pedalling and tripping over his feet. This fight was so horrendous for Leonard, it was enough for people like Young Griffo to cover up their faces.

Hector also rediscovered the art of dirty fighting from his early days on national tv, something I had sorely missed and thought I'd never see again.

I love how he came out for the fifth, immediately slamming two hard lefts to the face of Leonard. It was the hardest he'd been hit ever.

It was really turning out to be a bad night for Ray. Just in the previous round he had a spell of bad luck with Hector catching his eye with a butt and opening a laceration above the eye.

But it wouldn't have mattered anyways because Hector was wearing him down fast and sapping his strength moment by moment. The holding behind the neck and hitting tactic was very effective, something Leonard did not know how to cope with.

It's like I said, Leonard has had a very limited career and just hasn't had enough fights to say he's had those trials by fire. But Hector was one fight he'll never forget as well as the audience who had come to watch Leonard give that clown a lesson in pain and shut his mouth for all time.

Still I was quite satisfied with the out come and we all have to admit that Hector was the hero and leonard was nothing more than the big zero I said he was.

I forgot to mention I also won quite a bit of money much to someone's regret.

[My dinner with Conteh]

outboxed and beat up by Hearns before benefitting from the actions of an incompetent referee


Beat up? He ended up with a mouse, Hearns was Mr Jelly Legs. I know who I'd rather be. Why are you avoiding this 'controversy' that you mentioned. The only controversy was the scorecards. Ask Manny Steward. :good


ps. You remind me of someone. Maybe you're kinda like the 'Zeppo' of the bunch, while the other three... ;)

[KO Boxing]

Not to change the direction of the thread, but I've just finished watching Leonard-Hagler once more, and for the first time I actually have this fight a lot closer then normal (although I was trying to be generous to Hagler, based on this whole "Robbery" conception around here).

Still came out with a 115-114 (6 rounds to 5 with 1 even) win for Leonard. The even round was slightly favoured to Leonard for me also (so no draw)...

One misconception about this fight is that Hagler takes over midway. Yeah, Hagler certainly picks up the pace and does a lot better than what he was doing in the first four rounds (where he lost them all), but he was still very slow to get off at times and his punches were still not that effective. A lot of these so called Hagler rounds in the middle of the fight are very close. You give one to Leonard, or one a draw, and the fight is Leonards imo... And while many claim that Leonards flurries were just to win over the crowd, some of them were clean, and in a round where Hagler stalks and lands nothing, 2 or 3 flashy combos actually DO count.

But this fight also showed that Hagler in his prime would have beaten Leonard in his prime at middleweight. HOWEVER, I also believe this fight proves that p4p Leonard was better. If Leoanrd and Hagler were BOTH natural middleweights, I'd tip Leonard by decision.

[redrooster]

Beat up? He ended up with a mouse, Hearns was Mr Jelly Legs. I know who I'd rather be. Why are you avoiding this 'controversy' that you mentioned. The only controversy was the scorecards. Ask Manny Steward. :good


ps. You remind me of someone. Maybe you're kinda like the 'Zeppo' of the bunch, while the other three... ;)


Who would that someone be and why won't you mention his name?

[redrooster]

Not to change the direction of the thread, but I've just finished watching Leonard-Hagler once more, and for the first time I actually have this fight a lot closer then normal (although I was trying to be generous to Hagler, based on this whole "Robbery" conception around here).

Still came out with a 115-114 (6 rounds to 5 with 1 even) win for Leonard. The even round was slightly favoured to Leonard for me also (so no draw)...

One misconception about this fight is that Hagler takes over midway. Yeah, Hagler certainly picks up the pace and does a lot better than what he was doing in the first four rounds (where he lost them all), but he was still very slow to get offat times and his punches were still not that effective. A lot of these so called Hagler rounds in the middle of the fight are very close. You give one to Leonard, or one a draw, and the fight is Leonards imo.

But this fight also showed that Hagler in his prime would have beaten Leonard in his prime at middleweight. HOWEVER, I also believe this fight proves that p4p Leonard was better. If Leoanrd and Hagler were BOTH natural middleweights, I'd tip Leonard by decision.

how could Hagler have lost the first four rounds? You're being very generous to leonard when the most he did was make the first and third even. And you can't give him round seven because throwing combinations after the bell does not tip the scales,, at least not legally when it comes to scoring. That's what some guy did-he gave it to leonard because he got in 3 or 4 after the bell and pretended he didn't hear the bell, like Leonard.

Why does leonard always need so much help in fights?

[My dinner with Conteh]

Hagler was shit. He come out all confused not knowing which stance to fight in, Leonard was giving him what Mike Colbert had done for 11 rounds a decade earlier. Hagler looked like he wanted Leonard's autograph in the first few rounds. The stupid star-struck baldy bastard. :yep

[JohnThomas1]

Who would that someone be and why won't you mention his name?

Because anyone that frequents here with any regularity will know exactly what he is talking about.

Yet another dinner classic actually

:lol:

[My dinner with Conteh]

Recently I've noticed a link between those that had Leonard ahead vs Hearns and those that had Hagler in front vs Ray- and vice-versa.


Hugh McIlvanney: Leonard ahead, Hagler ahead.
Associated Press: Leonard ahead, Hagler ahead.
Ring magazizne: Hearns ahead, Leonard ahead.
Graham Houston, Boxing News. Hearns ahead, Leonard ahead.
KO mag: Hearns ahead, leonard ahead.
Harry Mullan, Boxing News, Leonard ahead, Hagler ahead.


MDWC: Hearns ahead, Leonard ahead. :good


It seems that shading rounds only applies when Leonard loses them with some people.

[JohnThomas1]

Recently I've noticed a link between those that had Leonard ahead vs Hearns and those that had Hagler in front vs Ray- and vice-versa.


Hugh McIlvanney: Leonard ahead, Hagler ahead.
Associated Press: Leonard ahead, Hagler ahead.
Ring magazizne: Hearns ahead, Leonard ahead.
Graham Houston, Boxing News. Hearns ahead, Leonard ahead.
KO mag: Hearns ahead, leonard ahead.
Harry Mullan, Boxing News, Leonard ahead, Hagler ahead.


MDWC: Hearns ahead, Leonard ahead. :good


It seems that shading rounds only applies when Leonard loses them with some people.

Interesting, both The Ring and KO had Leonard ahead. Well hardly surprising really. I think it was Big Book of Boxing who also had Leonard winning, by a big margin. I've lost count of the times Rooster has held up the esteemed rankings of both regarding fighter of the year etc. Looks like he picks and chooses just what he wants to publicise

:lol:

[redrooster]

Hagler was shit. He come out all confused not knowing which stance to fight in, Leonard was giving him what Mike Colbert had done for 11 rounds a decade earlier. Hagler looked like he wanted Leonard's autograph in the first few rounds. The stupid star-struck baldy bastard. :yep

"What Mike Colbert had done for 11 rounds" As if you watched the fight yourself. I get it. HaHa.

You just told us you were eight yrs. when you saw Leonard-Hearns so that makes you 3 or 4 when you watched Hagler-Colbert?

Now we all know you didn't see it so stop letting on like you did liar. If you're lucky you once watched the highlights but I don't think so because I live in the States and I haven't seen it. And that's no lie.

Unlike yourself, the rest of us (except for John Thomas) don't describe fights we didn't see ourselves and don't pretend to. If you're looking ways to smear a fighter, would you please do so in legitimate fashion the way I do on a day to say basis?

Thank you.

[redrooster]

i'm sick of these damn lies polluting the forms saying whatever they want and inventing stories on the spot.

Conteh, answer me this: why would any one from the world of boxing ask some low-life nobody, with no connections, off of the streets to come in and eat with them? They're not exactly the generous type from what I hear.

The guy who used to post here a while back, Hasscup, I can believe but he was quick to show me evidence and also has the kind of connections needed in this business but you're no one of importance so why should I believe you?

[JohnThomas1]

You're just soooo sexy when trying to play the innocent, rational and sane role reddy.

:lol:

[redrooster]

You're just soooo sexy when trying to play the innocent, rational and sane role reddy.

:lol:

i imagine it's hard to recall details from a fight when you're 3 years old. I love the front he puts on about "hagler fell behind just like in the Colbert fight"

He's hilarious.

[redrooster]

"He fell behind to leonard the way he did with Colbert a decade earlier"

What'll he say next?

[JohnThomas1]

"He fell behind to leonard the way he did with Colbert a decade earlier"

What'll he say next?


Hmmmmm, possibly that you are an absolute dickhead.

:lol:

[JohnThomas1]

i imagine it's hard to recall details from a fight when you're 3 years old. I love the front he puts on about "hagler fell behind just like in the Colbert fight"

He's hilarious.

He's hilarious says the undisputed Village Idiot of ESB

:rofl

[redrooster]

Hmmmmm, possibly that you are an absolute dickhead.

:lol:

Well, he does act like an eight year old so that wouldn't surprise anyone here.
he usually pops off like an imbecile on other people but quiets down once I come out. You don't have much to say either. I'd say I gave you both a good beating this morning. :!:

[JohnThomas1]

Well, he does act like an eight year old so that wouldn't surprise anyone here.
he usually pops off like an imbecile on other people but quiets down once I come out. You don't have much to say either. I'd say I gave you both a good beating this morning. :!:
I'd say the only thing you've been beating this morning is about 3 inches long and points in the direction of your SRL poster wall.

8===D~~~~ SRL poster

[KO Boxing]

how could Hagler have lost the first four rounds? You're being very generous to leonard when the most he did was make the first and third even. And you can't give him round seven because throwing combinations after the bell does not tip the scales,, at least not legally when it comes to scoring. That's what some guy did-he gave it to leonard because he got in 3 or 4 after the bell and pretended he didn't hear the bell, like Leonard.

Why does leonard always need so much help in fights?
I didn't score Leonard round 7... Round 3 was certainly Hagler's better of the first four rounds, but he is still visibly frustrated and swining wildly (and slowly, at that). Leonard is making him miss, and lands the occasional combination. Hagler, while more effective than rounds 1 and 2, was ineffective.

If Rounds 1 and 3 are a draw, then rounds 5, 6 and 8 (wierd I didn't say 7, but the fights fresh in my mind) could also be argued a draw.

Either way, 115-113 Leonard ain't no robbery... But I do now see how people can score this fight for Hagler... And it does prove a prime Hagler beats a prime Leonard AT MIDDLEWEIGHT. I also think it proves that p4p Leonard was better... Leonard fans may agree, most Hagler fans won't... but that's how it is.

EDIT: I scored those rounds for Hagler by the way... Maybe one of them was the even round in my scorecard (5th or 6th ??)

[redrooster]

I didn't score Leonard round 7... Round 3 was certainly Hagler's better of the first four rounds, but he is still visibly frustrated and swining wildly (and slowly, at that). Leonard is making him miss, and lands the occasional combination. Hagler, while more effective than rounds 1 and 2, was ineffective.

If Rounds 1 and 3 are a draw, then rounds 5, 6 and 8 (wierd I didn't say 7, but the fights fresh in my mind) could also be argued a draw.

Either way, 115-113 Leonard ain't no robbery... But I do now see how people can score this fight for Hagler... And it does prove a prime Hagler beats a prime Leonard AT MIDDLEWEIGHT. I also think it proves that p4p Leonard was better... Leonard fans may agree, most Hagler fans won't... but that's how it is.

EDIT: I scored those rounds for Hagler by the way... Maybe one of them was the even round in my scorecard (5th or 6th ??)

a lot of rounds from that fight could be argued either way and that means there is no clear winner. And if that's the case then no one can boastthat leonard beat him since it wasn't clear cut win and I'm not buying into the storythat he was p4p better than Hagler. Not with a 36-3-1 record I'm not. And certainly not when he can't account for the losing performance against Norris.

It may not have been a robbery as you saybut Leonard did not do enough to deserve win much less the right to brag of a big win that he could put on a resume.

BTW, Hagler was shot. I know because I watched him in sparring a couple weeks before the fight.

Don't take my word for it. You could hear Ryan and Clancy at the sixth. The conversation goes something like this: Tim Ryan- "Leonard said that Hagler had lost a lot of speed and was counting on the slowness of Hagler".

That is the clincher that confirms what I long thought, that Leonard refused to take a fight with Hagler 5 years before. Ray said one month after beating Tommy that he wanted Hagler as he was doing commentary for the Hamsho fight but as the rounds progressed and Hamsho took more of an ugly beating, Ray quieted down about wanting to fight.

by the time the fight was over he completely changed his tune. Larry went up to Marvin and relayed this message from Sugar Ray: "although Leonard has said that he'd like to fight you, he says maybe you'rea little big for him.

It looks like with your weight tonight at 157 if he doesn't move up that you might come down to 154"

That was Leonard's storyfrom then on,, as seen in the Ring interview in December 81, looking to handicap Hagler by having him drop to the lowest weight possible and since he wouldn't take the bait as Lalonde had, he just quitthe sport and decided to let the time pass while Hagler wore himself out with the opposition, namely Roldan, Hearns, and especially Mugabi.


because a man's reflexes have been dulled so that leonard could pull eve with him doesn't make him special. It just means Hagler deteriorated and tells me that Leonard despite what anyone says, needed more help and concessions
than other fighters because he couldn't cut it on his own before he left the sport. Which means he wasn't anything special at all. If he were, he would have beaten when he was expected to-no excuses!

In the end, I don't appreciate his methods just as I don't believe in surprise comebacks out of the blue against a man he wanted no part of for years. Even as I don't believe his reasons for refusing to defend his title even as I didn't believe in his winning two titles in one night.

He's a fake and it showed up in the Norris fight.

[SgrRyLeonard]

If he was really a fake it would have showed up long before then.

[Street Lethal]

It doesn't look like My Dinner with Conteh has seen the Colbert fight either (or maybe he just doesn't understand what he's seeing). Any similarity between the Colbert and Leonard fights lies in the fact that Hagler picked up the pace after the opening rounds and battered his opponent around the ring. One crucial difference of course is that Leonard fought a survival fight and made it to the last round (so he could benefit from poor or perhaps even corrupt judging). Colbert didn't hear the final bell.

My Dinner with Conteh also doesn't appear to know the basic facts about Leonard-Hearns I. Leonard had a deep bone bruise not a "mouse." Hearns beat Leonard's eye into a slit. Pearl believes it was in the fight that leonard suffered his detached retina. He said that the only thing that kept him from taking Leonard to the ringside physician and asking him whether it should continue was the fact that the eye was not completely closed. He said that the eye itself became discolored, and he could see that early in the fight.

Pearl also said after the fight that at the moment he stopped the fight, Hearns was taking a lot of shots, but that they must have been really soft one because Hearns otherwise would have been down and bleeding. In other words, Pearl admits to stopping a fight because of soft punches. Strange goings on if your ask me.

Had it not been for Hearns' legs going all wonky on him (under 100+ degrees temperature), Leonard would have lost nearly every round of that fight. The stoppage was controversial. If it hadn't of been we wouldn't have heard all the talk about how it wasn't. When a stoppage is obvious, nobody talks about it. Of course, I don't have a keepsake trunk with articles about it, so I can't site chapter and verse of the post fight coverage. But I have my memory and that's a hell of a lot better than the paper trail, because the press, so biased in favor of Leonard (despite Leonard's constant paranoia about that), whitewashed the controversy, justifyed the stoppage in their minds. I don't remember Dunphy retracting his very dramatic statement about how wrong it was to stop the fight, but if that's true, the fact that he would do so publicly proves how controversial the stoppage was! I do remember Dunphy that night though. He was horrified by the stoppage.

And do you guys remember all the stupid controversy over the scoring where people said Leonard should have won round 6 by more than a score of 10-9? In no other fight has the controversy ever been that on the basis of one shot that wobbled a fighter that the other guy shoul have been awarded a 10-8 or 10-7 round. Only for Leonard all the points should be used. Anything to justify the false view that Leonard was not on the receiving end of a boxing lesson that night.

Anyway, My Dinner with Conteh harbors some serious hatred for Hagler and is obviously a huge Leonard fanboy. He is so biased he seems like a caricature of a fan.

[salsanchezfan]

Here's to ya Ray! :happy :happy :happy


You have given Rooster his raison d'etre, and with it, years of thread fodder for us all.

Bless you.

[Street Lethal]

how could Hagler have lost the first four rounds?

Because for some people, if they keep repeating that and they keep hearing that pretty soon they actually come to believe that.

[Street Lethal]

One more thing. I understand that most ringside reporters had Leonard ahead in the Hearns fight. That is an amazing fact to me, but it does help me understand why so many reporters thought Leonard beat Hagler and Leonard-Duran I was close. What I don't understand is the power Leonard has over people that makes them see him winning when he is losing. It's like Leonard is a Jedi using a mental trick on the weak minded. (No offense)

[redrooster]

Damn it Sal! You know my logic is the glue that holds this forum together.

[salsanchezfan]

Damn it Sal! You know my logic is the glue that holds this forum together.


..........Not making fun! Honestly. You are an indespensible part of this place. :patriot

[redrooster]

It doesn't look like My Dinner with Conteh has seen the Colbert fight either (or maybe he just doesn't understand what he's seeing). Any similarity between the Colbert and Leonard fights lies in the fact that Hagler picked up the pace after the opening rounds and battered his opponent around the ring. One crucial difference of course is that Leonard fought a survival fight and made it to the last round (so he could benefit from poor or perhaps even corrupt judging). Colbert didn't hear the final bell.

My Dinner with Conteh also doesn't appear to know the basic facts about Leonard-Hearns I. Leonard had a deep bone bruise not a "mouse." Hearns beat Leonard's eye into a slit. Pearl believes it was in the fight that leonard suffered his detached retina. He said that the only thing that kept him from taking Leonard to the ringside physician and asking him whether it should continue was the fact that the eye was not completely closed. He said that the eye itself became discolored, and he could see that early in the fight.

Pearl also said after the fight that at the moment he stopped the fight, Hearns was taking a lot of shots, but that they must have been really soft one because Hearns otherwise would have been down and bleeding. In other words, Pearl admits to stopping a fight because of soft punches. Strange goings on if your ask me.

Had it not been for Hearns' legs going all wonky on him (under 100+ degrees temperature), Leonard would have lost nearly every round of that fight. The stoppage was controversial. If it hadn't of been we wouldn't have heard all the talk about how it wasn't. When a stoppage is obvious, nobody talks about it. Of course, I don't have a keepsake trunk with articles about it, so I can't site chapter and verse of the post fight coverage. But I have my memory and that's a hell of a lot better than the paper trail, because the press, so biased in favor of Leonard (despite Leonard's constant paranoia about that), whitewashed the controversy, justifyed the stoppage in their minds. I don't remember Dunphy retracting his very dramatic statement about how wrong it was to stop the fight, but if that's true, the fact that he would do so publicly proves how controversial the stoppage was! I do remember Dunphy that night though. He was horrified by the stoppage.

And do you guys remember all the stupid controversy over the scoring where people said Leonard should have won round 6 by more than a score of 10-9? In no other fight has the controversy ever been that on the basis of one shot that wobbled a fighter that the other guy shoul have been awarded a 10-8 or 10-7 round. Only for Leonard all the points should be used. Anything to justify the false view that Leonard was not on the receiving end of a boxing lesson that night.

Anyway, My Dinner with Conteh harbors some serious hatred for Hagler and is obviously a huge Leonard fanboy. He is so biased he seems like a caricature of a fan.

Well the guy blew his cover. I didn't know for sure that he didn't see it but once he admitted his age I did. Yes Lethal, he is one of those hiding his intentions with the usual "I love Hagler" types trying to follow in my footsteps and counter my accusations with his own. Except that all he's been armed with is an article that dates back "decades ago" as Dinner would put it. :lol:


I once cornered a writer who wrote some trashy Leonard article on a website a few years back. He didn't know how to defend his views at all and petered out early like most of them. And that's exactly the reason I don't understand why his fans laud him the way they do. They come on strong with the typical boasts but once the facts are presented, they take off limping Young Griffo style.

To tell the truth, I don't think they know why they believe the way they do. Could be the hype that made an early impression. They say the human mind is most susceptible to propoganda at ages of 7 and before.

I don't know why Leonard couldn't turn out to be more like Sanchez where he beat back everyone in brutal fashion. Sal was always up for a fight. You name the time and the place and he'll meet you there. And he never had a problem with rematches. What's more he always came out of fights with his face unmarked.

No controversy, just tko wins-no help needed. Sanchez would hate it if an opponent asked "Sal, would you like me to weigh in such and such weight to make it easy for you?" An insult. Hell no and he wouldn't tell you to hold on a few years "I need to make sure you can't hurt me it we fight"

Anyhow, I had Tommy way in front of Leonard. Ray wasn't doing anything except following him around and throwing haymakers every 45 seconds of the round. Tommy wilted late as you'd expect because his dumb trainer had him melt down to 145. Too light, no stamina for the late rounds, and no power

[TIGEREDGE]

Leonard was great great great no doubt about it but he never achieved as much as his rivals duran, hearns and hagler. The later parts of his career were a joke he never won the super middleweight titles and light heavyweight titles. that fight with LALONDE was joke of joke

How can a super middleweight win the light heavy title at super middle

[young griffo]

Very good post Lethal. You bring thought and intelligence to this forum. How i wish that others would follow in your footsteps.

Yes of course it counts against his legacy. We all saw what transpired and shouldn't pretend it never happened. Remember that part of the blame lies with his fans boasting how Leonard was going to beat him. But they underestimated him thinking "this is the guy who goes into a shell when faced with class punchers.., he's a runner, Ray Leonard will give him a boxing lesson and knock out this clown, finishing what Chavez couldn't do".

But Hector sure gave it to the legend that night and lived up to his nickname, the Macho Man. When it's Macho time, you'd better watch out!!

People I talked to afterwards who don't know about my fanaticism, were absolutely shocked over the way Hector came out and what he did to leonard. And these are old people that have been around.

It all comes down to this: they overrated leonard, as they still do today and underrated Hector as they do today, but is now getting a second look for his work at 130.

I think these people had to be in shock at the outcome and especially at the way Hector forced the fight so effectively, punching holes in his hapless foe's anatomy, surprising the world with glimpses of his lost greatness.

With just the little zip he had left and the confidence you'd expect from a Macho Man, this fighting mad tiger had leonard back pedalling and tripping over his feet. This fight was so horrendous for Leonard, it was enough for people like Young Griffo to cover up their faces.

Hector also rediscovered the art of dirty fighting from his early days on national tv, something I had sorely missed and thought I'd never see again.

I love how he came out for the fifth, immediately slamming two hard lefts to the face of Leonard. It was the hardest he'd been hit ever.

It was really turning out to be a bad night for Ray. Just in the previous round he had a spell of bad luck with Hector catching his eye with a butt and opening a laceration above the eye.

But it wouldn't have mattered anyways because Hector was wearing him down fast and sapping his strength moment by moment. The holding behind the neck and hitting tactic was very effective, something Leonard did not know how to cope with.

It's like I said, Leonard has had a very limited career and just hasn't had enough fights to say he's had those trials by fire. But Hector was one fight he'll never forget as well as the audience who had come to watch Leonard give that clown a lesson in pain and shut his mouth for all time.

Still I was quite satisfied with the out come and we all have to admit that Hector was the hero and leonard was nothing more than the big zero I said he was.

I forgot to mention I also won quite a bit of money much to someone's regret.
Beating Leonard that night was no great accomplishment.

If you think Camacho beating a 40 year old,who was coming off a 6 year lay off and was fighting with an injured leg is some sort of feat then you're easy to impress.Camacho did what he did best in his latter career and that's beat a once great fighter who was 15 years past his best.It was either that or meet a green youngster with not much of a future and fatten his record on them.

You're showing your selective memory once again Rooster as we saw what happened in Camacho's very next fight against a young,class puncher in Oscar De La Hoya.
What did he do after he tasted Oscar's power? He reverted to his true form and went into his shell all the while running and clinching and merely trying to survive.The same as he did against Rosario,the same as he did against Chavez,and the same as he did with Trinidad.

This fighting mad tiger you talk of more closely resembled a timid,tabby cat that had been neutered when faced with a prime fighter physically capable of victory.Oscar forever emasculated this so called Macho man.

Macho Camacho?:lol: :lol: You'd see more machismo in a gay pride march.

I shouldn't be tarnishing a thread about a great like Leonard with talk about a low life wastrel like Camacho who achieved half of what Ray did in twice as many fights but you making a hollow victory over Ray into something like a triumph has to be addressed.

Camacho had comparable talent to Ray but when faced with adversity Ray,at his best, always responded,Camacho didn't and therein lays the difference.This is why Leonard's remembered as a legend and Camacho's remembered as the dickhead who (quite appropriately considering his lack of balls) boxed in a skirt.

[JohnThomas1]

I shouldn't be tarnishing a thread about a great like Leonard with talk about a low life wastrel like Camacho who achieved half of what Ray did in twice as many fights but you making a hollow victory over Ray into something like a triumph has to be addressed.


Half? More like 1/10. Camacho didn't beat any great anywhere near their better form, he lost to every one of them.

[redrooster]

he said "Ray always responded"

See Norris and Camacho for definition of "response"

[JohnThomas1]

he said "Ray always responded"

See Norris and Camacho for definition of "response"

You mean Norris' response to Jacksons right hand and Macho's response to some heavy hitting from Rosario? Well one was Goodnight Irene and the other's answer was to fight to not get hit against dangerous opponents from then on

:lol:

[redrooster]

You mean Norris' response to Jacksons right hand and Macho's response to some heavy hitting from Rosario? Well one was Goodnight Irene and the other's answer was to fight to not get hit against dangerous opponents from then on

:lol:

No stupid. leonard's response to his conquerors Norris and Hector, the two fighters he was supposed to beat with ease.

He just stood there frozen on the ropes the way he did with Terry the moment Hector caught his chin which was never much to begin with.

Let's not pretend. People who were expecting an easy Ray Leonard win were pissed over the outcome and it showed on their faces. I know that you and especially Griffo would give anything to see Leonard add those two to his list of name fighters to the win column.

Undoubtedly, would brag to no end about how he handled the young upstart Norris and shut the clown-loudmouth Camacho just as I have the luxury to rub it in and will do so for time without end. And the best part is that no gift decisions were involved and no controversy-just a good old fashion ass kicking! :D

Griffo as you can see, was all bent out of shape over the outcome-especially when SRL was supposed to win. That's why he comes out with typical excuse nonsense about Leonard's calf. As I recall, it was Leonard's chin that Hector's left hand came crashing down on, not his leg.

Leonard always had an excuse for all his defeats so you should never believe him. i thought it was shameful the way he took the mike in his hand and tried unloading his new excuse for losing. His leg was fine.

i really don't see the importance of comparing career accomplishments-that leonard accomplished twice what Hector did with half the fights.

What do I care if Leonard wins two titles in one night or if he gets gift decisions? Hector beat his brains out, that's all I care about.

[young griffo]

No stupid. leonard's response to his conquerors Norris and Hector, the two fighters he was supposed to beat with ease.

He just stood there frozen on the ropes the way he did with Terry the moment Hector caught his chin which was never much to begin with.

Let's not pretend. People who were expecting an easy Ray Leonard win were pissed over the outcome and it showed on their faces. I know that you and especially Griffo would give anything to see Leonard add those two to his list of name fighters to the win column.

Undoubtedly, would brag to no end about how he handled the young upstart Norris and shut the clown-loudmouth Camacho just as I have the luxury to rub it in and will do so for time without end. And the best part is that no gift decisions were involved and no controversy-just a good old fashion ass kicking! :D

Griffo as you can see, was all bent out of shape over the outcome-especially when SRL was supposed to win. That's why he comes out with typical excuse nonsense about Leonard's calf. As I recall, it was Leonard's chin that Hector's left hand came crashing down on, not his leg.

Leonard always had an excuse for all his defeats so you should never believe him. i thought it was shameful the way he took the mike in his hand and tried unloading his new excuse for losing. His leg was fine.

i really don't see the importance of comparing career accomplishments-that leonard accomplished twice what Hector did with half the fights.

What do I care if Leonard wins two titles in one night or if he gets gift decisions? Hector beat his brains out, that's all I care about.
I wasn't bent out of shape by Camacho's win at all.
You've got me pegged as a Leonard fan boy when in reality I'm not at all.His career was done and dusted by the time I got into boxing and I was/am a bigger fan of guy's like Tszyu,Whitaker,Jones Jnr,and Holyfield.But I think he gets too much undeserved shit and belittlement from the likes of you Rooster.

You reckon Leonard had an excuse for every loss? Well I say you've got an excuse for every win Ray had.

Duran had a sore tummy,Hearns was weight weakened,Hagler was old and slow and got robbed,Geraldo had him hurt, Howard dropped him blah blah blah.SO WHAT! It was Ray's hand raised at the end of these fights and that's what counts,no matter how much piss and vinegar you spout about it.

I don't buy into all these excuses just like you don't buy Leonards against Camacho.

I can understand perfectly why you're not into comparing Camacho's and Leonard's careers as there really is no comparison.Leonard achieved more against a much better calibre of opposition and you know it and it hurts.

As for Camacho-Leonard I put about as much stock in Camacho's win as I do in James Toney's win over Holyfield or Kevin McBrides win over Mike Tyson.That is to say nothing at all.

[My dinner with Conteh]

One more thing. I understand that most ringside reporters had Leonard ahead in the Hearns fight. That is an amazing fact to me, but it does help me understand why so many reporters thought Leonard beat Hagler and Leonard-Duran I was close. What I don't understand is the power Leonard has over people that makes them see him winning when he is losing. It's like Leonard is a Jedi using a mental trick on the weak minded. (No offense)


Most of the ones that had Leonard ahead, had Hagler winning. Pay attention pecker breath.

[JohnThomas1]

You reckon Leonard had an excuse for every loss? Well I say you've got an excuse for every win Ray had.

Duran had a sore tummy,Hearns was weight weakened,Hagler was old and slow and got robbed,Geraldo had him hurt, Howard dropped him blah blah blah.

He's like a broken fukking record really isn't he :lol:

As predictable as he is delusional, and that is really saying something

:lol:

[JohnThomas1]

Most of the ones that had Leonard ahead, had Hagler winning. Pay attention pecker breath.

You know they only see what they want to see, or would like to see

:roll:

[My dinner with Conteh]

You know they only see what they want to see, or would like to see

:roll:



I wonder who Street Lethal really is? :huh :D

[My dinner with Conteh]

I'd say the only thing you've been beating this morning is about 3 inches long and points in the direction of your SRL poster wall.

8===D~~~~ SRL poster


:lol:

[My dinner with Conteh]

Pearl also said after the fight that at the moment he stopped the fight, Hearns was taking a lot of shots, but that they must have been really soft one because Hearns otherwise would have been down and bleeding. In other words, Pearl admits to stopping a fight because of soft punches. Strange goings on if your ask me.


Pearl also said he gave Hearns ever chance to punch back but he didn't. Tommy was spent. Accept reality. Steward agreed with the stoppage and the NY Times (who I'm sure you'll quote sooner or later ;) ) said Pearl's performance was 'flawless'.

[JohnThomas1]

I wonder who Street Lethal really is? :huh :D

Gee, i wonder

:lol:

[ChrisPontius]

You mean Norris' response to Jacksons right hand and Macho's response to some heavy hitting from Rosario? Well one was Goodnight Irene and the other's answer was to fight to not get hit against dangerous opponents from then on

:lol:

:lol:

This thread has been another, good, laugh.

[redrooster]

I wasn't bent out of shape by Camacho's win at all.
You've got me pegged as a Leonard fan boy when in reality I'm not at all.His career was done and dusted by the time I got into boxing and I was/am a bigger fan of guy's like Tszyu,Whitaker,Jones Jnr,and Holyfield.But I think he gets too much undeserved shit and belittlement from the likes of you Rooster.

You reckon Leonard had an excuse for every loss? Well I say you've got an excuse for every win Ray had.

Duran had a sore tummy,Hearns was weight weakened,Hagler was old and slow and got robbed,Geraldo had him hurt, Howard dropped him blah blah blah.SO WHAT! It was Ray's hand raised at the end of these fights and that's what counts,no matter how much piss and vinegar you spout about it.

I don't buy into all these excuses just like you don't buy Leonards against Camacho.

I can understand perfectly why you're not into comparing Camacho's and Leonard's careers as there really is no comparison.Leonard achieved more against a much better calibre of opposition and you know it and it hurts.

As for Camacho-Leonard I put about as much stock in Camacho's win as I do in James Toney's win over Holyfield or Kevin McBrides win over Mike Tyson.That is to say nothing at all.

I thought the sore tummy was an excuse myself until another poster put on an article from Randy Gordon himself.

So it's not my excuse. Dropping 40 + pounds that fast was a major factor in how Duran performed. Not to mention he was on diurretics and as Randy had said "Duran was in no condition for a 15 round fight". If Randy said it, it must be true.

Hagler was old and slow which we all know but won't acknowledge, as well as heard on the tape, round six, by leonard himself and quoted by Tim Ryan.

Tommy at 145 which affected his performance. Same as what Clancy said frequently throughout the fight and just as critical of Ray's performance.

So all of this negative comments as you like to call it is based on observation and opinions from those in the know, expert sources including Ray himself and all I'm doing is pointing it out as a reminder.

As for Hector, it doesn't matter to me if he never won two titles in one night. No one else has either. :smoke

What does matter is head to head which cancels out the importance of all of leonard's tarnished victories,, even his tko win over Lalonde. In fact, I can tell you from experience that it's far more satisfying to see a head bashing instead of fantasizing over it the way you and John do.

You know, bragging rights.

[redrooster]

:lol:

This thread has been another, good, laugh.


At least Griffo has the nerve to defend his position.

[ChrisPontius]

At least Griffo has the nerve to defend his position.

I know, the fact that i've not been in Haglers camp weeks before the Leonard fight where everyone was amazed by how shot Hagler suddenly was, makes me unconfident on this matter. :oops:

[Street Lethal]

I wonder who Street Lethal really is? :huh :D

Funny, but I don't wonder who you really are, although I am coming to believe that you and JohnThomas1 are the same person using different nicks (I guess I can understand why opinions such as your require false support through the proliferation of nicks).

We use nicks and not our real names for a reason. I don't want to know who you really are. I want to argue about ideas. But if it helps make you feel more secure, I can tell you that I am not a sports writer or a former boxer, so there is no trickerying going on. I'm just a huge fan of the sport of boxing.

[Street Lethal]

Most of the ones that had Leonard ahead, had Hagler winning.

This doesn't make any sense. You want to try that again?

[Street Lethal]

Pearl also said he gave Hearns ever chance to punch back but he didn't.

But Hearns was punching back, so Pearl's statement is blatantly false.

[JohnThomas1]

I know, the fact that i've not been in Haglers camp weeks before the Leonard fight where everyone was amazed by how shot Hagler suddenly was, makes me unconfident on this matter. :oops:

Yeah, Marvin relayed the fact that he was shot to redrooster when he had Red over the day after the fight to review the tapes together. They watched this over a few beers while Marv's wife Berryl cooked them up a roast which was followed by a sweet chocolate mudcake and then the bottle of Jack came out. Red promptly told Marv, look Marv i only had you ahead by 118 - 111 and if this sucker can not only take a round off you but also go the 12 i think it's time we shut up shop. Marv promptly rang Randy Gordon and announced that after heavily deliberating his future with his most trusted advisor it was time to call it a day.

[JohnThomas1]

Funny, but I don't wonder who you really are, although I am coming to believe that you and JohnThomas1 are the same person using different nicks (I guess I can understand why opinions such as your require false support through the proliferation of nicks).

We use nicks and not our real names for a reason. I don't want to know who you really are. I want to argue about ideas. But if it helps make you feel more secure, I can tell you that I am not a sports writer or a former boxer, so there is no trickerying going on. I'm just a huge fan of the sport of boxing.
Pass the pepper please Megs

:lol:

[redrooster]

Funny, but I don't wonder who you really are, although I am coming to believe that you and JohnThomas1 are the same person using different nicks (I guess I can understand why opinions such as your require false support through the proliferation of nicks).

We use nicks and not our real names for a reason. I don't want to know who you really are. I want to argue about ideas. But if it helps make you feel more secure, I can tell you that I am not a sports writer or a former boxer, so there is no trickerying going on. I'm just a huge fan of the sport of boxing.

FYI

Don't take him at his word Lethal. He doesn't believe his own words and displays nonsense only for display to ridicule. I should tell you that John has done this sort of thing before with others before you and started with me on a rumour that I was one of the other posters from the ESB classic section.

Several others from this forum disputed his claims although he was dead set and even tracked the times we came on and off the forum. Once this other fellow was banned, who by the way was very informative and knowledgable, he makes claims that anyone new to the forum with similar insights must be the same person but with a new name.

[JohnThomas1]

FYI

Don't take him at his word Lethal. He doesn't believe his own words and displays nonsense only for display to ridicule. I should tell you that John has done this sort of thing before with others before you and started with me on a rumour that I was one of the other posters from the ESB classic section.

Several others from this forum disputed his claims although he was dead set and even tracked the times we came on and off the forum. Once this other fellow was banned, who by the way was very informative and knowledgable, he makes claims that anyone new to the forum with similar insights must be the same person but with a new name.

It appears there is another

glich in the system

:hi:

[My dinner with Conteh]

Yeah, Marvin relayed the fact that he was shot to redrooster when he had Red over the day after the fight to review the tapes together. They watched this over a few beers while Marv's wife Berryl cooked them up a roast which was followed by a sweet chocolate mudcake and then the bottle of Jack came out. Red promptly told Marv, look Marv i only had you ahead by 118 - 111 and if this sucker can not only take a round off you but also go the 12 i think it's time we shut up shop. Marv promptly rang Randy Gordon and announced that after heavily deliberating his future with his most trusted advisor it was time to call it a day.


:lol:



Although you missed one key detail mate. When Marv got the bottle of 'Jack' out he promptly hit his wife over the head with it. :good

[JohnThomas1]

:lol:



Although you missed one key detail mate. When Marv got the bottle of 'Jack' out he promptly hit his wife over the head with it. :good

Oops, "Bertha", new it was something to do with a golf club :lol:

and don't forget the jab that set up the sneaky overhand Jack!

[ChrisPontius]

Yeah, Marvin relayed the fact that he was shot to redrooster when he had Red over the day after the fight to review the tapes together. They watched this over a few beers while Marv's wife Berryl cooked them up a roast which was followed by a sweet chocolate mudcake and then the bottle of Jack came out. Red promptly told Marv, look Marv i only had you ahead by 118 - 111 and if this sucker can not only take a round off you but also go the 12 i think it's time we shut up shop. Marv promptly rang Randy Gordon and announced that after heavily deliberating his future with his most trusted advisor it was time to call it a day.

:lol:

[redrooster]

Name calling is not an argument but rather a refuge for the ignorant. :!:

[Street Lethal]

FYI

Don't take him at his word Lethal. He doesn't believe his own words and displays nonsense only for display to ridicule. I should tell you that John has done this sort of thing before with others before you and started with me on a rumour that I was one of the other posters from the ESB classic section.

Several others from this forum disputed his claims although he was dead set and even tracked the times we came on and off the forum. Once this other fellow was banned, who by the way was very informative and knowledgable, he makes claims that anyone new to the forum with similar insights must be the same person but with a new name.

I see. Thanks for the heads up. What I see from these guys so far is Hagler is an inferior boxer because he had problems in his marriage and because I may be somebody else.

You're right. It is for the most part ad hominem tactics. The pattern I see is JohnThomas playing straightman to My Dinner with Conteh's insult comedy routine.

I have decided not to talk to these guys anymore. They aren't serious about classic boxing.

[JohnThomas1]

The pattern I see is JohnThomas playing straightman to My Dinner with Conteh's insult comedy routine.

I have decided not to talk to these guys anymore. They aren't serious about classic boxing.

Promise?

:good

[fists of fury]

This has been a great thread so far...

[redrooster]

This has been a great thread so far...

Thanks. We try our hardest to please.

[Addie]

I've heard Ray Leonard cop a lot of shit on this site and I think it's time to redress the balance.

After all this brilliant boxer provided us with some superb and compelling moments in a brilliant and exciting career yet I feel he's sadly underappreciated on this forum.

This is a man who beat legends like Duran,Hearns,Hagler,and Benitez but has recently began to experience a backlash of sorts which has seen a lot of his fantastic achievements given little respect from his detractors and his standing downgraded by said haters.

Let's hear from some of you Leonard fans,tell us your favourite fights of his,your best memories of his career,where you rank him p4p,or whatever else about him you would like to make comment on.


Please note this thread is only for those people who are appreciative of Leonard's abilities,detractors can feel free vent their dislike of him in other threads but don't hijack this one to push your anti-Leonard agenda's.

Props on making the thread.

Regardless of the Sugar Man's personality, he has to be regarded as one of the greatest fighters that ever stepped in the ring. He holds victories over Hagler, Hearns, and Duran - all ATG's themselves. None of them were shot fighters, Hearns was arguably in his prime, whereas Hearns was still great. Can't discredit the man.

His career showcases one of the most impressive highlight reels I've seen.

[redrooster]

Props on making the thread.

Regardless of the Sugar Man's personality, he has to be regarded as one of the greatest fighters that ever stepped in the ring. He holds victories over Hagler, Hearns, and Duran - all ATG's themselves. None of them were shot fighters, Hearns was arguably in his prime, whereas Hearns was still great. Can't discredit the man.

His career showcases one of the most impressive highlight reels I've seen.

Sure you can--and you need to get your facts straight. Hagler was shot, Hearns was 3 years from his prime and didn't know how to clinch, Duran was on diurretics and took off 10 pounds three days before he weigh in.

Sugar's career was a joke.

[Drew101]

Sure you can--and you need to get your facts straight. Hagler was shot, Hearns was 3 years from his prime and didn't know how to clinch, Duran was on diurretics and took off 10 pounds three days before he weigh in.

Sugar's career was a joke.

Sugar KO 1 Billy Backus :D

[redrooster]

Sugar KO 1 Billy Backus :D

Hector Camacho KO 5 Ray Leonard :tdh

[Addie]

Sure you can--and you need to get your facts straight. Hagler was shot, Hearns was 3 years from his prime and didn't know how to clinch, Duran was on diurretics and took off 10 pounds three days before he weigh in.

Sugar's career was a joke.

Of course, all of this Sugar Ray Leonard knew and used to his advantage.

I apoligise.

[redrooster]

Of course, all of this Sugar Ray Leonard knew and used to his advantage.

I apoligise.

You must have missed the thread I wrote "What Ray Leonard must do to certify his greatness". If you had read it you'd understand just how far he needed to go. In the 1940's he'd never be able to get away with his antics and would be laughed out of the sport for making such ludicrous demands.

He'd be a a good prelim fighter but never a main event fighter. Can you imagine Leonard competing at the same time as Robinson at welter? :lol:

He couldn't carry Robinson's jockstrap.

[Robbi]

You must have missed the thread I wrote "What Ray Leonard must do to certify his greatness". If you had read it you'd understand just how far he needed to go. In the 1940's he'd never be able to get away with his antics and would be laughed out of the sport for making such ludicrous demands.

He'd be a a good prelim fighter but never a main event fighter. Can you imagine Leonard competing at the same time as Robinson at welter? :lol:

He couldn't carry Robinson's jockstrap.

Robinson also made outrageous demands as well. Everything had to be to his satisfaction before he'd enter the ring.

Some members of the press and Robinson's team were never certain he'd actually compete in a sheduled match until he was in the ring with the first bell sounding.

Maybe thats a slight overexaggeration, but ive heard that statement before about Robinson.

A very complex and difficult individual to deal with, who was said to have a great business brain between his ears.

[redrooster]

Forget the rumours, look at his record.

For the first 11 years I see a very long list of enviable accomplishments and abounding with rematches with anyone with significance.

He was ambitious to say the least, an overachiever if ever there was one. What's more, he had more pride than leonard and would never think of asking for a match if the opponent was down. By down, I mean in decline or looking shaky, or vulnerable in any way that other fighters can spot. Leonard was spoiled and got everything on a silver platter including two titles in one night-he didn't have no 100 fights. He didn't even have 50 fights or close to it.

If people want to call me a hater for harping on it, that's just their way of trying to deny it-but we all know they-Griffo, Dinner, JT, Mantequilla, and all the other ignoramuses, can't.

Robbi, do you know what would happen to this forum if I stayed away for more than a week? Those types would begin congregating at ESB and wind up like some cheap forum with a bunch of kids at the helm taking over. It would be like leaving the trash out for a week and finding roaches swarming all over the house.

Don't you want your house clean?

But wait, there's more...when RR had a rematch, it didn't take better part of a decade as it did with Leonard. You know I just don't believe in that bullshit (his excuses). That's for the lame and the weak and Robinson just doesn't fit that bill.

Robbie was never hesitant to fight and his record proves it. That's one of the reasons he's so highly esteemed.

[young griffo]

Forget the rumours, look at his record.

For the first 11 years I see a very long list of enviable accomplishments and abounding with rematches with anyone with significance.

He was ambitious to say the least, an overachiever if ever there was one. What's more, he had more pride than leonard and would never think of asking for a match if the opponent was down. By down, I mean in decline or looking shaky, or vulnerable in any way that other fighters can spot. Leonard was spoiled and got everything on a silver platter including two titles in one night-he didn't have no 100 fights. He didn't even have 50 fights or close to it.

If people want to call me a hater for harping on it, that's just their way of trying to deny it-but we all know they-Griffo, Dinner, JT, Mantequilla, and all the other ignoramuses, can't.

Robbi, do you know what would happen to this forum if I stayed away for more than a week? Those types would begin congregating at ESB and wind up like some cheap forum with a bunch of kids at the helm taking over. It would be like leaving the trash out for a week and finding roaches swarming all over the house.

Don't you want your house clean?

But wait, there's more...when RR had a rematch, it didn't take better part of a decade as it did with Leonard. You know I just don't believe in that bullshit (his excuses). That's for the lame and the weak and Robinson just doesn't fit that bill.

Robbie was never hesitant to fight and his record proves it. That's one of the reasons he's so highly esteemed.
One of your (myriad) of criticisms of Leonard is that the Duran rematch happened too soon after their first fight and that Duran didn't have time to prepare properly,now your saying he took too long to give them.

So you think Leonard was too slow AND too quick in having rematches:huh

Consistency isn't one of your strong points Rooster.You also give Camacho full credit for beating up an old and infirm Leonard but take points of Chavez for punching holes in Camacho because Hector was a bit past it.

Talk about wanting to have things both ways.Honestly it's pointless contradicting one of your posts as given time you'll do it yourself.

Exposing flaws in your arguments is even easier than shooting fish in a barrel,it's more akin to dynamiting fish in a bucket.

[redrooster]

One of your (myriad) of criticisms of Leonard is that the Duran rematch happened too soon after their first fight and that Duran didn't have time to prepare properly,now your saying he took too long to give them.

So you think Leonard was too slow AND too quick in having rematches:huh

Go back and read Gordon's account if you haven't done so yet and once you have this knowledge available to you, will be better prepared to ask the right questions. :smoke

[redrooster]

Consistency isn't one of your strong points Rooster.You also give Camacho full credit for beating up an old and infirm Leonard but take points of Chavez for punching holes in Camacho because Hector was a bit past it.

Talk about wanting to have things both ways.Honestly it's pointles contradicting one of your posts as given time you'll do it yourself.

Exposing flaws in your arguments is even easier than shooting fish in a barrel,it's more akin to dynamiting fish in a bucket.

news flashl-both were past their primes so it evens out. It doesn't tell you that one fighter destroyed another fighter based on only one fighter's decline.

Hector Camacho hasn't seen his prime since 1987 when nobody could even compete with him. so 3 defeats later (4 when you count Duran) and 30 pounds heavier, looks on paper like Hector is doing just as bad as Ray.

That's what it looks like to me. Ray did have the problem of inactivity but this was his sort of situation. You know, he lays on the sofa for a few years watching fights until a flash of inspiration hits him and compels him to make another comeback. He's done this before typically does very well.

We all know what leonard was thinking after Hector's last fight-"he got beat by a 45 year old, a 45 year old I beat twice!"

Everyone knows this Young Griffo!


So leonard had his inactivity and Hector had his losses. The greatness of Hector relative to Leonard's, was too much to cope with and he simply overpowered him.

[Drew101]

Hector Camacho KO 5 Ray Leonard :tdh

Julio Cesar Chavez W12 Hector Camacho :D

oh, and...

Glen Johnson K09 Roy Jones Jr. :good

Hey, this is fun! Let's keep it going! :thumbsup

[JohnThomas1]

Julio Cesar Chavez W12 Hector Camacho :D

oh, and...

Glen Johnson K09 Roy Jones Jr. :good

Hey, this is fun! Let's keep it going! :thumbsup

Hey, great game!!

SRL TKO8 Duran
SRL W12 Duran
SRL W12 Hagler
Parker TKO3 Fletcher
Curry TKO2 "Hard Rock (for Rooster)" Green
Jail KO1 Ayala
Robbi TKO2 Rooster

[redrooster]

I'm in

Barkley ko 3 Hearns

Nelson ko 8 Fenech

Norris w 12 Leonard

Duran w 15 Leonard

:D

[Sweet Science]

news flashl-both were past their primes so it evens out. It doesn't tell you that one fighter destroyed another fighter based on only one fighter's decline.

Hector Camacho hasn't seen his prime since 1987 when nobody could even compete with him. so 3 defeats later (4 when you count Duran) and 30 pounds heavier, looks on paper like Hector is doing just as bad as Ray.

That's what it looks like to me. Ray did have the problem of inactivity but this was his sort of situation. You know, he lays on the sofa for a few years watching fights until a flash of inspiration hits him and compels him to make another comeback. He's done this before typically does very well.

We all know what leonard was thinking after Hector's last fight-"he got beat by a 45 year old, a 45 year old I beat twice!"

Everyone knows this Young Griffo!


So leonard had his inactivity and Hector had his losses. The greatness of Hector relative to Leonard's, was too much to cope with and he simply overpowered him.


Why do you hate Leonard with so much passion?

[redrooster]

Why do you hate Leonard with so much passion?

I pick on him for all the special treatment he got. Where would he be without it?

People actually believe his claims as a five time world champion when he couldn't even handle Norris. Two titles in one night? Forget about it!

[JohnThomas1]

I'm in

Barkley ko 3 Hearns

Nelson ko 8 Fenech

Norris w 12 Leonard

Duran w 15 Leonard

:D

OMG what are you going to do now, you've used all (a meager 3) SRL's losses and we haven't even warmed up :lol:

Greg Haugen W12 Hector Camacho
Tito Trinidad W12 Camacho
ODLH W12 Camacho
Chris Walsh!!! TD7 Camacho!

[redrooster]

OMG what are you going to do now, you've used all (a meager 3) SRL's losses and we haven't even warmed up :lol:

Greg Haugen W12 Hector Camacho
Tito Trinidad W12 Camacho
ODLH W12 Camacho
Chris Walsh!!! TD7 Camacho!

i'm sure if Leonard had any more fights I could name that much more the way he was going. What was his record-was it 36-3-1 or was it more like 35-5?

:!:

[Drew101]

I'm in

Barkley ko 3 Hearns

Nelson ko 8 Fenech

Norris w 12 Leonard

Duran w 15 Leonard

:D

Nice.

Haugen W12 Camacho

Lewis KO2 Bowe

Hearns KO4 Roldan

Mullings KO9 Norris

[young griffo]

i'm sure if Leonard had any more fights I could name that much more the way he was going. What was his record-was it 36-3-1 or was it more like 35-5?

:!:
I'm sure if Leonard didn't have any pride or self respect he could've feasted on the Craig Houk's or Otilio Villarreal's of this world and fattened his record 65-3-1 ala the mighty Macho Man.

He could kiss HOF status goodbye but it would keep him in steady drug and bail money just like Hector.

Maybe if he'd followed this career path of underachievement Ol' Rooster might've even warmed to the kid.:D

[Robbi]

Leonard v Hearns I. I think everyone would agree Hearns won the first 5 rounds, not by decisively knocking Leonard all over the ring during each round. But he was coming forward aggressively, landing jabs, and out-working Leonard. The odd right hand connected on Leonards chin as well. Competitive rounds, but Hearns clearly.

13 rounds were completed at the time of the stoppage. So If Hearns won the first 5 rounds, he would only have needed to win 2 of the last 8 rounds to be ahead. However depends on If someone scores the 6th and 13th rounds 10-8 for Leonard, which is possible. If memory serves me correctly Hearns did take a count during the 13th round. I might be wrong.

[redrooster]

I'm sure if Leonard didn't have any pride or self respect he could've feasted on the Craig Houk's or Otilio Villarreal's of this world and fattened his record 65-3-1 ala the mighty Macho Man.

He could kiss HOF status goodbye but it would keep him in steady drug and bail money just like Hector.

Maybe if he'd followed this career path of underachievement Ol' Rooster might've even warmed to the kid.:D


Did you say Bruce Finch, Larry Bonds, and Ayub Kalule? Did you say Don lalonde? Did you say......two titles in one night? Uno mas? :lol: a rubber match ten years in the making. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I didn't think so.

[Robbi]

Did you say Bruce Finch, Larry Bonds, and Ayub Kalule? Did you say Don lalonde? Did you say......two titles in one night? Uno mas? :lol: a rubber match ten years in the making. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I didn't think so.

Rooster. While I'm not a fan of Leonard, his accomplishments in the ring are of the highest calibre. However I do agree that Leonard winning the two WBC titles against Lalonde was a farce to say the least. He got special treatment from Jose Sulaiman on that occassion, no question.

As I have said before, I'd be embarrassed with such an achivement on my record.

Pretty simple: Winning two world titles from two seperate divisions in one fight you could call cheating.

While fighters like Hearns and De la hoya won WBO titles at super-middleweight and super-featherweight, they did win titles in 5 divisions by winning them against 5 seperate opponents, the same can't be said of Leonard.

In my opinion only one fighter has legitmately won titles in 5 different weight divisions, counting the three major sanctioning bodies. WBC/WBA/IBF.

Floyd Mayweather

1. Genaro Hernandez. WBC super-featherweight title, 1998.

2. Jose Luis Castillo. WBC lightweight title, 2002.

3. Arturo Gatti. WBC light-welterweight title, 2005.

4. Zab Judah. IBF welterweight title, 2006. Carlos Baldomir, WBC welterweight title, 2006

5. Oscar De la hoya. WBC light-middleweight title, 2007.

[redrooster]

Nice.

Haugen W12 Camacho

Lewis KO2 Bowe

Hearns KO4 Roldan

Mullings KO9 Norris

Not bad but nothing quite tops Camacho KO 5 Ray Leonard :!: :vonnecunt :toney :tdh

[Drew101]

Not bad but nothing quite tops Camacho KO 5 Ray Leonard :!: :vonnecunt :toney :tdh

Tarver KO2 Jones.

Checkmate!:D

:smoke

[JohnThomas1]

Tarver KO2 Jones.

Checkmate!:D

:smoke

Ooooooooooooooo, he saved the killer blow for last! Well played, and congratulations on your resounding victory!!

:good

[redrooster]

Tarver KO2 Jones.

Checkmate!:D

:smoke

Not even close. Camacho ko 5 Leonard is the most gratifying knockout of our lifetimes. Remember, leonard thought he would actually beat Hector. So did you!

[redrooster]

Ooooooooooooooo, he saved the killer blow for last! Well played, and congratulations on your resounding victory!!

:good

That was his killer blow?? Hell, that tickled! He should feel embarassed :oops:

[young griffo]

Did you say Bruce Finch, Larry Bonds, and Ayub Kalule? Did you say Don lalonde? Did you say......two titles in one night? Uno mas? :lol: a rubber match ten years in the making. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I didn't think so.
Finch,Bonds,Kalue,and Lalonde are a full head and shoulders above the garbage that Camacho chose to fight later on in his career.

Uno mas ? Seven years later Camacho fought an even older,slower and fatter Duran and still struggled.When Leonard fought him the third time Duran was coming off a great win over Barkley,by the time he fought Camacho the only thing he'd won recently was a seniors discount.

You've once again displayed the patented Rooster double standard when it comes to Leonard,and you've left yourself wide open to it yet again.:yep

[My dinner with Conteh]

Tarver KO2 Jones.

Checkmate!:D

:smoke


Ha ha. Nice work Kasparov. :good



"Got any excuses tonight Red?" :yep

[redrooster]

Ha ha. Nice work Kasparov. :good



"Got any excuses tonight Red?" :yep

Excuses for what? You're lame!

[JohnThomas1]

Ha ha. Nice work Kasparov. :good



"Got any excuses tonight Red?" :yep

:rofl

[Street Lethal]

Finch,Bonds,Kalue,and Lalonde are a full head and shoulders above the garbage that Camacho chose to fight later on in his career.

You mean like Duran and Leonard?

[Street Lethal]

Rooster. While I'm not a fan of Leonard, his accomplishments in the ring are of the highest calibre.


His accomplishments, while impressive, are hardly of the highest calibre. Think about it. If any other welterweight but Leonard won the title in a close affair, lost it to the lightweight champion, regained it in a fight that disappointed everybody, received a severe beating from an up-and-coming welterweight, refused to give that up-and-comer a rematch, and otherwise posted a mere three title defenses against inferior opposition, people would hardly be talking about an all-time great welterweight. There are many welterweights who accomplished more than this, and we don't say their accomplishments in the ring "are of the highest calibre." That's because in those cases we aren't blinded by the light.

If that same welterweight won the middleweight title from an fading champion in an extremely controversial fight, refused to give the long-time champion a rematch, won the light heavyweight title from an unremarkable fighter whom he made lose down to 168 pounds for the fight, was awarded a draw in a fight he himself knew he lost, received a severe beating from an up-and-coming junior middleweight, and then was knocked out inside of five rounds by an old former lightweight title claimant, people would hardly be talking about an all-time great fighter. They would regard his comeback as ordinary and full of gifts.

If they were objective, they would note that everything this fighter did was manipulated to his advantage, that he received numerous gifts from referees and judges and matchmakers, that he lost to a lightweight in his prime and at his end, and especially that he was knocked down 7 times in his last 7 fights. And all the while he complained that everybody was against him. His paranoia was extreme (and shared by his manager), belied by the fact that everywhere in public he was adored.

Without the illusion created by hype, Leonard would be seen as a fighter who was competitive, a tough hombre, but hardly a fighter who achieved feats of the highest calibre. He never dominated any division. He was not a fighting champion. He never demonstrated a committment to taking on the best opponents in their primes. He never demonstrated a willingness to give rematches to those who proved the potential of beating him. In fact, much of his behavior was shameful and a detriment to the sport of boxing.

Leonard came along when the media needed a replacement for Ali. A good looking fellow, articulate and knowing how to play to a camera and an audience, Leonard played the American public like a harp. So good was his performance that people today still go on about his greatness as if he deserved to be in the upper echelon of the welterweight division and the all time pound for pound ratings. It's more illusion reality, more style than substance.

[My dinner with Conteh]

That's actually a pretty good post. But when one considers the welter he beat for the title was one of boxing's pound-for-pound best; the lightweight that defeated him and he beat in rematch was boxing's pound-for-pound best; the welter he unified against was probably the pound-for-pound hardest hitter in boxing and fighter of the year for 1980; the middleweight champ, while faded, was still considered to be boxing #1 pound-for-pounder. He also picked up a 154 strap against a fine light-middleweight. That's one decent fighter, baby. :good


I agree that the post-Hagler version was a twat. No doubts there. His ego got the better of him after that fight.

[young griffo]

That's actually a pretty good post. But when one considers the welter he beat for the title was one of boxing's pound-for-pound best; the lightweight that defeated him and he beat in rematch was boxing's pound-for-pound best; the welter he unified against was probably the pound-for-pound hardest hitter in boxing and fighter of the year for 1980; the middleweight champ, while faded, was still considered to be boxing #1 pound-for-pounder. He also picked up a 154 strap against a fine light-middleweight. That's one decent fighter, baby. :good


I agree that the post-Hagler version was a twat. No doubts there. His ego got the better of him after that fight.
:thumbsup

[redrooster]

That's actually a pretty good post. But when one considers the welter he beat for the title was one of boxing's pound-for-pound best; the lightweight that defeated him and he beat in rematch was boxing's pound-for-pound best; the welter he unified against was probably the pound-for-pound hardest hitter in boxing and fighter of the year for 1980; the middleweight champ, while faded, was still considered to be boxing #1 pound-for-pounder. He also picked up a 154 strap against a fine light-middleweight. That's one decent fighter, baby. :good


I agree that the post-Hagler version was a twat. No doubts there. His ego got the better of him after that fight.


But he was faded (if you want to be truthful, shot). Hagler was boxing's best p4p for years. Why couldn't he face him a few years sooner? :smoke

[My dinner with Conteh]

But he was faded (if you want to be truthful, shot). Hagler was boxing's best p4p for years. Why couldn't he face him a few years sooner? :smoke



Why didn't Hagler, in 1987, say: "You want my title? Earn a ranking first, peanut head"?



Maybe he thought Hagler was too strong in 1982, probably did. It's likely that he changed his mind after he saw Marv in with Duran.