In the last 30 years- p4p whose better than Sugar Ray Leonard

[Nawfal]

i think the guy is the best fighter i have seen

he had everything. speed, power heart, skills. complete package and fought in a great era

who in the last 30 years was better than him?

[dangerousity]

Roberto Duran possibly. P4P.

[sues2nd]

Arguably is all you can say, cause....well its Leonard, so.

But p4p you could make an arguement for.

Duran
Whitaker
Sanchez (if not for the accident)
RJJ
Floyd

I may be forgetting a few that are in the area of, but noone you could say without a doubt.

[brooklyn1550]

But p4p you could make an arguement for.

Duran
Whitaker
Sanchez (if not for the accident)
RJJ
Floyd


:goodYou can certainly make arguments for all of them, although besides Duran, I rate SRL higher than the other 4.

[acb]

Floyd? Look at his level of competition in comparison to SRL.

SRL: Haggler, Hearns, Duran, Benitez...

Floyd: DLH, Corrales, Castillo, Judah...

:-(

[brooklyn1550]

Floyd? Look at his level of competition in comparison to SRL.

SRL: Haggler, Hearns, Duran, Benitez...

Floyd: DLH, Corrales, Castillo, Judah...

:-(

Die-hard Floyd fans will certainly try to present their case:lol:

[doublesuited]

Honestly, since 1977, the only boxers that could arguably be better P4P than Leonard are Hagler and Whitaker. Duran's dominance at lightweight play a huge part in his P4P ranking for me, so I don't include him. If it was the past 40 years, it would easily be Duran.

Leonard is #1 for me the past 30 years.

[sues2nd]

Floyd? Look at his level of competition in comparison to SRL.

SRL: Haggler, Hearns, Duran, Benitez...

Floyd: DLH, Corrales, Castillo, Judah...

:-(

Like I said, make an arguement...not that he was better. Floyd is faster, had better defense, etc. His resume tho is not even close.

Of those names, I only really believe Whitaker and Duran are close. Just pointing out that there are a few at or around that level.

[acb]

Like I said, make an arguement...not that he was better. Floyd is faster, had better defense, etc. His resume tho is not even close.

Of those names, I only really believe Whitaker and Duran are close. Just pointing out that there are a few at or around that level.

I know, you were bringing up possibles. My response wasnt so much for you, just for what I know is coming.

SRL and Duran kick Floyd´s ass, legacy wise and head to head.

[Illmatic]

The only person I think who has a strong case to be better p4p than Leonard in the last 30 years is Whitaker. Hagler has no case, Duran has some case. Leonard had an incredible career.

[Max Molyneux]

Calzaghe.

[sues2nd]

Calzaghe.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Welcome to sport of boxing...I hope you enjoy learning about it.

[brooklyn1550]

Calzaghe.

End of discussion:deal

20 defenses of his WBO title with wins over Jeff Lacy (who is better than Hagler), Chris Eubank (who is better than Hearns), Robin Reid (who is better than Benitez), Peter Manfredo Jr (who is better than Duran), Mario Veit, Omar Sheika, and Charles Brewer...

Simply put, a much better resume than Ray Leonard:happy

[brooklyn1550]

Considering Duran's lightweight days were over 30 years ago, Whitaker has the best case with titles at 135, 140, 147, and 154. However, his wins over Azumah Nelson, Jose Luis Ramirez, Julio Cesar Vasquez, Buddy McGirt, and Jorge Paez (should have had a win over Chavez) fall short of Leonard's dramatic wins over Hagler and Hearns and his two other greatest wins over Duran and Benitez. But Whitaker's longevity, length as a champion, and more wins over high quality opponents make a case very presentable.

[codeman99998]

Floyd is not faster than SRL...

[robert ungurean]

Duran
possable Hagler,Sanchez & pryor

[robert ungurean]

I would never put Jones jr. or Floyd in the same class as Leonard.

[acb]

Duran
possable Hagler,Sanchez & pryor

Pryor? Based on...

[surreal deal]

Roberto Duran possibly. P4P.
one of the few with a good case.:good
i think leonard is the fastest,quicker than any other speedster.

[surreal deal]

me too.

[surreal deal]

Floyd is not faster than SRL...
damn right he's not.

[surreal deal]

damn right he's not.

[surreal deal]

Honestly, since 1977, the only boxers that could arguably be better P4P than Leonard are Hagler and Whitaker. Duran's dominance at lightweight play a huge part in his P4P ranking for me, so I don't include him. If it was the past 40 years, it would easily be Duran.

Leonard is #1 for me the past 30 years.
youre right.good point,take away 135lb duran and
SRL it is.

[robert ungurean]

Pryor? Based on...
He was a GREAT fighter.

[thunder06]

dlh

[George W Hedge]

You can choose between these 4 for best p4p in the last 30......

DURAN
LEONARD
CHAVEZ
WHITAKER

2 sweet stylists & 2 technically brilliant pressure fighters but in reality.... 4 complete fighters.

Ps. I rate Ali in his prime a touch higher than those guys & I know he fought in 77 but that version of Ali wasnt as good as those guys, not by a long shot, maybe subtract 10 yrs, thats a different story.

:good

[Hadrian]

chavez for his achievements, sweet pea for his achievements and his talent, hagler, I'd put pryor in there especially since word ahs it around here (DC-SRL home turf) that SR ducked Pryor. Duran for sure was no 1 if you go back 40 and probably right there at 30.heavyweights are tuff....
I can't say on PBF as I hate to include anyone who isn't done (notice I chose done rather than retired) yet...but he is on track to be right there. Let's not forget SRL got undeserving decision against hearns 2, was questionable vs. an old hagler, and got beaten like a dozen eggs vs norris (albeit he was pretty far gone himself) though his losses were late in his career to be an undisputed p4p that kind of thing weighs in...or else we should definately throw in Jones, Toney and a few others. Not that this puts SRL out of it at all...just makes it less dominant. Finall if we're going to take PBF to task for not so great opposition, then let's really look at leaonard. He lost the first duran fight, he won the second but lot's of peeps have questioned that one, he beat a prime Hearns in his greatest effort and Benitez...anyone else of top class I'm forgetting? Oh yeah a pretty aged Hagler again in a not so impressive victory. I think SRL was a great fighter an all time great...but he has some real ???marks like most of the others too. Cheers.

[Pimp C]

In no order
RJJ
Hagler
Sweet Pea
Duran
PBF

[Relentless]

In no order
RJJ
Hagler
Sweet Pea
Duran
PBF

bitch.

[igotJUIC3]

the only person to come close is Floyd...BUT....he isnt there only because his fights...if he fights Cotto,Hatton, and Mosley he would be in my opinion...he is already just as talented as him but he just doesnt fight the competition like SRL.

[Nawfal]

floyd doesnt even deserve to be mentioned alongside leonard

leonard is better than floyd in every department. mabe not defence.

[Asterion]

--


Since 1977.....only Whitaker or Chavez could be considered better. Not Roy Jones, not Lennox Lewis, not Floyd Mayweather.

Not Duran because we're starting since 1977, not 1970.

[Marnoff]

Floyd's career isn't over. If he racks up some big wins (Cotto would be the most important of anyone, including Mosley and Hatton), I would then be able to put him here. If he retires now, he's lower on the list than Leonard. If he beats Hatton and Cotto, you can surely put him there. I'll reserve judgment until his career ends.

Also, keep in mind that though Leonard fought the biggest names of his time, he also had losses. Floyd remains undefeated against the big names of his own era, though there are still some heads not on his resume. One point you would add to Leonard that Floyd does not have is his Olympic Gold Medal, if you put much merit into the amateur background. Essentially what I'm saying is that if Floyd retires now, he's below Leonard, if he racks up two to three more big wins, he is above Leonard.

As for who is possibly better from the last thirty years, I would consider Roy Jones, Roberto Duran, Bernard Hopkins, or Pernell Whitaker. To me, Hagler simply isn't there, as great as he was. Also, considering his longevity in the sport and his record, Hearns has a case.

[dangerousity]

A win over the best LW and top 5 p4p of all time. A win over a top 30p4p and top 3 WW of all time, a win over arguably the best MW of all time + a whole lot of other big names. No contest, only Duran can compare but if his accomplishments pre-30yrs dont count, the answer to thread is nobody.

P4P SRL KO's RJJ. SRL had the power and speed to catch RJJ.

[acb]

In no order
RJJ
Hagler
Sweet Pea
Duran
PBF

You have to be kidding. Explain what makes PBF´s P4P legacy greater than Leonard.

[acb]

He was a GREAT fighter.

That doesnt cut it. :deal

This isnt the who else has been a great fighter in addition to SRL thread.

Pryor was great, but again, his competition doesnt match up to SRL.

[DanePugilist]

Hagler was the better man - just not when they met - Thats my view, but SRL was definately a mayor roleplayer.

1. Hagler
2. SRL
3. Whitaker.
4. Hearns.
5. Aaron Pryor.

[Daruf]

I have Duran and Hearns ahead also Whitaker has a good case but thats it.

[Shake]

Floyd can't do anything atthis point to ever surpass Leonard. For one thing, we always have to compare currents to the best of all-time. Do we compare Floyd to Wilfredo Benitez? No. We compare him to Sugar Ray Leonard, a man who fought in the best welter/middleweight era and has attained legendary status.

The comparison is unfair. Floyd was not born in such an era, and in fifty years when people look back, Floyd will be remembered as an awesome talent that won titles in multiple weight divisions, but Leonard will still be legendary for the drama, rivalries, and several of the best fights of all-time in that specific era.

Adding to that, no, I don't think Floyd stacks up to Leonard, and I firmly believe Leonard would have won head-to-head. Floyd has the tools to beat him, but mentally, Ray is very much tougher.

[SugarRay]

Floyd's career isn't over. If he racks up some big wins (Cotto would be the most important of anyone, including Mosley and Hatton), I would then be able to put him here. If he retires now, he's lower on the list than Leonard. If he beats Hatton and Cotto, you can surely put him there. I'll reserve judgment until his career ends.

Also, keep in mind that though Leonard fought the biggest names of his time, he also had losses. Floyd remains undefeated against the big names of his own era, though there are still some heads not on his resume. One point you would add to Leonard that Floyd does not have is his Olympic Gold Medal, if you put much merit into the amateur background. Essentially what I'm saying is that if Floyd retires now, he's below Leonard, if he racks up two to three more big wins, he is above Leonard.

As for who is possibly better from the last thirty years, I would consider Roy Jones, Roberto Duran, Bernard Hopkins, or Pernell Whitaker. To me, Hagler simply isn't there, as great as he was. Also, considering his longevity in the sport and his record, Hearns has a case.

Wins over Cotto, Hatton and an aging Mosley does not compare with wins over Hearns nor Hagler. There is nothing Mayweather can do apart from unifying all the titles or beating someone convincing likely Wright or Hopkins. Head to head, Leonard would KO Mayweather.

[Illmatic]

Yes Hagler was a great fighter, but his accomplishments cant hold a candle to those of Leonards. All the Hagler fans rave about him beating Mugabi...if Leonard beat Mugabi it wouldnt even rank over his win over Ayub Kalule....Kalule was a good titlist and would barely rank as one of his ten best wins.

[Thread Stealer]

Roberto Duran.

[Thread Stealer]

Considering Duran's lightweight days were over 30 years ago, Whitaker has the best case with titles at 135, 140, 147, and 154. However, his wins over Azumah Nelson, Jose Luis Ramirez, Julio Cesar Vasquez, Buddy McGirt, and Jorge Paez (should have had a win over Chavez) fall short of Leonard's dramatic wins over Hagler and Hearns and his two other greatest wins over Duran and Benitez. But Whitaker's longevity, length as a champion, and more wins over high quality opponents make a case very presentable.

Duran was still a lightweight in 1977.

Duran in the rubber match against Dejesus was the best he looked during his lightweight reign, IMO.

[lillarry]

none. Can anybody say that they have beat Benitez, Duran, Hagler and Hearns. But it will be funny for somebody to make a case for somebody else.

[C Money]

None IMO.

[cuchulain]

End of discussion:deal

20 defenses of his WBO title with wins over Jeff Lacy (who is better than Hagler), Chris Eubank (who is better than Hearns), Robin Reid (who is better than Benitez), Peter Manfredo Jr (who is better than Duran), Mario Veit, Omar Sheika, and Charles Brewer...

Simply put, a much better resume than Ray Leonard:happy

Calzaghe is underrated, even by ChinaHand, but you're laying it on a little thick.

RJJ, though was better in nearly every category.

[cuchulain]

dlh

The surgeon General should put warnings on crack-pipes !

[brooklyn1550]

Calzaghe is underrated, even by ChinaHand, but you're laying it on a little thick.

RJJ, though was better in nearly every category.

In the past 30 years, a lot of fighters, P4P, were better than Joe Calzaghe

[cuchulain]

In the past 30 years, a lot of fighters, P4P, were better than Joe Calzaghe


Not that many.

He makes my top 10. (of last 30 years, that is)

[stuistylee]

im new 2 this discussion stuff...u R fkn jokin rnt u?

[stuistylee]

i meant the guy who said joe.c...

[Hadrian]

Some of you are over rating SLL suppossed success over great compitition. He beat Duran in a somewhat suspicious fight after he already lost to him. He beat Hagler when Hagler was old, in Haglers SIXTY SEVENTH fight, and again a very unimpressive questionable win. He drew with Hearns in their second fight and has since admitted that he should have lost the decision. His two major conclusive victories over top oppenents were the first Hearns fight (he was awesome in this one-just awesome) and the Benitez fight.

[cuchulain]

i meant the guy who said joe.c...


Which concept amused you? And why?

[cuchulain]

Some of you are over rating SLL suppossed success over great compitition. He beat Duran in a somewhat suspicious fight after he already lost to him. He beat Hagler when Hagler was old, in Haglers SIXTY SEVENTH fight, and again a very unimpressive questionable win. He drew with Hearns in their second fight and has since admitted that he should have lost the decision. His two major conclusive victories over top oppenents were the first Hearns fight (he was awesome in this one-just awesome) and the Benitez fight.


He holds legit wins over Duran, Hearns and Benitez. And even though I thought Haggler edged him, he was a welterwt fighting at middlewt and aquitted himself well.

Overall, a legend and an ATG.

[cuchulain]

none. Can anybody say that they have beat Benitez, Duran, Hagler and Hearns. But it will be funny for somebody to make a case for somebody else.


RJJ has wins over BHop (generally the same as Haggler, and the margin was much clearer), Toney (as good as Benitez), and Ruiz (he was a heavy, 70 lbs heavier than Roy' starting wt, and a conqueror of heavywt HOFer, Holyfield).

He generally disposed of his opponents much more decisively and was overall, a better athlete.

He was the best of the past 30 years. (Other possibles: SRL, Sweetpea, Floyd)

[China_hand_Joe]

Calzaghe.And look how many people jump on you. "Look at Calzaghe's resume!" "There are no americans on it!" "All those fighters are shit, they lost to Joe Calzaghe". Who cares about resumes really? Calzaghe would be the best even if he'd fought Eric Crumble 40 times because of his ability. Calzaghe may not be the greatest (which is determined by resume) but he arguably is the best (determined by ability and skill).

[quintonjacksonfan]

Jones win over Ruiz is no better then SRL over Lalonde

SRL beat 4 all time greats at the pinncale of their careers. Wilfredo and

Hearns had never lost and Duran and Hagler had gone 10 years without a loss

Nobody knew who Hopkins was when Jones beat him and some people

don't have Toney in their top 50 all-time.

[A-50]

Compare Leonard's and Roy Jones Resume. No way can Glass Jaw Roy Jones be compared to Leonard P4P. The competition level is like night and day. Leonard would knock Roy Jones out.

[Beatboxer]

RJJ resume is nowhere near as good as SRLs

if you dismiss Calzaghe based on his legacy you must dismiss china chops Jones

the same goes for Mayweather

in all honesty i think only Duran really matches up to Leonard...although i wouldn't totally dimiss Whittaker offhand either.

[dangerousity]

I cant believe no one says Hagler. This is the man who stayed in his own division for over 10 years FILTERING the best his division has to offer.

Everyone seems so fascinated by fighters moving up and down, these are the same reason we have so many what if's scenario.

You have to respect guys like Hagler and Hopkins, even for just the discipline of keeping weight all those years.

Hagler is close but fact is, Hagler made his name beating up ATG's who were naturally smaller than him. SRL made his name beating up ATG's his size, smaller and above. On top of that he did beat Hagler though that fight could have been scored either way. Also I think staying in your own weight class is easier than moving up to seek the best on that division. What SRL did moving up to MW to beat ATG Hagler would be simmilar to Hagler moving up to LHW and beating RJJ(if they were from same era). Certainly very impressive.

[Hadrian]

I'm going to say this one more time as clearly as possible. If we are considering oppenets as much as has been posted thus far, the criteria should be: The opponents level (all time great, great etc.), where the opponent was in his career-because I could have beaten the Ali that fought Berbick, how succesful/convincing was the win. On that basis, INMO SRL beat 2 possibly 3 fighters which qualify. Benitez, Hearns 1 and maybe the infamous NO MAS Duran 2. NONE of his other fights were decisive wins against top level opponents in- or near- their prime. I will bump him higher for the first Duran fight which he-barely-lost. But Ayube kalube, Donnie and Marie Lalonde and co. are not up to snuff. Jones beat a prime hopkins a prime Toney, won a heavyweight championship and beat a lot of other tough rugged big men as well as some good lighter weight guys. I'm not saying RJJ had better oposition than SRL....but it is not as far as some of you make it out to be. Which brings up another interesting question- why do sports fans-boxing especially-always seem so stingy about awarding credit to people of a current era, particularly in relation to those from the past?

[surreal deal]

bitch.
bitch?what weight class was he?

[dangerousity]

I'm going to say this one more time as clearly as possible. If we are considering oppenets as much as has been posted thus far, the criteria should be: The opponents level (all time great, great etc.), where the opponent was in his career-because I could have beaten the Ali that fought Berbick, how succesful/convincing was the win. On that basis, INMO SRL beat 2 possibly 3 fighters which qualify. Benitez, Hearns 1 and maybe the infamous NO MAS Duran 2. NONE of his other fights were decisive wins against top level opponents in- or near- their prime. I will bump him higher for the first Duran fight which he-barely-lost. But Ayube kalube, Donnie and Marie Lalonde and co. are not up to snuff. Jones beat a prime hopkins a prime Toney, won a heavyweight championship and beat a lot of other tough rugged big men as well as some good lighter weight guys. I'm not saying RJJ had better oposition than SRL....but it is not as far as some of you make it out to be. Which brings up another interesting question- why do sports fans-boxing especially-always seem so stingy about awarding credit to people of a current era, particularly in relation to those from the past?

So lemme see. Hagler who was undefeated for 10 years and was coming off huge wins over the likes of Hearns & Mugabi is supposudley shot in comparison to the likes of Ali vs Berbick? Yet at the same time, A green hopkins is supposudley prime and Toney who was weight drained is also prime. This has nothing to do with old vs new era, if this was I would say Mugabi rates higher than Hopkins. Its just a case of one having greater accomplishments and happens to be a fighter from 30 years ago. Were not naming a fighter from 100 years ago either.

[achillesthegreat]

No one. It is arguable that all those years before Leonard that he is still the best.

Leonard beat Benitez, Duran, Hearns and Hagler. That's arguably the best 135, 140, 154 and 160 in history. He never beat arguably the best 147 because he could be it!

I don't think any P4Per has really achieved this. Opposition is paramount and I'm not sure I can say Robinson, Armstrong, Pep or any one else has really done that.

Just like Ali at heavy. I can't say any heavy beat a Liston, a Foreman AND a Frazier.

Now on top of all that both these guys got there fair share of achievements so it's like they lost twenty fights with no achievements but 3 or 4 good wins.

Achievements, accomplishments etc are secondary to opposition. The best beating the best and proving what they can do IN THE RING!

Guys like Robinson, Armstrong do bend this rule because on paper they did some stupid shit like Robinson being a major player until 40. That's longevity like Hopkins but after wars, hundreds of fights and some bad living.

[achillesthegreat]

Nope.
Yes.

Who was the greatest 140 pounder in history that he arguably beat? His fights with Hagler and Hearns are marred with controversy, and he got beat in the rematch with Hearns. He lost to natural LW Duran the first time and beat him again under controversial circumstances the second time and when he was old the 3rd time. Lot of excuses from me, all good wins, but not as good as they seem on paper.
Wilfredo Benitez.

Stop being ridiculous. Excuses, controversy and all that bollocks can be brought up for anyone. I'll rip apart Ali, Louis and everyone elses record. Give it some respect like it deserves and it gets it's true worth.

He never got beat in the rematch by Hearns. It was a draw and that is not a controversial decision.

Duran was proven at 147 and up to 160. No shame there. Second time, Duran loss. Some call it controversial, others say excuses. Arcel knows nothing of it and one of Durans mouthpieces admitted he made it up to save face or risk Duran being killed (maybe literally) in Panama. Third time, he was old but so was LEonard, Duran was coming off of amazing Barkley win, Leonard came off of another fight where he looked bad.

Too many legendary wins for it to be a fluke.

They all had MUCH MUCH MUCH deeper resumes though and beat greats in their own right.
Comeptition is paramount and I don't think any P4P fighter has faced arguably the best 135, 140, 154 and 160. Speaks for itself.

Explained above, these fights were in some questionable circumstances, but they are good wins, but once again, not as good as they seem on paper. Also remains the fact that the rest of his resume literally has nothing.
There is always controversy and excuses when the fighter LOSES. Every fight where something is wrong for Leonards opponent think about what was wrong for Leonard and then you'll see your shining bias.

How does the rest of his resume have nothing? It has the typical titlists and contenders like Kalule, Lalonde etc

He didn't have a good enough resume(even decent) aside from these fightys, which again were not as good as you make them out to be given the circumstances in them all. He was a great fighter, and arguably a top 10, but not the greatest at all.
You are talking out of your arse. What I've said about his competition is irrefutable. His competition is unbelievable and legendary to the highest degree.

[achillesthegreat]

You lack discipline!

C'mon, don't bullshit me.

Ok, the Hearns fight was a good win, most think he lost the rematch, including Leonard himself. Hagler was past his prime, but still a good win, but A LOT think Hagler won. The Benitez fight was a good win. He lost to a top conditioned Duran, and won two rematches with a not so top Duran. All in all, when it comes to the names,, great stuff, but as I said, it's not all about resume, it's about what actually happens and what the circumstance is in the ring, and while he some GREAT wins, they are not as great in real life as they seem on papper. You seem to be going purely by paper. Even with that, he is definitely not the best.

Leonard himself thought he lost, as did most who watched it.

I have no bias, I just don't think Leonard was the greatest in the entire history of boxing because of some controversial situations and some good name wins. I am usually the one defending Leonard.

He fought top names, but those top names were the only good names he fought, the rest of his resume blew, cept maybe Lalonde. Good wins on paper, but it ain't all about paper. He's not the best ever, in any way.
Too many excuses and too much bullshit.

Leonard has elite wins that are unrivalled. He also has wins over titlists, contenders and typical cannon fodder. We are talking about a man who use Kalule and a new division as a warm up for THOMAS HEARNS! Not only does he have that he does have longevity going to 35 and he does have accomplishments with 5 division titles.

You don't respect the worth of his wins. No point debating anymore.

[quintonjacksonfan]

Leonard had 3 stoppages against the big 4

Also beating Hagler after only 9 rounds in 5 years is quite impressive

[achillesthegreat]

You don't respect everyone else in history if you think his resume is the most impressive of all time. It's not at all.
This isn't true. Now you are just talking out of your arse. I have said arguable all along. I even said arguable for the rankings of Duran, Benitez etc I even said Robinson, Armstrong etc are an exception to the rule (opposition being paramount). So stop chatting shit.

Leonards record is irrefutable. Don't give me that jive about controversy, that's excuses and bullshit that can be used to rip anyones careers to shred - it doesn't matter if they are called Muhammad Ali or Joe Louis. Fighters are human, they aren't invincible and things don't go flawlessly.

Accept this and appreciate Ray Leonard.

[achillesthegreat]

I do appreacite him, I think he's perhaps a top 10 ATG, how is that not appreciation? I said he is not THE greatest, which you seem to think. I'm pretty sure noone but you shares that thought as well.
Top 10 is adequate appreciation. I'm sure his wins warrant him to be arguably ranked above any top 10 guys you name.

No one can refute what I've said. Bring me the excuses and bullshit to tarnish Leonards wins and I'll throw it right back at you with just as much shit.

[Bigcat]

there have been too many to mark a solid yes to Leonard being the best in the last 30 years.. Hearns, Hagler, Pernell, Duran its a very debatable one.......

Curry was awesome until McCallum got to him....

[Nawfal]

how can i meet ray leonard

he is the man

did you lot see that wind up with him and his son

[Fab2333]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Welcome to sport of boxing...I hope you enjoy learning about it.:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl

[Fab2333]

End of discussion:deal

20 defenses of his WBO title with wins over Jeff Lacy (who is better than Hagler), Chris Eubank (who is better than Hearns), Robin Reid (who is better than Benitez), Peter Manfredo Jr (who is better than Duran), Mario Veit, Omar Sheika, and Charles Brewer...

Simply put, a much better resume than Ray Leonard:happy
:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl
this gave me my laugh of the day

[achillesthegreat]

how can i meet ray leonard

he is the man

did you lot see that wind up with him and his son
i remember seeing that. we are talking about punked right?

[emanuel_augustus]

Marvin Hagler

[Marnoff]

Floyd can't do anything atthis point to ever surpass Leonard. For one thing, we always have to compare currents to the best of all-time. Do we compare Floyd to Wilfredo Benitez? No. We compare him to Sugar Ray Leonard, a man who fought in the best welter/middleweight era and has attained legendary status.

The comparison is unfair. Floyd was not born in such an era, and in fifty years when people look back, Floyd will be remembered as an awesome talent that won titles in multiple weight divisions, but Leonard will still be legendary for the drama, rivalries, and several of the best fights of all-time in that specific era.

Adding to that, no, I don't think Floyd stacks up to Leonard, and I firmly believe Leonard would have won head-to-head. Floyd has the tools to beat him, but mentally, Ray is very much tougher.

See, that's a trash response. How can you say... "Floyd can't do anything at this point to ever surpass Leonard." This is just crazy. You are putting Leonard on a pedastal that can't be reached, and that's wrong.

Also, what makes Ray tougher than Floyd? When did Floyd buckle under the pressure? I don't see where you get that statement. Yes, Ray is tough mentally, but nothing tells me that he is tougher.

[Marnoff]

Nope.

Who was the greatest 140 pounder in history that he arguably beat? His fights with Hagler and Hearns are marred with controversy, and he got beat in the rematch with Hearns. He lost to natural LW Duran the first time and beat him again under controversial circumstances the second time and when he was old the 3rd time. Lot of excuses from me, all good wins, but not as good as they seem on paper.

They all had MUCH MUCH MUCH deeper resumes though and beat greats in their own right.

Explained above, these fights were in some questionable circumstances, but they are good wins, but once again, not as good as they seem on paper. Also remains the fact that the rest of his resume literally has nothing.

He didn't have a good enough resume(even decent) aside from these fightys, which again were not as good as you make them out to be given the circumstances in them all. He was a great fighter, and arguably a top 10, but not the greatest at all.

I agree.

[platnumpapi]

roy jones jr is the best in the past 30
duran
mayweather jr

[Nawfal]

roy jones jr is the best in the past 30
duran
mayweather jr

rjjr or mayweather hasnt had the level of opposition that srl did

[Fab2333]

Mayweather? RJJ is the most talented in the past 30, but not really the greatest.
I agree here
I would rock with RJ, be4 his KO losses, that man did his thing in a boxing ring. And did it like no other bar none

[cuchulain]

I agree here
I would rock with RJ, be4 his KO losses, that man did his thing in a boxing ring. And did it like no other bar none


Like Ali, and Holmes (and some others) I would not count Roy's career much after Ruiz.

He went on too long. Some boxers get addicted to the whole hoopla.


I don't count Holmes losses after his middleaged comeback against him in his legacy. I count what he did up to Spinks 2 , which, IMO he won.

(He lost the first time though and he probably lost to Witherspoon)

Likewise, I don't count Ali's last two fights. He was a goner by then, old and disabled.

Stil, I rank Ali 1 and Holmes 5 or 6 alltime.


With Roy, he reached his pinnacle with his capture of a piece of the heavywt title over Evander-conqueror, John Ruiz.

Put that together with all that he achieved previously, and I think his accomplishments stack up against anyone in the past 30 years.

In terms of boxing ability, he ranks as the best of that period.

[TBooze]

Top 30 who turned pro since 1976:

30 James Toney
29 Ronald 'Winky' Wright
28 Orlando Canizales
27 Mike Tyson
26 Sot Chitalada
25 Jeff Chandler
24 Lennox Lewis
23 Aaron Pryor
22 Myung Woo Yuh
21 Jung Koo Chang
20 Kostya Tszyu
19 Brian Mitchell
18 Jeff Fenech
17 Salvador Sanchez
16 Marco Antonio Barrera
15 Mike McCallum
14 Felix Trinidad
13 Evander Holyfield
12 Khoasio Galaxy
11 Michael Spinks
10 Azumah Nelson
9 Floyd Mayweather Jr
8 Bernard Hopkins
7 Ricardo Lopez
6 Roy Jones
5 Thomas Hearns
4 Pernell Whitaker
3 Oscar de la Hoya
2 Julio Cesar Chavez
1 Ray Leonard

[TBooze]

I don't know what's up with a few of those choices at all, pretty ridiculous. But also De La Hoya that high? Chavez above Whitaker? Don't get it.

de la Hoya was the finest fighter of the 90s

Chavez's career was better than Whitaker's, there were far more career defining fights for Chavez, and overall better quality.

Just take there own fight, Chavez was fighting near prime Whitaker, but Whitaker was fighting a Chavez six years and 10+lbs past his best.

[TBooze]

He was NOT 6 years past his best, are you saying he was past his best in the Taylor fight as well?

Yes, he was three years past his best in 1990. Chavez was never quite the same fighter after Rosario.

[TBooze]

SO his best was only for one fight? He was pre-prime before that and only for that fight was he prime? After that if he lost it was because he was "past his prime"? Get real. He was not at his peak for the Whitaker fight, but he wasn't far past his prime at all. That was the first fight he was really made to look bad in.

He peaked against Rosario, and even the 1988 Aguilar and Ramirez fights showed a dip in performance, and that hurt him even more when he had the Mayweather rematch in 89, where he had to battle, yet three years earlier he was blowing Mayweather out in a couple of rounds.

Mayweather had improved in them three years, but even the 85/86 version decked Whitaker;)

[See Me Flow]

Peter Manfredo Jr (who is better than Duran)

No you did not mean this?! :rofl

[TBooze]

A dip in performance? Because the Rosario fight was his best doesn't mean he was past his prime after that fight. You make it seem like his prime lasted that fight and that fight only. He had difficult performances as they all do, but he also had great ones like against Haugen and Camacho. He was not past his prime really when he fought Whitaker(not a lot anyway), he was just past his peak, a little more than Whitaker was, who was also past his peak.

Chavez was a phenom no doubt, but that does not hide the fact he was six years past his peak (prime) performance, and yet was still the best fighter in the world!

Great fighters can substain excellent performances when way past their best, look at the Motor City Cobra hand Hill a boxing lessom in 1991, but no one for one second, mistook that Hearns for the 83/84 vintage, indeed Hearns demolition of Maynard put a chill though me, and that was what 94?

Chavez was the same, yes he seemed to roll back the years against Haugan or Camacho, but there was enough evidence (Taylor, Fuentas, Ramirez) to know Chavez had peaked and was on the way down.

[See Me Flow]

He was joking with that whole post to show how stupid that guy that said Calzaghe was.

:patsch You never know on this forum, Sweet.

[sweet_scientist]

Chavez was a phenom no doubt, but that does not hide the fact he was six years past his peak (prime) performance, and yet was still the best fighter in the world!

Great fighters can substain excellent performances when way past their best, look at the Motor City Cobra hand Hill a boxing lessom in 1991, but no one for one second, mistook that Hearns for the 83/84 vintage, indeed Hearns demolition of Maynard put a chill though me, and that was what 94?

Chavez was the same, yes he seemed to roll back the years against Haugan or Camacho, but there was enough evidence (Taylor, Fuentas, Ramirez) to know Chavez had peaked and was on the way down.
You're right, great fighters can sustain their excellence when past their best. Take Whitaker for example, he was four years past his peak performance against Jose Luis Ramirez, and still put a whooping on Julio Cesar Chavez :good

[TBooze]

You're right, great fighters can sustain their excellence when past their best. Take Whitaker for example, he was four years past his peak performance against Jose Luis Ramirez, and still put a whooping on Julio Cesar Chavez :good

And Chavez was so good, he took a whooping off a great fighter like Whitaker and still get a draw; hell even fooled us into believing he was unbeaten when he lost his 12th bout, the man had stroke! ;)

[sweet_scientist]

And Chavez was so good, he took a whooping off a great fighter like Whitaker and still get a draw; hell even fooled us into believing he was unbeaten when he lost his 12th bout, the man had stroke! ;)

:lol:

[Shake]

See, that's a trash response. How can you say... "Floyd can't do anything at this point to ever surpass Leonard." This is just crazy. You are putting Leonard on a pedastal that can't be reached, and that's wrong.

Sometimes no matter how much ability you have, in terms of opposition and legacy you can't catch up to someone else through no fault of your own. Be careful branding something trash before you fully understand what it is you're reading.

I'm not saying Leonard was a better boxer than Pretty Boy Floyd -- though I believe he was -- I'm saying that we're comparing Floyd to a man who came out on top during the deepest welterweight/middleweight era known to boxing. You tell me -- what can Floyd do to improve his resume so that it is better than a man who beat Roberto Duran,, Marvin Hagler, Thomas Hearns and Wilfredo Benitez, many of whom are regarded among the top 50 of all-time?

[Azania]

Man...I love this place.Boxing world fo sho.

[Minotauro]

The only person in the past 30 years I rate above him p4p is Duran although you could make a fair agrument for Whitaker or Chavez.