Best boxer in last 30 yrs - `Sugar`Ray Leonard

[Bill Butcher]

I debated between Leonard & Duran but 2 factors swung it SRLs way - A good part of Durans career was before 1978 & I regard Leonard as the superior BOXER of the 2.

5 weight world champion (tho I personally see him as a 4 weight due to the nonsense winning the 168 & 175 titles vs Lalonde)

1st man to beat Benitez (TKO 15)
1st man to beat Hearns (TKO 14)
2nd man to beat Duran (TKO 8)
1st man to stop Duran (TKO 8)
1st man to beat Hagler in 11 yrs (PTS 12)

I could list his attributes but you`ve all seen him no doubt so thats my choice anyway.

:thumbsup

[TommyV]

Are you forgetting a certain Pernell Whitaker?

[enquirer]

If you take it to maybe 33 years then its defo roberto,as it stands i still think roberto is better p4p,better at 135 than ray at 147,and lastly he beat ray in the fight were both were at their best And 13 pounds over his best weight.
Durans longevity,championship reign and undisputed no1 rank at 135,his genuine weight climbing and all round genius swing it for me,though ray was pretty awesome in his own right. Close but clear for manos de piedra...

[Bokaj]

Are you forgetting a certain Pernell Whitaker?

My thinking exactly. "Pea" didn't have Leonard's speed and power, but skill wise I don't think I've ever seen anyone more complete. His perfomance against Chavez... Amazing.

[mr. magoo]

Are you trying to attract a Rooster?



[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[bladerunner]

have you ever posted on ESB with another nick?

[Loewe]

If you take it to maybe 33 years then its defo roberto,as it stands i still think roberto is better p4p,better at 135 than ray at 147,and lastly he beat ray in the fight were both were at their best And 13 pounds over his best weight.
Durans longevity,championship reign and undisputed no1 rank at 135,his genuine weight climbing and all round genius swing it for me,though ray was pretty awesome in his own right. Close but clear for manos de piedra...

I totally agree. Leonard would be second though and because they are mentioned: Whitaker would be third and Chavez fourth.

[redrooster]

Roy Jones is the best boxer of the last 30 years. ray leonard isnt even close

[Robbi]

Roy Jones is the best boxer of the last 30 years. ray leonard isnt even close

Not even close? Resume counts more than anything else. What overly impresses you about Jones apart from skill and athletic ability? Toney and Ruiz are probably his best wins.

[Bill Butcher]

Are you forgetting a certain Pernell Whitaker?

No, I remembered Pernell.

He just wasnt as good a fighter as Leonard, there`s not much else to say, its that simple.

[DINAMITA]

Duran cannot be the best boxer of the last 30 years obviously, as his peak was the early-mid 70s. Duran is definitely the best boxer of the last 40 years IMO. Leonard is a fair call, but strong cases can surely be made for Hagler, Arguello, Whitaker, Chavez, and Hearns.

[Bill Butcher]

I always struggle between Duran & Leonard - on one hand Duran was IMO the best ever LWT, 4 weight champ, jumped 2 weights & handed SRL his 1st loss & had great longevity but after beating SRL had some terrible losses.... on the other hand Leonard was the 2nd best WWT ever IMO, 4/5 weight champ, had that marvelous comeback vs Hagler 2 weights above his natural weight, beat a better collection of great fighters than Duran including Duran himself but missed a large part of his career thru retirement.

I dont let the 2-1 thing affect my thinking when comparing the 2, the 3rd SRL/Duran fight should never have been made, I suppose its the quality of opponents defeated by Leonard that place him above not just Roberto but all others.

[Addie]

You made the right call. Ray Leonard is the best boxer of the past 30 years.

Whitaker was better defensively, but Leonard superior offensively. He also has the superior supreme to all the other candidates in question; Whitaker, Roy Jones, Duran, etc.

[bladerunner]

I always struggle between Duran & Leonard - on one hand Duran was IMO the best ever LWT, 4 weight champ, jumped 2 weights & handed SRL his 1st loss & had great longevity but after beating SRL had some terrible losses.... on the other hand Leonard was the 2nd best WWT ever IMO, 4/5 weight champ, had that marvelous comeback vs Hagler 2 weights above his natural weight, beat a better collection of great fighters than Duran including Duran himself but missed a large part of his career thru retirement.

I dont let the 2-1 thing affect my thinking when comparing the 2, the 3rd SRL/Duran fight should never have been made, I suppose its the quality of opponents defeated by Leonard that place him above not just Roberto but all others.
a few years ago there was a poster here called George W Hedge that was always talking about Morales and SRL is that you?

[stevebhoy87]

If it is done on resume since 1978 then i would agree with leonard, i have duran ahead of leonard all time but most of his lightweight work would not be included so leonard would be top for me

Roy jones is the most talented fighter in the last 30 years and i would rate him second best fighter behind leonard all things taken in to account,whitaker would be just behind in 3rd though would have no argument if anyone had whitaker 2nd and jones 3rd

[stevebhoy87]

Duran cannot be the best boxer of the last 30 years obviously, as his peak was the early-mid 70s. Duran is definitely the best boxer of the last 40 years IMO. Leonard is a fair call, but strong cases can surely be made for Hagler, Arguello, Whitaker, Chavez, and Hearns.

I personally woul say duran peak was 78 to 80 or from de jesus 3 to leonard, well his 3 best performance in my mind against them two and palomino where duing that period anyway

[Bill Butcher]

a few years ago there was a poster here called George W Hedge that was always talking about Morales and SRL is that you?

Afraid not.

Glad to hear someone else likes Morales, I do love the way the guy fights & feel he is underrated by many.
Leonard as it goes will always be a love hate kinda guy but at least everyone (except rooster) rates him highly.

Actually... whenever I do a p4p list, Duran is always a spot above Leonard although it is always a struggle in my mind, I DO LIKE SRL & he is 1 of my fav`s but I like others equally well like Chavez, Duran & Pep... Ali is my all time fav boxer with Morales a close 2nd tho (you wont be suprised there then ?)

:lol:

[bladerunner]

Afraid not.

Glad to hear someone else likes Morales, I do love the way the guy fights & feel he is underrated by many.
Leonard as it goes will always be a love hate kinda guy but at least everyone (except rooster) rates him highly.

Actually... whenever I do a p4p list, Duran is always a spot above Leonard although it is always a struggle in my mind, I DO LIKE SRL & he is 1 of my fav`s but I like others equally well like Chavez, Duran & Pep... Ali is my all time fav boxer with Morales a close 2nd tho (you wont be suprised there then ?)

:lol:
i also rank Duran ahead of Hagler but its very close and could see why someone can rank Leonard ahead,you could say that SRL beat arguably the best LW ever,that he beat the best JRW ever,the best JRM ever and the best MW ever he has one hell of a record.

i like Morales too hes badass but i like the Babyface Assassin more.

[Loewe]

Duran cannot be the best boxer of the last 30 years obviously, as his peak was the early-mid 70s. Duran is definitely the best boxer of the last 40 years IMO. Leonard is a fair call, but strong cases can surely be made for Hagler, Arguello, Whitaker, Chavez, and Hearns.

Nah, I disagree with Hagler and Hearns. Those two are clearly behind the likes of Leonard, Duran, Whitaker and Chavez. Imo even behind Jones, Hopkins, PBF when it comes to p4p ratings.

[the cobra]

Cutting off pretty much all of Duran's lightweight reign, I'd have to say Leonard is the greatest of the past 30 years, but make no mistake, if this was the past 40 years then Duran is the clear cut #1.

Whitaker is right there with SRL IMO, but Ray should be higher.

[redrooster]

Not even close? Resume counts more than anything else. What overly impresses you about Jones apart from skill and athletic ability? Toney and Ruiz are probably his best wins.

not even close. Leonard was weak and fragile. Leonard couldn't stand the thought of getting hurt in a fight. Look at what Howard did to him for 3 years. Poor guy was destroyed mentally after nine rounds as Norris destroyed him after two rounds except Leonard couldnt walk out of the ring till it was all over.

Leonard was a weakling who could never stand the thought of facing a formidable opponent in his prime or give rematches. he ducked the best even when he was active 88,89. I dont have to tell you what would have happened to him had it been Nunn instead of Lalonde or Hearns

Whitaker is overrated too although he was a very solid fighter and very clever - better than Leonard but he's no Roy Jones either.

Roy Jones was the next Sugar Ray, not leonard. He was just a cheap imitation that knew he better stay out of the ring or else.

[Robbi]

not even close. Leonard was weak and fragile. Leonard couldn't stand the thought of getting hurt in a fight. Look at what Howard did to him for 3 years. Poor guy was destroyed mentally after nine rounds as Norris destroyed him after two rounds except Leonard couldnt walk out of the ring till it was all over.

Leonard was a weakling who could never stand the thought of facing a formidable opponent in his prime or give rematches. he ducked the best even when he was active 88,89. I dont have to tell you what would have happened to him had it been Nunn instead of Lalonde or Hearns

Whitaker is overrated too although he was a very solid fighter and very clever - better than Leonard but he's no Roy Jones either.

Roy Jones was the next Sugar Ray, not leonard. He was just a cheap imitation that knew he better stay out of the ring or else.

You're a waste of time on ESB. You clearly have favourites who you can't go against. Jones, Hagler, Norris, and Camacho, etc. You can't seperate favourtism and fairness. And the fighters you dislike, again you can't see the truth and the good in their wins. Jones' best wins are clearly not up there with Leonard's. And I repeat, clearly not. You are a fool and not just an embarassment to this forum, but also yourself.

[Stonehands89]

not even close. Leonard was weak and fragile. Leonard couldn't stand the thought of getting hurt in a fight. Look at what Howard did to him for 3 years. Poor guy was destroyed mentally after nine rounds as Norris destroyed him after two rounds except Leonard couldnt walk out of the ring till it was all over.

Leonard was a weakling who could never stand the thought of facing a formidable opponent in his prime or give rematches. he ducked the best even when he was active 88,89. I dont have to tell you what would have happened to him had it been Nunn instead of Lalonde or Hearns

Whitaker is overrated too although he was a very solid fighter and very clever - better than Leonard but he's no Roy Jones either.

Roy Jones was the next Sugar Ray, not leonard. He was just a cheap imitation that knew he better stay out of the ring or else.
This post is a study in insanity. Rooster, you know better.

In terms of courage, Ray Leonard was Alexander the Great compared to Roy Jones who was closer to a puppy under the bedcovers during a thunderstorm.

[redrooster]

You're a waste of time on ESB. You clearly have favourites who you can't go against. Jones, Hagler, Norris, and Camacho, etc. You can't seperate favourtism and fairness. And the fighters you dislike, again you can't see the truth and the good in their wins. Jones' best wins are clearly not up there with Leonard's. And I repeat, clearly not. You are a fool and not just an embarassment to this forum, but also yourself.

I'm sticking to my guns. Leonard pulled out of the sport at a critical time. At a time when a Hagler-Leonard match was ripe, he refused to fight then he came back out when the field had weakened, it's that simple. He knew he wouldn't fare well when it was so competitive. I think it's fairly obvious what the score was for him.


Look at what happened to him in the Howard fight. He got knocked down and it embarrassed him. He couldn't take it and that's why he went back into retirement. It's evident isn't it?

Look at Roy Jones! he's been knocked out two consecutive times and he stayed in and made a decent comback since then. That's because he has more heart than Ray Leonard. He could have retired after claiming he was but a shell of what he once was, which he was. But he persisted and that's what sets him apart from the quitters.

After Hagler was out of the way he picked right up where he left off, one fight after another. And once again he aimed for the weakest opponents he could find like Lalonde, Hearns, Duran instead of Nunn, McCallum, Jackson. These are not matches that demand the public's respect. Then when he decides to get brave and pick a fight with the unheralded Terry Norris, he takes his lumps as I predicted.

In front of everyone that dissagreed with my I told them alright, NOW let's see what he can do. I wasn't the one who left the casino wearing a somber expression. EVERYONE else was, but everyone else is not me.

Last thing: whatever happened to all that talk about Leonard's eye coming back for those fights with Lalonde thru Camacho. Was his eye not once damaged?

[natonic]

"I'm sticking to my guns. Leonard pulled out of the sport at a critical time. "

He had a fucking detached retina, which at the time was career threatening if not career ending. Remember? Or did Leonard just make that up?

[Stonehands89]

Leonard the best boxer of the past 30 years. Eh. If you must be rigid.

Duran was the best boxer of the past 50 years. Ay? Although by your reasoning which considers the trajectory of the career, perhaps of the past 60 years. 60 years ago, Robinson was finishing up his WW glory and soon moving up in weight where he would begin to lose...

[redrooster]

"I'm sticking to my guns. Leonard pulled out of the sport at a critical time. "

He had a fucking detached retina, which at the time was career threatening if not career ending. Remember? Or did Leonard just make that up?

And what about later in 84, 87, 88, 89, 91, 97. You dont bother to question these things do you? Is it just that you're blind, stupid or what?

[The Predator]

Well, it´s interesting reading about all the different opinions about SRL and everyone is right to his/her opinion but in fairness, if you watch how Leonard boxed against topfighters you have to be honest, he was great.
In my opinion he was the best and compare him and Roy Jones, well I like Roy Jones but he´s no SRL.
SRL is just simply magnificent!
Ali is, well, even better... in my opinion (my favourite boxer!)
All the best friends
the Predator

[Bill Butcher]

i like Morales too hes badass but i like the Babyface Assassin more.

Most people do mate, I have 1 friend that likes Morales better, the rest like Barrera.
The thing that gets me tho is these guys are casual boxing fans as is most people in Britain but they all know MAB thru the Naseem Hamed fight & they barely know Morales - to me thats just wrong, especially when it SHOULD have been Morales v Naz until Naz called out Barrera.

I thought it might be different in America but it seems that most prefer Barrera from what Ive heard so far on esb.
with little to choose talent wise between them, I go for the entertainment factor, thats why I like Morales, its the way fighters should fight IMO.

:thumbsup

[Loewe]

And what about later in 84, 87, 88, 89, 91, 97. You dont bother to question these things do you? Is it just that you're blind, stupid or what?

You know sometimes medicine and science evolves, new techniques and so but well, you are just a waste of time. No arguments, just biased oppinions. Go away troll.

btw. Leonard SD12 Hagler :yep

[Rebel-INS]

Nah, I disagree with Hagler and Hearns. Those two are clearly behind the likes of Leonard, Duran, Whitaker and Chavez. Imo even behind Jones, Hopkins, PBF when it comes to p4p ratings.

Seriously?

[teeto]

Past 40 years, as most have already stated, is Duran for me aswell. Leonard is a good one for the past 30 though, but i like Whitaker personally, like i always say, greatness is awfully subjective, so the case could possibly be made for either as it's tight.

No disrespect, bt Hearns has no place in this thread, PLEASE do not overlook the 'no disrespect' at the beginning of this sentence.

[Loewe]

Seriously?

Seriously.

[Rebel-INS]

Past 40 years, as most have already stated, is Duran for me aswell. Leonard is a good one for the past 30 though, but i like Whitaker personally, like i always say, greatness is awfully subjective, so the case could possibly be made for either as it's tight.

No disrespect, bt Hearns has no place in this thread, PLEASE do not overlook the 'no disrespect' at the beginning of this sentence.

No I was more suprised that he had Hopkins, PBF and Jones higher in his P4P rakings than Hagler and Hearns.

[teeto]

No I was more suprised that he had Hopkins, PBF and Jones higher in his P4P rakings than Hagler and Hearns.
I have Hagler above Hopkins in my all-time MWs list, but simply as a great fighter i rate Bernard very high, the case could possibly be made? Maybe not, it's a hard one, he has proved his greatness imo, but so has Marvin.

[DINAMITA]

I always struggle between Duran & Leonard - on one hand Duran was IMO the best ever LWT, 4 weight champ, jumped 2 weights & handed SRL his 1st loss & had great longevity but after beating SRL had some terrible losses.... on the other hand Leonard was the 2nd best WWT ever IMO, 4/5 weight champ, had that marvelous comeback vs Hagler 2 weights above his natural weight, beat a better collection of great fighters than Duran including Duran himself but missed a large part of his career thru retirement.

I dont let the 2-1 thing affect my thinking when comparing the 2, the 3rd SRL/Duran fight should never have been made, I suppose its the quality of opponents defeated by Leonard that place him above not just Roberto but all others.

As I said before, Duran should be discounted from this time-period because of his work at lightweight in the 1970s.

However, in your post you seem to be speaking about their wider careers, so I must take issue that Leonard was better as he beat better opponents. Leonard had 4 big wins in his entire career (Benitez and the big 3), but very little else on his resume. The Hagler win was very debatable. Duran has wins over Ken Buchanan, Esteban deJesus (twice), Leonard, Pipino Cuevas, Davey Moore, and Iran Barkley on his record. Duran dominated a division for a prolonged spell, which Leonard didn't, and he competed at the top level for a far longer period. IMO, Duran jumping to welterweight and taking Leonard's zero beats anything on Leonard's resume.

[DINAMITA]

Past 40 years, as most have already stated, is Duran for me aswell. Leonard is a good one for the past 30 though, but i like Whitaker personally, like i always say, greatness is awfully subjective, so the case could possibly be made for either as it's tight.

No disrespect, bt Hearns has no place in this thread, PLEASE do not overlook the 'no disrespect' at the beginning of this sentence.

I am not overlooking it mate, but do you mind if I ask why you discount Hearns from this discussion?

[DINAMITA]

No I was more suprised that he had Hopkins, PBF and Jones higher in his P4P rakings than Hagler and Hearns.

Putting Floyd Mayweather above Marvin Hagler is scandalous.

[redrooster]

You know sometimes medicine and science evolves, new techniques and so but well, you are just a waste of time. No arguments, just biased oppinions. Go away troll.

btw. Leonard SD12 Hagler :yep

Hector Camacho KO 5 Ray Leonard. If you had any valid points to make you'd put up an argument

[Bill Butcher]

Duran was the best boxer of the past 50 years.

Gotta go with MUHAMMAD ALI on that one but Duran & Leonard are close to him with Chavez & Whitaker close to them IMO.

:good

[teeto]

I am not overlooking it mate, but do you mind if I ask why you discount Hearns from this discussion?
No that's fine, it's just that the title of the thread is 'the greatest boxer of the past 30 years', i don't mind an honourable mention for Tommy, but i really don't think the case can be made for number 1.

I will admit though, that i'm a bit grouchy on the subject of Hearns of late, i really think he is generally the most overrated ATG on ESB. It seems smetimes that people think if a guy is tall and long-limbed and can box then he is h2h one of the most difficult propositions ever. So maybe i'm being a bit harsh on on Tommy how i jumped on him rather than the others that have been wrongly mentioned here.

I like Tommy and rate him high but there are a few welters i pick over him h2h, im just sick of seeing things to the effect of him beating Ray Robinson and oither elite level achievers around his weight division(s).

Sorry about the unnecessary rant by the way!!

[Rebel-INS]

No that's fine, it's just that the title of the thread is 'the greatest boxer of the past 30 years', i don't mind an honourable mention for Tommy, but i really don't think the case can be made for number 1.

I will admit though, that i'm a bit grouchy on the subject of Hearns of late, i really think he is generally the most overrated ATG on ESB. It seems smetimes that people think if a guy is tall and long-limbed and can box then he is h2h one of the most difficult propositions ever. So maybe i'm being a bit harsh on on Tommy how i jumped on him rather than the others that have been wrongly mentioned here.

I like Tommy and rate him high but there are a few welters i pick over him h2h, im just sick of seeing things to the effect of him beating Ray Robinson and oither elite level achievers around his weight division(s).

Sorry about the unnecessary rant by the way!!

Thomas Hearns is my favourite boxer of all time, but I agree that there is no way he can be called the greatest boxer of the past 30 years.

[Ezzard]

Taking the Duran cut off I agree on Leonard but...

His ranking over Hearns really should not be by much at all. The seond fight was a fair match up (even if it didn't look like it at the time).

You can argue that Hagler beat Hearns but not Leonard but then you can argue that Hearns nuked Duran and Leonard didn't...

Both of their fights were very competitive.

The guys who stand out for me...

Leonard
Whittaker
Sanchez
Chavez
Spinks
Hagler
Hopkins

[teeto]

Thomas Hearns is my favourite boxer of all time, but I agree that there is no way he can be called the greatest boxer of the past 30 years.
Good to see we agree, i like Tommy too, possibly (most likely) the hardest hitting welter ever. Greatest 154 pounder ever for me, but McCallum runs him close.

[redrooster]

No I was more suprised that he had Hopkins, PBF and Jones higher in his P4P rakings than Hagler and Hearns.

People like to forget about all the years that Roy was #1 in the p4p ratings, something like six times. I think eight is a more realistic figure but the media was also having a love affair with DLH.

Ray Leonard only won the award once-in 1981. Personally I think Hagler or Sanchez were more deserving but the media was still having it's love affair with Leonard. Personally I was excited that Leonard had beat Hearns because it would make his image grown even though he didn't look good doing it. I also there were better fighters out there.

Hagler's performance vs. Hamsho was much stronger. He looked at least ten times better than Leonard that's why Ray lost interest in fighting the same man who earlier was boasting how much he wanted to fight. :lol:

Big chicken

I also think Sal Sanchez delivered a much stronger performance than Leonard. While Leonard had to wait a few rounds before taking chances with an anemic hitman, Sanchez went toe to toe with Gomez right away. A man that had stopped ALL of his opponents had his eyes closed and cheekbone broken and in serious trouble all in the first round alone.

Sanchez was masterful in the manner in which he took his time wearing down his dangerous foe and NEVER falling behind the way Leonard did. No controversial stoppage either. :smoke

NOTE: If anyone doesnt like my message, TS. If you don't like it don't look at it

[JohnThomas1]

Taking the Duran cut off I agree on Leonard but...

His ranking over Hearns really should not be by much at all. The seond fight was a fair match up (even if it didn't look like it at the time).

You can argue that Hagler beat Hearns but not Leonard but then you can argue that Hearns nuked Duran and Leonard didn't...

Both of their fights were very competitive.

The guys who stand out for me...

Leonard
Whittaker
Sanchez
Chavez
Spinks
Hagler
Hopkins

Ezz, you say SRL should barely be above Hearns, but then have Ray at 1 but then can't find room for Hearns in the top 7? Not saying he deffo belongs, but just found it odd after your comments.

[JohnThomas1]

But yes, Leonards 1.

[enquirer]

Even from the last 30 years only duran has de jesus 3,palamino,leonard,cuevas,moore and barkley as big wins,with a tremendous showing against prime hagler,castro,paz and camacho...
L eonard has super wins against benitez,duran,hearns,kalule and hagler,plus a great showing v lalonde. Leonards wins are against better opposition overall (durans leonard win excepted),but robertos are mainly above his best weight,over a longer time period and past prime as well...
I guess its down to who you think LOOKS more impressive???

[Ezzard]

Ezz, you say SRL should barely be above Hearns, but then have Ray at 1 but then can't find room for Hearns in the top 7? Not saying he deffo belongs, but just found it odd after your comments.

Hearns should be on that list. Just an oversight.

My point really is that Leonard and Hearns were very, very close in ability.

Had Hearns been around in 12 round championship days I think he'd have been even better.

I'm not sure I'd even pick Robinson over Tommy in a 10 round fight.

[Loewe]

Hector Camacho KO 5 Ray Leonard. If you had any valid points to make you'd put up an argument

As if you ever cared about arguments in a discussion regarding Ray Leonard.

[teeto]

Shit i gotta go now, but im gunna be home in a few hours. Tommy Hearns does not beat Ray Robinson, they both fought in 15 round days, that's where im doing this. People talk about Hearns being a great puncher, true, one of the very finest and elite level there. People talk about him being a great boxer, true in a sense, he could box, but his defense was not great. For the first half of the fight with Leonard he was doing well on offense whilst sticking to the jab to start everything. I think to beat Robinson you must be offensive so that can mean good for Tommy, a defensive fighter cant beat SRR for me, theres no defence for the greatest, most devastating calculated attacks to body and head of all-time. Anyhow, you look at Hearn's sole defeat at welter, SRL got to him, FACT. Now Leonard has aspects to his game that are possibly unparalelled, but he was not the hunter of prey that was Sugar Ray Robinson was, arguably there was never one as effective as he. Robinson would stop Tommy Hearns, if Hearns would try to move and box, the stoppage is a foregone conclusion imo.

[Loewe]

Putting Floyd Mayweather above Marvin Hagler is scandalous.

Well, Hagler was better and ranks higher at his weightclass than PBF was at any of his and his wins over Duran and Hearns are better than any on PBF´s resume. But when you take into account that Floyd´s best weight was at sfw and he still fouhgt up to jmw, winning titles at each weightclass even though he was the smaller fighter in every fight. He also never lost. Yeah, he cherry-picked but he still fought some of the best at his weightclasses. P4p I think there could be made an argument to put him above Hagler. I don´t have any of them in my Top30 p4p and I never went past that but I can see an argument for it - I neither have Hearns, Jones, Hopkins inside those Top30.

[DINAMITA]

Gotta go with MUHAMMAD ALI on that one but Duran & Leonard are close to him with Chavez & Whitaker close to them IMO.

:good

No offence here Butch, but you do seem to only mention mainstream famous boxers. Do you not think that Carlos Monzon or Alexis Arguello have a case to be rated above Julio Cesar Chavez? I cannot see why anyone would have Chavez over Monzon.

[Ezzard]

Shit i gotta go now, but im gunna be home in a few hours. Tommy Hearns does not beat Ray Robinson, they both fought in 15 round days, that's where im doing this. People talk about Hearns being a great puncher, true, one of the very finest and elite level there. People talk about him being a great boxer, true in a sense, he could box, but his defense was not great. For the first half of the fight with Leonard he was doing well on offense whilst sticking to the jab to start everything. I think to beat Robinson you must be offensive so that can mean good for Tommy, a defensive fighter cant beat SRR for me, theres no defence for the greatest, most devastating calculated attacks to body and head of all-time. Anyhow, you look at Hearn's sole defeat at welter, SRL got to him, FACT. Now Leonard has aspects to his game that are possibly unparalelled, but he was not the hunter of prey that was Sugar Ray Robinson was, arguably there was never one as effective as he. Robinson would stop Tommy Hearns, if Hearns would try to move and box, the stoppage is a foregone conclusion imo.

teeto

15 rounds and Robinson wins. Definitely. Over 10 then Hearns has a chance.

Of course Robinson was almost on a par with Tommy in terms of punching power. Ray often gets overlooked in greatest punchers debates but he was right up there. IMO the second best puncher at 147.

[DINAMITA]

Well, Hagler was better and ranks higher at his weightclass than PBF was at any of his and his wins over Duran and Hearns are better than any on PBF´s resume. But when you take into account that Floyd´s best weight was at sfw and he still fouhgt up to jmw, winning titles at each weightclass even though he was the smaller fighter in every fight. He also never lost. Yeah, he cherry-picked but he still fought some of the best at his weightclasses. P4p I think there could be made an argument to put him above Hagler. I don´t have any of them in my Top30 p4p and I never went past that but I can see an argument for it - I neither have Hearns, Jones, Hopkins inside those Top30.

I don't believe keeping the zero means anything, so I don't even count that. Look at the fighters who had losses on the record (Robinson, Ali, Whitaker), look at guys who have kept the zero (Mayweather, Calzaghe, Ricardo Lopez). The undefeated guys are all quality fighters, but it definitely does not indicate they are better than guys with losses.

Mayweather is a great fighter and achieved great things, but although this is not always the case, I think this is one instance where resume makes this a no-brainer. Hagler's wins over Hearns and Duran are all better than anything on Mayweather's record. Hagler was more dominant at one division, and I think he was better h2h, as the only man I would fancy to beat Hagler in history at middleweight is Monzon. I wouldn't have Mayweather as 2nd best in any division he fought in, except super-featherweight (behind Arguello) but sfw is one of the modern sub-divisions.

[Loewe]

I don't believe keeping the zero means anything, so I don't even count that. Look at the fighters who had losses on the record (Robinson, Ali, Whitaker), look at guys who have kept the zero (Mayweather, Calzaghe, Ricardo Lopez). The undefeated guys are all quality fighters, but it definitely does not indicate they are better than guys with losses.

I never said PBF is better than Hagler. I said there could be made an argument fot him to rank higher p4p. And I still think so.

Mayweather is a great fighter and achieved great things, but although this is not always the case, I think this is one instance where resume makes this a no-brainer. Hagler's wins over Hearns and Duran are all better than anything on Mayweather's record. Hagler was more dominant at one division, and I think he was better h2h, as the only man I would fancy to beat Hagler in history at middleweight is Monzon. I wouldn't have Mayweather as 2nd best in any division he fought in, except super-featherweight (behind Arguello) but sfw is one of the modern sub-divisions.

Well, h2h I don´t give a thought if the guys are too far apart in weight. Yeah Hagler has the better wins but Floyd fighting mostly fighters who were bigger than him and Hagler´s biggest win were against smaller men evens it out quite a bit I think.

[DINAMITA]

I never said PBF is better than Hagler. I said there could be made an argument fot him to rank higher p4p. And I still think so.



Well, h2h I don´t give a thought if the guys are too far apart in weight. Yeah Hagler has the better wins but Floyd fighting mostly fighters who were bigger than him and Hagler´s biggest win were against smaller men evens it out quite a bit I think.

I meant h2h at their own weights

[Loewe]

I meant h2h at their own weights

Well, doesn´t change anything. Firstly it isn´t about h2h, secondly I never cared much about the divisions below lw - with a few exceptions - and I´m not really schooled at the history of sfw. So, I can´t comment on that.

[enquirer]

If we go back slightly more than 30 years we also catch the tail end of two totally awesome fighters,monzon and ali. I would say that monzon and ali have better resumes and cases than all the chavezs',pbfs',jones',hoppos and such like. I think whitaker is the main p4p guy to rival these due to his all round skills.
With regard to thomas hearns,i think he was without a doubt one of the best of the past 30 years,and definately talent wise....I feel that he would have surprised many if he ever shared a ring with SRR,in fact i think the possibility exists that robinson is stopped,robinson never fought a puncher boxer like tommy,wheras hearns fought a comparable welter to SRR in SRL.....

[DINAMITA]

Well, doesn´t change anything. Firstly it isn´t about h2h, secondly I never cared much about the divisions below lw - with a few exceptions - and I´m not really schooled at the history of sfw. So, I can´t comment on that.

It isn't only h2h of course, but it's always something to consider, as this is indicative of ability. I have Mayweather 2nd of all-time at sfw behind Arguello.

[Loewe]

It isn't only h2h of course, but it's always something to consider, as this is indicative of ability. I have Mayweather 2nd of all-time at sfw behind Arguello.

Well, I don´t take h2h into account when I do any rankings, too much theory and too less facts. But for example what I take into account is if somebody is an over- or an unerachiever. I admire overachiever like Ruiz but I´m dissapointed of underachievers like Jones, PBF, Hamed and Tyson and I take that into account if I have problems in what tier I rank a fighter.

[DINAMITA]

Well, I don´t take h2h into account when I do any rankings, too much theory and too less facts. But for example what I take into account is if somebody is an over- or an unerachiever. I admire overachiever like Ruiz but I´m dissapointed of underachievers like Jones, PBF, Hamed and Tyson and I take that into account if I have problems in what tier I rank a fighter.

But surely by taking underachievement into account, you are therefore saying "they could have done..." so this is too much theory and too little facts too? I don't see how this is any more speculative than considering h2h at their own weights??

[Loewe]

But surely by taking underachievement into account, you are therefore saying "they could have done..." so this is too much theory and too little facts too? I don't see how this is any more speculative than considering h2h at their own weights??

Nah, let´s take Jones as an example. Look at his tremendous talent and than look at what he did and what not. Not much theory but there to be seen.

Also like I wrote, I just use this when I can´t decide. For example I couldn´t decide if Marciano is a tier 1 or 2 hw. Him doing what he did without the talent of an Ali, Tyson or even Wlad put him into tier 1.

[DINAMITA]

Nah, let´s take Jones as an example. Look at his tremendous talent and than look at what he did and what not. Not much theory but there to be seen.

Also like I wrote, I just use this when I can´t decide. For example I couldn´t decide if Marciano is a tier 1 or 2 hw. Him doing what he did without the talent of an Ali, Tyson or even Wlad put him into tier 1.

Yes, exactly, looking at what he did not do is speculating as to what he could have done. You saying "he could've beat Hopkins in a rematch, he could've beaten a better heavyweight than Ruiz"- how is this any less an example of theory and speculation than me saying "Hagler would have beaten Hopkins h2h"?

Why do you think Rocky Marciano didn't have talent comparable to Wladimir Klitschko? Marciano fought in a different style, less refined maybe, but I wouldn't say he had less talent than Wlad who has merely allied a jab and a cautious nature to his own natural physical attributes. He is robotic, he has took time and made mistakes to learn how to box by numbers, I don't think he has much natural talent at all. Surely the success Marciano had with his comparative lack of finesse and technique prove he has MORE talent, not less?

[Loewe]

Yes, exactly, looking at what he did not do is speculating as to what he could have done. You saying "he could've beat Hopkins in a rematch, he could've beaten a better heavyweight than Ruiz"- how is this any less an example of theory and speculation than me saying "Hagler would have beaten Hopkins h2h"?

Nah, I´m not saying he should/would have fought/beaten XYZ. I say look at the work he did and at the talent he had and than decide if his career achievements are enough for all the talent he had or if it was even more.

Why do you think Rocky Marciano didn't have talent comparable to Wladimir Klitschko? Marciano fought in a different style, less refined maybe, but I wouldn't say he had less talent than Wlad who has merely allied a jab and a cautious nature to his own natural physical attributes. He is robotic, he has took time and made mistakes to learn how to box by numbers, I don't think he has much natural talent at all. Surely the success Marciano had with his comparative lack of finesse and technique prove he has MORE talent, not less?

With talent I mean physical talent or attributes like you phrased it. Marciano lacked size, speed and reach but made up for it by adapting his style and his determination - especially in training - that should count for something.

[JohnThomas1]

Hearns should be on that list. Just an oversight.

My point really is that Leonard and Hearns were very, very close in ability.

Had Hearns been around in 12 round championship days I think he'd have been even better.

I'm not sure I'd even pick Robinson over Tommy in a 10 round fight.

Ok mate, cheers.

[teeto]

teeto

15 rounds and Robinson wins. Definitely. Over 10 then Hearns has a chance.

Of course Robinson was almost on a par with Tommy in terms of punching power. Ray often gets overlooked in greatest punchers debates but he was right up there. IMO the second best puncher at 147.
Just logged in again now Ezzard, i get your reasoning about the 10 round thing, i just couldnt ever pick Tommy over him personally though, just my opinion.

[redrooster]

As if you ever cared about arguments in a discussion regarding Ray Leonard.

Well he might to better if not for his glass jaw. Didnt you notice all the times he hit the floor? Even Camacho knocked him out

[redrooster]

I would say he was the best boxer of the last 30 years that didnt take a punch well. How's that? :good

[MrMagic]

Roy Jones is the best boxer of the last 30 years. ray leonard isnt even close

Leave this section, please.

[McGrain]

1 - Duran
2 - Leonard

[redrooster]

Leave this section, please.

You know Roy was the best. Why deny it?

[MrMagic]

You know Roy was the best. Why deny it?

Head to head? He was the man, but please.. compare their best fights and come back with your comment...

SRL had them ALL on his list (Hearns, Hagler, Duran etc, etc..) and he beat them all. Roy Jones beat all he could except DM, he can't compare his three best wins to SRL's.

[redrooster]

Head to head? He was the man, but please.. compare their best fights and come back with your comment...

SRL had them ALL on his list (Hearns, Hagler, Duran etc, etc..) and he beat them all. Roy Jones beat all he could except DM, he can't compare his three best wins to SRL's.

Hagler was shot so I cant count it as a win anymore than I would count Berbick's win over ALi. And Ray always struggled with the opposition at best managing some controversial decision after falling hopelessly behind. that's how all his fights were-no more real than his knockout of Benitez :patsch or his winning two titles from Lalonde :patsch :patsch :lol: or any of his retirements

Now look at Roy's best wins: Ruiz. No problem. Roy wasnt even a heavyweight and lost but one round! This outdoes anything Fitzsimmons ever did. He unified the light heavyweight title as compared with leonard who did nothing with it.

Now who looks better??

Not to mention the fact he dominated Hopkins and Toney both without half trying! That's greatness. Let's not forget that he beat X with a broken hand and weight drained. :happy

Duran? Leonard? Don't make me laugh!

[redrooster]

Head to head? He was the man, but please.. compare their best fights and come back with your comment...

SRL had them ALL on his list (Hearns, Hagler, Duran etc, etc..) and he beat them all. Roy Jones beat all he could except DM, he can't compare his three best wins to SRL's.

DM?? isn't he the one who lost to Roy Jones victinm Julio Gonzalez? You must be having one of your fantasies!

[Robbi]

Head to head? He was the man, but please.. compare their best fights and come back with your comment...

SRL had them ALL on his list (Hearns, Hagler, Duran etc, etc..) and he beat them all. Roy Jones beat all he could except DM, he can't compare his three best wins to SRL's.

Rooster will try and find some way. He'll be at his PC thinking how to tarnish Leonard's wins and elevate Jones' to a level only he can do.

One of Jones' best wins was Toney and without any shadow of doubt whatsoever he was weight drained badly as it showed in his performance. I give Jones credit for dominating him thoroughly, but Toney was like a shell in there. Infact I'll go as far to say that he looked like a shot fighter. Everything about him were signs of someone who was shot. Ok, he wasn't shot as it was an off night due to problems with the weight.

[redrooster]

Rooster will try and find some way. He'll be at his PC thinking how to tarnish Leonard's wins and elevate Jones' to a level only he can do.

One of Jones' best wins was Toney and without any shadow of doubt whatsoever he was weight drained badly as it showed in his performance. I give Jones credit for dominating him thoroughly, but Toney was like a shell in there. Infact I'll go as far to say that he looked like a shot fighter. Everything about him were signs of someone who was shot. Ok, he wasn't shot as it was an off night due to problems with the weight.

James looked rather tubby to me. and even if he was weight drained it couldn't have been half as bad as what Hearns went thru in the leonard fight. it looked as if someone had forgotten to feed him.

and forget about this talk about James being a shot fighter. he was at the top of KO's best fighters at the time.

:smoke :smoke :smoke :smoke :smoke

[MrMagic]

So in short, RJs resume is superior to SRL's... rooster?

[r_9-Ronaldo]

Leonard the best boxer of the past 30 years. Eh. If you must be rigid.

Duran was the best boxer of the past 50 years. Ay? Although by your reasoning which considers the trajectory of the career, perhaps of the past 60 years. 60 years ago, Robinson was finishing up his WW glory and soon moving up in weight where he would begin to lose...
begin to lose?? wtf he suffered like 1 loss in his first 90 fights at middleweight

[teeto]

Hope they have mercy on u kiid!

EDIT- that's a reply to u, r-9_ronaldo

[redrooster]

So in short, RJs resume is superior to SRL's... rooster?


Neither man has that great a resume. Ray has a couple and Roy has a couple. Roy won his fights no sweat. Ray had to struggle and have help from the officials to get his tko and split decision. He also had to make sure Duran was 40 pounds overweight otherwise he never would have beaten someone so obviously superior.

If I had to choose I'd say Leonard's a little better than Roy Jones but still in need of improvement. He got Duran even tho he was out of shape and Hearns hadnt fought but one guy.

His comeback for the rematches didnt impress me 10 years later. These were mostly Tyson-McNeeley type matches with a curiosity/nostalgia factor involved but shouldn't be taken more serious than say Leonard-Howard or Leonard-Lalonde.

He was mostly fighting retreads long past the point of public interest when he should have been exploring new worlds to conquer; Nunn, Jackson, Norris, Kalambay, McCallum. THose were the rising stars of the day but Leonard never had any interest in meeting rising stars but rather falling stars.

[Stonehands89]

begin to lose?? wtf he suffered like 1 loss in his first 90 fights at middleweight
Robinson last defense of his WW title was against Charley Fusari in '50. Before that he was the WW champ fighting many over-the-weight nontitle bouts -even with a few state MW title fights thrown in. This was not uncommon then. Robinson was having a world of difficulty by this time making weight and had to steam off extra pounds to fight Fusari, which explains why he elected to box the younger man instead of fighting him.

Anyway, it is more accurate to say that Robinson had 3 losses in his first 25 or 26 bouts after he permantely began campaigning as a MW.

....

[round15]

Sugar Ray Leonard is arguably the best fighter of the last 30 years and some have mentioned Duran, but I place Roberto at the top if this was over a 40 year duration.

Roy Jones Jr is perhaps the most spectacular fighter of the last 30 years and an argument can be made that he was the most talented fighter within this time period, but his resumes pales in comparison to Leonard.

Pernell Whitaker should be compared with Leonard in terms of his ring accomplishments and his boxing skills alone.

Honourable mentions, Lennox Lewis and Evander Holyfield.