Inmediate rematches that never happened

[Ambling Alp II]

It is not a fact that Hearns beat Benitez easier than Leonard. That is an opinion. and it's just your incredibly biased opinion.
Leonard was well ahead on the Benitez fight; he won most of the rounds and knocked him down twice. How many times did Hearns knock Benitez down? Zero. (The same amount of times that the "monster" Hearns knocked Luigi Minchillo down. Woulld Luigi qualify as C-level?)

Interesting that you think that Benitez-Leonard fight at 147 is so important anyway. That would mean that he Hearns-Leonrd fight at 147 would mean a lot as well. How did that turn out for Hearns?

Leonard struggled with C rated fighters above 147? You only have two relevant fights to go on. Tony Chiaverini and Ayub Kalue. He stopped them both. Both were better than C level fighters.

You like to bring up the Howard fight of course and overlook that Leonard had been off for two years and dominated the fight outside of the knockdown.
He never fought any other C-level fighters above 147.

Leoanrd never would have fought Hagler in 1982. That was not even on the table. He probably moves up to 154 in 1984 and stays there for a while. He would keep busy fighting top competition as he always did.

A busy Leonard gradually moves up and takes on Hagler around 1985. Nor reason to think he would not have beaten him even easier given that Hagler would not have the huge advantages that he had when Leonard bet him 1987.

Easy to say Hearns would have won at 154 when it didn't happen. Too bad you got nothing to back your theory up.

You need to stop your obsession with Leonard. You don't like him , fine. You don't need to rip him every time someone brings up his name.

[elmersalsa]

Alp, do not be delusional. I like Sugar Ray. He is one of my favorite fighters. But, in my view, he was not better than the great Roberto Duran. I like the greats Muhammad Ali, Eusebio Pedroza, Julio Cesar Chavez, Kid Gavilan, Vicente Saldivar, Henry Armstrong and Mike Tyson (the one that used to kick your ass, kiss you and tell you bye-bye version). I like them all, but none above Duran. Just like you love Leonard.

But, we got to be REALISTIC here. A fight of Hearns vs Leonard II at 154lbs, would've never been a great match for Leonard because of THE WEIGHT, THE WEIGHT. At 147? I am all for it for Leonard. But, at 154? That is SUICIDAL FOR HIM at any way you look at it. He never looked great above 147lbs. The ONLY TIME he looked great was against a FADING MARVELOUS.

Here are more evidences above 147:
Leonard vs Marcos Geraldo: Leonard, in his TOTAL PRIME, was on QUEER STREET. Geraldo is not even a quarter of fighter of what The Hitman was, and he gave him all kinds of trouble. Geraldo is a C level boxer.

Leonard vs Ayub Kalule: You said that Sugar Ray dominated him? I saw something different. Kalule was winning the fight in my scorecard. I don't know what fight you was watching. Kalule was OBLITERATED by Davey Moore. A guy that only had 9 fights? Kalule, even though he was champion, was a C level fighter at best.

Leonard vs Kevin Howard: Leonard was rusty. It's understandable. But, in no way or fashion, should have got dropped by a D level fighter like Howard. C'mon Alp. That was embarrassing. The boxing powers that were helped Leonard by stopping the fight too soon. They didn't want their "Golden Boy" looked more mediocre than it was against a D level boxer. After that, Sugar Ray said "He didn't have it anymore" Reallly? Or was it that HE KNEW he couldn't beat Marvelous? Now, imagine that same Leonard fighting a destructive machine like The Hitman? It would've been a MASSACRE! You know it. I know it. Everybody knows it. Let's not put a blind eye on this.

Leonard vs Donny Lalonde: Leonard was not in his prime. We all know that. But, he got dropped by Donny Lalonde? Who was that? In a CATCHWEIGHT FIGHT? EMBARRASSING. The only good thing I saw was his competitive spirit.

Leonard vs Hearns II: At 168 lbs. Do we need to say more? He took the fight with the Hitman because he thought that Tommy was shot. And still, Hearns dropped him twice in the fight. And the judges called it a draw?

Leonard vs Duran III: People expected a Thrilla in Manila fight. Twenty pounds above their prime weight and 9 years later, it was a waste of time. One of boxing's greatest garbages. Do we need to say more?

Leonard vs Terry Norris: Norris gave him the whupping of his life. Sugar Ray was not prime, we all know that. But, above 147, his performances, most of them, were lots to be desired in my view.

What more evidences we need above 147? Hearns looked much better above 147. He was a TOTAL MONSTER at 154lbs, plus, HE BEAT BENITEZ MUCH BETTER AND CONVINCINGLY than Ray who suffered and struggled with a Jr. welterweight. He beat Duran much better than Leonard did in his weight class at 147. If the fight of Duran vs Hearns was at 147, Hearns would've not beaten Duran nor Benitez that easy. He beat those men because it was at 154lbs. A weight class PERFECT FOR THE HITMAN.

Let's ask the folks to see Leonard vs Benitez and Hearns vs Benitez to watch those fights and see who won much easier. We could also compare them with the Duran fights. I know that I will not be alone in that sentiment.

[Counter-puncher]

You had kalule ahead on points vs Leonard?

There's really no way to discuss anything with that level of madness.

[elmersalsa]

You had kalule ahead on points vs Leonard?

There's really no way to discuss anything with that level of madness.

Watch the fight, buddy. Do not follow the multitude to do evil. Those boxing announcers were all biased in that fight. Leonard struggled big time with a C level boxer.

Do you agree that in that performance, he beats the Hitman that destroyed Duran and Fred Hutchins at 154lbs? Do you? Do not give the blind eye. Be sincere Counter-puncher.

[Ambling Alp II]

You are lying when you say that you are a fan of Leonard. You gave yourself away a while back when you claimed that Leonard was not a "real fighter".

Even for you elmer, saying that you had Kalue ahead of Leonard on your scorecard is idiotic.
You have excuses for all of but one of Duran's many losses. However, you can't figure out that Leonard was not at his best when he was knocked down but defeated Lalonde and Howard. Buy yourself a clue.

Leonard was on his way up, weighed 153 to Geraldo's 160 which isn't even the same weight class, and beat him. No embarrassment there.

I have answered the rest of your nonsense many times before. No need to go over this BS again.

I will mention something else. You claimed a while back that Duran's win over frikkin Ray Lampkin is an impressive win because Lampkin was a NABF champion. (Even though the guy he beat for that joke of a title had a record of 6-7)

Leonard won world (not just NABF) titles at junior middleweight, middleweight, super middleweight, and light heavyweight.

Yet you somehow, some way, you come up with the notion that Leonard was a mediocre fighter above welterweight. Really, how biased and stupid can you get?

[Syntax Error]

You are lying when you say that you are a fan of Leonard. You gave yourself away a while back when you claimed that Leonard was not a "real fighter".

Even for you elmer, saying that you had Kalue ahead of Leonard on your scorecard is idiotic.
You have excuses for all of but one of Duran's many losses. However, you can't figure out that Leonard was not at his best when he was knocked down but defeated Lalonde and Howard. Buy yourself a clue.

Leonard was on his way up, weighed 153 to Geraldo's 160 which isn't even the same weight class, and beat him. No embarrassment there.

I have answered the rest of your nonsense many times before. No need to go over this BS again.

I will mention something else. You claimed a while back that Duran's win over frikkin Ray Lampkin is an impressive win because Lampkin was a NABF champion. (Even though the guy he beat for that joke of a title had a record of 6-7)

Leonard won world (not just NABF) titles at junior middleweight, middleweight, super middleweight, and light heavyweight.

Yet you somehow, some way, you come up with the notion that Leonard was a mediocre fighter above welterweight. Really, how biased and stupid can you get?

I think the Marcos Geraldo fight had huge impact on Leonard's career.

Leonard said that every time Geraldo hit him, he felt the power because of the size difference.

He also alluded to the fact that it might have been this fight which set in stone his retina problems that would end his peak just 3 years later.

That was a very underrated victory for Leonard & was further proof of his mettle.

[sweetsci]

Ali-Liston 2 should have been called a No Contest based on the officiating and a rematch should have been held.

[elmersalsa]

You are lying when you say that you are a fan of Leonard. You gave yourself away a while back when you claimed that Leonard was not a "real fighter".

Even for you elmer, saying that you had Kalue ahead of Leonard on your scorecard is idiotic.
You have excuses for all of but one of Duran's many losses. However, you can't figure out that Leonard was not at his best when he was knocked down but defeated Lalonde and Howard. Buy yourself a clue.

Leonard was on his way up, weighed 153 to Geraldo's 160 which isn't even the same weight class, and beat him. No embarrassment there.

I have answered the rest of your nonsense many times before. No need to go over this BS again.

I will mention something else. You claimed a while back that Duran's win over frikkin Ray Lampkin is an impressive win because Lampkin was a NABF champion. (Even though the guy he beat for that joke of a title had a record of 6-7)

Leonard won world (not just NABF) titles at junior middleweight, middleweight, super middleweight, and light heavyweight.

Yet you somehow, some way, you come up with the notion that Leonard was a mediocre fighter above welterweight. Really, how biased and stupid can you get?

You're running away from REALITY, Ambling Alp. I always loved Sugar Ray. I always rooted for him in all his fights, except, you know who. I have even said in this forum, that he was more complete boxer than the great Sugar Ray Robinson. I also said that Leonard vs Robinson fight, that Leonard wins at 147. Robinson wins 154 or above. Why? Not because of talent. It would be because 154 and above, it suits better for the original Sugar Ray. In which Leonard, above 147lbs, DID NOT LOOKED GOOD MOST OF HIS FIGHTS. He looked MEDIOCRE.
And that would be the case with the Hitman. Tommy would've embarrassed him if they ever fought in 1982 at 154lbs. Not because of talent, but because the weight favors Hearns.

Sugar Ray struggled vs Marcos Geraldo. He was behind in my cards by 2 points vs Ayub Kalule. And was EMBARRASSED by Kevin Howard. He didn't looked that great in those fights. Now, IMAGINE a Tommy Hearns vs those versions of Leonard? Tommy would've knocked him out. I don't see how Leonard would've survived the barrage. LEONARD @ 147 VS Hearns? Leonard beat him as we saw. But, at 154lbs or beyond? It would be all Tommy Hearns!

Leonard wins vs Kalule and Donny Lalonde were not impressive by Sugar Ray's standards. The ONLY FIGHT he looked good was against a FADING MARVELOUS. And some people believe that Hagler won that fight.

Let's ask the forum who wins between Leonard vs Hearns at 154lbs?
Let's ask the forum which performance was better between Hearns vs Duran/Leonard vs Duran II and Leonard vs Benitez/Hearns/Benitez.

Hearns beat Duran and Benitez much easier than Leonard did. Why? because it was at 154lbs.

[elmersalsa]

And Ambling Alp: Who beat Marcos Geraldo much better? Hearns or Leonard? I need your answer

[Ambling Alp II]

Once again I am going to say you are lying when you say you are a fan of Leonard You rip him every time his name is mentioned. You also once claimed he wasn't a real fighter.

Love how you move the goalposts when it's suits your argument against a guy you don't like or for someone you do.

When Duran beats Lampkin it's a big deal because Lampkin was a frikkin NABF champion.
When Leonard wins four world titles above 147, you call him mediocre.

For years, you have been claiming that Roberto "Forever a lightweight" Duran was washed up after the first Leonard fight and that none of his losses after the first Duran fight than mean much.
Now you are giving Hearns a lot of credit for beating Duran at 154?

Leonard was not in the same weight class when he beat Geralo. Hearns was. Btw, Leonard beat Geraldo about as easy as Hagler beat Geraldo. Who won the Hagler-Hearns fight again?

I stand by my earlier comments about Leonard's fights against Kalue and Benitez.

Who did better against Hagler, Leonard or Hearns?

You are clueless.

[elmersalsa]

Once again I am going to say you are lying when you say you are a fan of Leonard You rip him every time his name is mentioned. You also once claimed he wasn't a real fighter.

Love how you move the goalposts when it's suits your argument against a guy you don't like or for someone you do.

When Duran beats Lampkin it's a big deal because Lampkin was a frikkin NABF champion.
When Leonard wins four world titles above 147, you call him mediocre.

For years, you have been claiming that Roberto "Forever a lightweight" Duran was washed up after the first Leonard fight and that none of his losses after the first Duran fight than mean much.
Now you are giving Hearns a lot of credit for beating Duran at 154?

Leonard was not in the same weight class when he beat Geralo. Hearns was. Btw, Leonard beat Geraldo about as easy as Hagler beat Geraldo. Who won the Hagler-Hearns fight again?

I stand by my earlier comments about Leonard's fights against Kalue and Benitez.

Who did better against Hagler, Leonard or Hearns?

You are clueless.

Clueless? Don't make me laugh. You still have not answered my question. Who beat Marcos Geraldo better? Who had a better performance? Hearns or Leonard?
Either you want to be blind, Leonard biased or delusional.

Who beat Duran better? Hearns or Leonard? Even if Duran was prime, I can't picture him beating a prime Hearns at 154lbs. I could see Duran beating Hearns at 147lbs, but, at 154lbs? Not. Why? Because 154lbs is a better weight class for the Hitman. Sugar Ray, Duran nor Benitez belong in the same ring with Hearns at 154lbs or above. It's a MASSACRE EVERY TIME or a comfortable win for Tommy.

And yes, Leonard was MEDIOCRE above 147lbs. Most of the time he was. The ONLY TIME he looked great was against a FADING MARVELOUS. With Donny Lalonde? He won 2 titles in one night in a catchweight fight. And looked so-so with Ayub Kalule. Put that Leonard against that Hearns at 154lbs, and Hearns will BLAST HIM. HE WILL BLOW HIM AWAY! It's NOT A FAIR FIGHT FOR SUGAR RAY!

[Ambling Alp II]

Your really hanging your hat on Marcus Geraldo?

OK I will answer your question. Hearns looked more impressive. Hearns scored a first round KO. Leonard with just two years of experience, only won a decision.

How about answering my questions for once?

1. Between Hagler and Caveman Lee, who was more impressive against Geraldo?
2. What was the result of the Hagler-Caveman Lee fight?
3. After answering 1 and 2, do you for once, get the point?
4. Between Hearns and Leonard, who looked better against Hagler?
5. How many times did Hearns knock down Luigi Minchillo at 154?
6. How many times did Hearns knock down Benitez at 154?
7. How many times did Leonard knock Benitez down?
8. Who won the first Leonard-Hearns fight?
9. Did Hearns destroy Leonard at 164?
10. Besides Ray Leonard, are there any other fighters who had just two years of experience that you would like to criticize for beating a fighter two weight classes ahead of him?

11. Why does it impress you that the great Ray Lampkin was an NABF champion, but a guy who won world titles at 4 different weight classes above 147 is medicore?
12. What is the definition of the word "mediocre"?

[elmersalsa]

Your really hanging your hat on Marcus Geraldo?

OK I will answer your question. Hearns looked more impressive. Hearns scored a first round KO. Leonard with just two years of experience, only won a decision.

How about answering my questions for once?

1. Between Hagler and Caveman Lee, who was more impressive against Geraldo?
2. What was the result of the Hagler-Caveman Lee fight?
3. After answering 1 and 2, do you for once, get the point?
4. Between Hearns and Leonard, who looked better against Hagler?
5. How many times did Hearns knock down Luigi Minchillo at 154?
6. How many times did Hearns knock down Benitez at 154?
7. How many times did Leonard knock Benitez down?
8. Who won the first Leonard-Hearns fight?
9. Did Hearns destroy Leonard at 164?
10. Besides Ray Leonard, are there any other fighters who had just two years of experience that you would like to criticize for beating a fighter two weight classes ahead of him?

11. Why does it impress you that the great Ray Lampkin was an NABF champion, but a guy who won world titles at 4 different weight classes above 147 is medicore?
12. What is the definition of the word "mediocre"?

These questions are not hard to answer Ambling Alp. Thank you for ADMITTING that Hearns performance over Geraldo was better than what Leonard did with that same Geraldo.

Now, let's answer these questions:
1. Hagler took it easy on Geraldo and won comfortably. Am I right? Plus, Geraldo was already washed up when Hearns eliminated him in one round.
2. Hagler destroyed Caveman Lee in one stanza. Hagler was the better man, and demonstrated that Lee's win over Geraldo was really a FLUKE.
3. THE POINT WAS CONFIRMED THAT LEE'S WIN WAS A FLUKE.
4. Hearns was better. Why? Marvelous was not a fading champion then. Plus, Hearns cut Hagler in the middle of his forehead. Put Leonard in that same night and he loses to both of them.
5. He never put Luigi Michillo down. But, Hearns won from here to Japan. With NO PROBLEMS.
6. Hearns knocked down Benitez once. And he dominated the fight better than Leonard did with his jab. Benitez could not do nothing with Hearns, but he was more competitive with Sugar Ray. In fact, he was winning the final round before he got stopped. Had he never gone down and finished on his feet, he would've kept the title in my scoring. The fight would have been a DRAW. Hearns won more comfortably. He outboxed the boxer, while Leonard struggled at 147lbs. Hearns at 154lbs, does not lose to Leonard and obviously, Not to Duran nor Benitez. Ah, and remember: Hearns broke his hand and still won comfortably.
7. Twice. And still, Benitez was in the fight. Benitez could've pulled a draw and retained his title in the last round if not gone down. Watch the fight.
8. Leonard had to suck it up against a Hearns that looked frailish at 147lbs. Great win, no doubt. But, at 154lbs? DIFFERENT STORY. Don't you believe that?
9. The rematch was 8 years too late. Hearns was believed to be shot, and still, whupped Leonard. Anybody that believes that that fight was a draw gotta be delusional, got paid under the table, or must be PLAINLY CRAZY. Now, can you see that 168lbs favored Hearns over Sugar Ray? Not because of talent, but, the weight, the weight, mister! Plus, Leonard thought that Tommy was shot. That is why he gave Hearns the rematch. Why he didn't give the rematch after the Kevin Howard fight in '84? Anwer: He would've got EMBARRASSED by the Hitman
10. The fight was at 154. Not at 160. There have been plenty of fighters that fought above their natural class in only their second year as a pro. LEONARD IS NOT THE ONLY ONE.
11. Ray Lampkin was an outstanding fighter. He won the NABF lightweight crown. He gave the Hands of Stone one of his toughest fights. He slugged it out with Duran in extreme weather conditions. He was losing by one point at the time of the stoppage. He gave everything he had and the Panamanian public gave him a thumbs up for his performance. At least, he wasn't a tomato can. That's slugging it out. What Leonard did was clutching and grabbing for survival against a lightweight.
12. Mediocre because he fought WAY BELOW OF HIS STANDARDS. Way below of his capabilities. That happened to every boxer. But, THE EVIDENCE CLEARLY SHOWED, that Leonard above 147, was MEDIOCRE in most of his fights. There are the tapes. We could see them over and over again. He would've not been a great match for The Hitman at 154lbs. It wouldn't be a fair fight. Hearns would've embarrassed him. If at 147, Leonard was losing the fight, now imagine 7 pounds over? Hearns would've got his revenge with SPECTACULAR FASHION

[Ambling Alp II]

Wow. I mean Wow.
Yes I said Leonard didn't not look as good. Of course you don't take into consideration that Leonard had not reached his prime yet while Hearns already had when he fought Geraldo.

Yes the questions I had for you were easy. It was meant for someone who doesn't know much to to be able to come to easy conclusions. Given your answers I guess that didn't work. Your answers are unbelievably stupid.

1. Hagler took it easy on Geraldo? That's what happened. We all know that Hagler always took it easy on his opponents.
Geraldo was already washed up when Hearns beat him? You just admitted that! Therefore, Hearns KO1 over Geraldo doesn't mean much.
You do comprehend that?

2. You got that one right. Hagler knocked out Lee in the first round.
3. So Caveman's win was a fluke? It's a fluke because it doesn't fit your ill logic. You could just as easily say Hearns Ko 1 was a fluke.
4. Hearns looked better against Hagler than Leonard did? Are you saying this with a straight face? Getting stopped in three is not as good as winning. Use your brain.
5. The "monster' never knocked frikkin Luigi Minchillo down. Wow, quite a monster.
6. Leonard knocked Benitez more than the monster Hearns did. That's all you had to say. On your scoring, you actually had Benitez ahead of Leonard going into the last round?
7. Benitez could have pulled off a draw if he doesn't get knocked down in the last round? Again,
8. No, I don't believe that Hearns was frailish at welterweight. Was he frailish against Cuevas? How come no one else made him look frail? He threw everything he had at Leonard and could not hurt him at all at 147. No reason to think at 154 Leonard suddenly has no chance?
9. Did he destroy Leonard at 164? No, that is what I asked.
10. No the fight was not at 160 for both Leonard and Geraldo. Geraldo, weighed 160, but Leonard only weighed 153, which makes him a jr middleweight for the fight.
I asked if there was anyone else besides Leonard who won a fight above weight class in his 2nd year as a pro that you would like to criticize? You didn't answer.
11. You didn't answer the question. I asked why is it a big deal for Ray Lampkin to win the NABF title, but a guy (Leonard) who wins four world titles above 147 is mediocre? I asked because it doesn't make any sense to think like that.
12. You didn't answer the question. I asked you to tell what the definition of mediocre is? I asked because it's clear that you don't know what it means.

To sum things, but you have said a lot of very stupid things. Again. All you do is pick things that you think favors fighters that you like or does not favor guys that you don't like. You constantly ignore all evidence to the contrary.

You simply don't know much about logic or boxing. You are unable to grasp the most basic concepts.

[elmersalsa]

Ambling Alp. You're the one that is STUPID, not me. Respect others to be respected. I am not your child.

And this is why you're STUPID:
Your blind love for Sugar Ray does not make you see reality. Between Leonard and the Hitman, when both guys go to a step further in weight class, the weight favors the taller guy. That is a logic you cannot comprehend. Why? Because you're stupid.

Hearns fought a PRIME Hagler.
Leonard fought a FADING Marvelous. Ask anyone in this forum and I won't be alone. He was missing targets like he normally didn't. Hearns almost knocked him out in Marvelous prime. Put anyone of those two against Leonard on that night of April 15, 1985 and Leonard gets KO'd by both.

I am not going to answer or reply all your stupid questions and rebottle your stupid answers because you're foolish. But, I am going to answer the ones that matter like answers:

5. Yes, Hearns was a monster against Minchillo. As a matter of fact, Minchillo at 154 has a better chin than Sugar Ray. Put Sugar Ray that night and he gets TKFO!
6. The Hitman beat Benitez comfortably. Way better than Leonard. With a broken hand. I have never said that Benitez was winning vs Leonard. I said that if Benitez finished the 15th round on his feet without a lockdown, he would've retained the title in my view by a draw.
8. A fight between 1982 and 1985 at 154lbs, Hearns would've embarrassed Leonard.
9. He gave Leonard a whopping. The judge$$$ were biased in the rematch. Two knockdowns in a fight should never be a draw.
11. I have never compared Leonard vs Lampkin. Two different fighters. One was way better than the other. But, the inferior fighter slugged it out better than a "superior" welterweight against Duran.

12. Leonard was MEDIOCRE above 147 in most of his fights. It wasn't near his performances at 147. Hearns above 147 had better and more greater performances than Leonard above 147.

I am not going to answer no more questions. I know what I know. I know a lot about what I know in boxing. So you can't tell me a damn thing or two. Like the bible says: Do not follow a fool according to his folly.

[Crease]

Initially what comes to mind is Ali vs Foreman - I don't see how that rematch wouldn't have made them both another ton of money.

And would also throw in Hagler vs Hearns - any match up between them couldn't be anything but widely exciting, it's just not in their natures.

My last suggestion would probably be Salvador Sanchez vs Wilfredo Gomez - and that genuinely is a fight which could have been fought 10 times with 10 different endings.

[palooka]

Lupe Pintor and Carlos Zarate should have rematched, it was a very close bout, I though Pintor won but there wasn't much in it.

[Ambling Alp II]

Ambling Alp. You're the one that is STUPID, not me. Respect others to be respected. I am not your child.

And this is why you're STUPID:
Your blind love for Sugar Ray does not make you see reality. Between Leonard and the Hitman, when both guys go to a step further in weight class, the weight favors the taller guy. That is a logic you cannot comprehend. Why? Because you're stupid.

Hearns fought a PRIME Hagler.
Leonard fought a FADING Marvelous. Ask anyone in this forum and I won't be alone. He was missing targets like he normally didn't. Hearns almost knocked him out in Marvelous prime. Put anyone of those two against Leonard on that night of April 15, 1985 and Leonard gets KO'd by both.

I am not going to answer or reply all your stupid questions and rebottle your stupid answers because you're foolish. But, I am going to answer the ones that matter like answers:

5. Yes, Hearns was a monster against Minchillo. As a matter of fact, Minchillo at 154 has a better chin than Sugar Ray. Put Sugar Ray that night and he gets TKFO!
6. The Hitman beat Benitez comfortably. Way better than Leonard. With a broken hand. I have never said that Benitez was winning vs Leonard. I said that if Benitez finished the 15th round on his feet without a lockdown, he would've retained the title in my view by a draw.
8. A fight between 1982 and 1985 at 154lbs, Hearns would've embarrassed Leonard.
9. He gave Leonard a whopping. The judge$$$ were biased in the rematch. Two knockdowns in a fight should never be a draw.
11. I have never compared Leonard vs Lampkin. Two different fighters. One was way better than the other. But, the inferior fighter slugged it out better than a "superior" welterweight against Duran.

12. Leonard was MEDIOCRE above 147 in most of his fights. It wasn't near his performances at 147. Hearns above 147 had better and more greater performances than Leonard above 147.

I am not going to answer no more questions. I know what I know. I know a lot about what I know in boxing. So you can't tell me a damn thing or two. Like the bible says: Do not follow a fool according to his folly.

Your not going to answer no more questions?
You said "I know a lot about what I know in boxing." I agree with that. You know a lot about you know. The problem is that you don't know much. You also have little ability to use logic.
All you do is exaggerate the accomplishments of guys you like and downplay or ignore the guys you don't. And stop pretending you like Leonard.

I didn't say you were comparing Lampkin and Leonard. However, on another thread you made a big deal about Lampkin winning the NABF title. (Of course the only reason you did this was to make your favorite fighter Duran look good)
Then you say a guy who won 4 world titles above 147 is mediocre. You can't have it both ways.
Unbelievable that you can't comprehend that.

I will let my comments and your comments speak for themselves.
Lets see how long you can go without bringing up your anti-Leonard crap. Maybe you can last a month or two. In the mean time look up the word mediocre in the dictionary.

[Ambling Alp II]

Initially what comes to mind is Ali vs Foreman - I don't see how that rematch wouldn't have made them both another ton of money.

And would also throw in Hagler vs Hearns - any match up between them couldn't be anything but widely exciting, it's just not in their natures.

My last suggestion would probably be Salvador Sanchez vs Wilfredo Gomez - and that genuinely is a fight which could have been fought 10 times with 10 different endings.

Foreman went into a funk and didn't want to fight for a while. In fact it was 15 months before he fought again. He threw everything he had but it didn't work. I think Foreman would have tried to pace himself more, but it's hard to imagine him winning a 15-round decision.

Hearns probably would have tried to box a lot more . Still, Hagler would probably have got to him at some point.

Sanchez-Gomez-I dunno. Sanchez was so dominant, it's hard to imagine him losing. May have been interesting though.

[Ambling Alp II]

Lupe Pintor and Carlos Zarate should have rematched, it was a very close bout, I though Pintor won but there wasn't much in it.

A lot of people thought Zarate won. Zarate was having trouble making 118 so maybe that is why the rematch never happened.

[palooka]

Gomez was maybe more gifted than Sanchez but Salvador was highly professional and worked very hard; Wilfredo tended to get worn down and stopped, Sanchez would have done that regularly, particularly with 15 round scraps.

[Syntax Error]

Initially what comes to mind is Ali vs Foreman - I don't see how that rematch wouldn't have made them both another ton of money.

And would also throw in Hagler vs Hearns - any match up between them couldn't be anything but widely exciting, it's just not in their natures.

My last suggestion would probably be Salvador Sanchez vs Wilfredo Gomez - and that genuinely is a fight which could have been fought 10 times with 10 different endings.

Back in the early to mid 70s, HW championship rematches were rare.

Frazier beat Ali & Muhammad had to wait 3.5 years for another shot at the title.

Foreman beats Frazier & there was not an immediate rematch either.

Ali beats Foreman & even if George didn't retreat into the shadows & wait for a postcard from Muhammad, I don't believe an immediate rematch would have happened anyway.

Back then, they had to fight their way back into contention & Foreman did not do that.

[palooka]

Lupe Pintor and Carlos Zarate should have rematched, it was a very close bout, I though Pintor won but there wasn't much in it.

A lot of people thought Zarate won. Zarate was having trouble making 118 so maybe that is why the rematch never happened.

I can understand why people would plump for Zarate, he was the heavier hitter and scored the only knockdown; I thought Pintor was a touch busier and lead off through the bout. Zarate did OK coming back after about 10 years out, he was a super fighter.

[elmersalsa]

Ambling Alp. You're the one that is STUPID, not me. Respect others to be respected. I am not your child.

And this is why you're STUPID:
Your blind love for Sugar Ray does not make you see reality. Between Leonard and the Hitman, when both guys go to a step further in weight class, the weight favors the taller guy. That is a logic you cannot comprehend. Why? Because you're stupid.

Hearns fought a PRIME Hagler.
Leonard fought a FADING Marvelous. Ask anyone in this forum and I won't be alone. He was missing targets like he normally didn't. Hearns almost knocked him out in Marvelous prime. Put anyone of those two against Leonard on that night of April 15, 1985 and Leonard gets KO'd by both.

I am not going to answer or reply all your stupid questions and rebottle your stupid answers because you're foolish. But, I am going to answer the ones that matter like answers:

5. Yes, Hearns was a monster against Minchillo. As a matter of fact, Minchillo at 154 has a better chin than Sugar Ray. Put Sugar Ray that night and he gets TKFO!
6. The Hitman beat Benitez comfortably. Way better than Leonard. With a broken hand. I have never said that Benitez was winning vs Leonard. I said that if Benitez finished the 15th round on his feet without a lockdown, he would've retained the title in my view by a draw.
8. A fight between 1982 and 1985 at 154lbs, Hearns would've embarrassed Leonard.
9. He gave Leonard a whopping. The judge$$$ were biased in the rematch. Two knockdowns in a fight should never be a draw.
11. I have never compared Leonard vs Lampkin. Two different fighters. One was way better than the other. But, the inferior fighter slugged it out better than a "superior" welterweight against Duran.

12. Leonard was MEDIOCRE above 147 in most of his fights. It wasn't near his performances at 147. Hearns above 147 had better and more greater performances than Leonard above 147.

I am not going to answer no more questions. I know what I know. I know a lot about what I know in boxing. So you can't tell me a damn thing or two. Like the bible says: Do not follow a fool according to his folly.

Your not going to answer no more questions?
You said "I know a lot about what I know in boxing." I agree with that. You know a lot about you know. The problem is that you don't know much. You also have little ability to use logic.
All you do is exaggerate the accomplishments of guys you like and downplay or ignore the guys you don't. And stop pretending you like Leonard.

I didn't say you were comparing Lampkin and Leonard. However, on another thread you made a big deal about Lampkin winning the NABF title. (Of course the only reason you did this was to make your favorite fighter Duran look good)
Then you say a guy who won 4 world titles above 147 is mediocre. You can't have it both ways.
Unbelievable that you can't comprehend that.

I will let my comments and your comments speak for themselves.
Lets see how long you can go without bringing up your anti-Leonard crap. Maybe you can last a month or two. In the mean time look up the word mediocre in the dictionary.

I made a deal that Ray Lampkin won the NBAF lightweight title in a thread about The Hands of Stone opponents. He went TOE TO TOE with one of the greatest champions in history. Something that your boy didn't do of what you and the media claim that he "slugged it out" when in REALITY, LEONARD WAS HOLDING AND CLUTCHING FOR SURVIVAL. That's what really happened.

I am SURPRISED you didn't called me stupid this time. Probably, I knew why. You don't want it TO GET UGLIER WITH ME. So behave yourself. Ok?

We could go TOE TO TOE on this subject clean or ugly! The question is how do you want it?

All I can say that I felt your FRUSTRATION by calling me stupid first, and I will respond. Why? Because I demand respect of you or anybody in this forum. Once you call someone stupid, IT MEANS TO ME THAT YOU'RE FRUSTRATED AND LOST THE ARGUMENT.

[palooka]

Whether you go toe to toe, clean or dirty can't you do it by PM, please? This ongoing thing is really doing nothing for the thread and got boring some time ago.