Roberto Duran's legacy?

[Cojimar 1946]

Leonard simply doesn't have the resume depth of certain other guys. For example, Emile Griffith fought something like 25 ranked opponents.

[Jacopodb]

f you have 8 in the 50s you make some kind of argument, however, I would go with beating 4 in the top 50. But 50-100 is a broad range. Beating someone you consider to be #100 in the world is impressive but nothing like beating someone like Duran, Hagler or Hearns.

Hagler had tough fight after tough fight defending his title. Most weren't top 100 ATG's but considerable challengers nonetheless. Mugabi was a monster when he stepped into the ring with Hagler and got tamed...no one will dispute Bennie Briscoe's greatness/toughness although certainly not top 100 ATG...or Mintor maybe? The list goes on. Same with Monzon; Rodrigo Valdez; Tony Licata; Munoz; Napoles; Benvenuti; etc. Leonard doesn't have those sorts of wins on his resume really. He opted for crap or diamonds. So four (I say three) diamonds in a mound of crap. Sorry.

nothing stems from a diamond, but flowers are born from manure
Fabrizio De André

[elmersalsa]

Leonard simply doesn't have the resume depth of certain other guys. For example, Emile Griffith fought something like 25 ranked opponents.

But according to Leonard fans, he was a better Welterweight than Griffith. Laughable!

[oogiebe]

f you have 8 in the 50s you make some kind of argument, however, I would go with beating 4 in the top 50. But 50-100 is a broad range. Beating someone you consider to be #100 in the world is impressive but nothing like beating someone like Duran, Hagler or Hearns.

Hagler had tough fight after tough fight defending his title. Most weren't top 100 ATG's but considerable challengers nonetheless. Mugabi was a monster when he stepped into the ring with Hagler and got tamed...no one will dispute Bennie Briscoe's greatness/toughness although certainly not top 100 ATG...or Mintor maybe? The list goes on. Same with Monzon; Rodrigo Valdez; Tony Licata; Munoz; Napoles; Benvenuti; etc. Leonard doesn't have those sorts of wins on his resume really. He opted for crap or diamonds. So four (I say three) diamonds in a mound of crap. Sorry.

nothing stems from a diamond, but flowers are born from manure
Fabrizio De André

NICE!!! LOL!

[Ambling Alp II]

Griffith also somehow managed to lose to Benny Paret, Manual Gonzales,, and Don Fullmer. He got knocked out in the first round by Hurricane Carter. Won several dubious decisions to far less than great fighters. Any one of these things happened with Leonard we would never hear the end of it.

[oogiebe]

Griffith also somehow managed to lose to Benny Paret, Manual Gonzales,, and Don Fullmer. He got knocked out in the first round by Hurricane Carter. Won several dubious decisions to far less than great fighters. Any one of these things happened with Leonard we would never hear the end of it.

Nah! Folks could've talked about his last two fights. Losing to Norris by decision and Camacho by TKO. They really aren't indicative of Rays greatness, or taking anything away from it. Gotta be fair. Griffith was a terrific fighter in his day.

[chrisjs1985]

I always felt Rodriguez won all four fights with Griffith. Griffith was obviously incredibly great though. Just thought I'd point that out. Rodriguez perhaps beats Leonard too.

[oogiebe]

I always felt Rodriguez won all four fights with Griffith. Griffith was obviously incredibly great though. Just thought I'd point that out. Rodriguez perhaps beats Leonard too.

A bit off base here, but in the early seventies, the town in Long Island next to mine, they had a MW/LHW who made somewhat of a name for himself, as local fighters go. But thanks to Bobby Cassidy had I heard of Rodriguez, as well as fighters like Rodrigo Valdez (years before fighting Monzon)...we didn't have the internet and a whole lotta reading material to learn about fighters of the past. We learned from fathers and other friends and family, about the "good ole' days" of fighters. Anyway...

[Ambling Alp II]

Griffith also somehow managed to lose to Benny Paret, Manual Gonzales,, and Don Fullmer. He got knocked out in the first round by Hurricane Carter. Won several dubious decisions to far less than great fighters. Any one of these things happened with Leonard we would never hear the end of it.

Nah! Folks could've talked about his last two fights. Losing to Norris by decision and Camacho by TKO. They really aren't indicative of Rays greatness, or taking anything away from it. Gotta be fair. Griffith was a terrific fighter in his day.

Believe it or not, those fights have been brought up on this Forum before. Griffith was certainly a great fighter; didn't mean to give the impression that he wasn't.

[Cojimar 1946]

Leonard had very few fights at middleweight, its hard to know how consistent he would be at that weight against a diverse array of world class opponents. So I'm not sure Griffith's losses at that weight are especially relevant at least vis a vis Leonard given they were both welterweights who moved up in weight.

I thought he beat Paret pretty clearly, 9-6, seems like a bad decision.

[Ambling Alp II]

Well, we know that Griffith was not that consistent.
If you are going to count Griffith's wins, then you have to count the loess and near losses to ordinary fighters. Griffith got more than his share of close decisions in his career. Great fighter. Clearly not as good as Leonard. Leonard did just about virtually everything better.

[oogiebe]

I always felt Rodriguez won all four fights with Griffith. Griffith was obviously incredibly great though. Just thought I'd point that out. Rodriguez perhaps beats Leonard too.

Wow! That's a bold statement, but to be fair, you'd know better than me.

[Onetimeonly]

That would have been really close. I hate to open myself up for the ridicule but I think Floyd would have caused ray a ton of trouble.

[oogiebe]

That would have been really close. I hate to open myself up for the ridicule but I think Floyd would have caused ray a ton of trouble.

One helleva fight though. Leonard could have a hard time finding opportunities. Floyd was the epitome of hit and don't get hit.

[Onetimeonly]

That would have been really close. I hate to open myself up for the ridicule but I think Floyd would have caused ray a ton of trouble.

One helleva fight though. Leonard could have a hard time finding opportunities. Floyd was the epitome of hit and don't get hit.

Ray wasn't great defensively and while he could stick to his own plan of movement in a fight to a tee, I think Floyd not engaging would piss him off and may weather would tag him with that right lead and counter. I'd edge to ray on harder shots and aggression but it would be razor close IMO.

[Cojimar 1946]

I would say that Griffith's losses can be explained as a combination of fighting more frequently than fighters of later eras, fighting such a large number of quality opponents, and fighting well past his prime.

Had Leonard fought the guys Griffith faced over the timespan Griffith fought them I think he suffers far more losses than he did in his actual career especially given that he was well past his prime by age 34 and Griffith fought to age 39 and was facing elite competition up until the very end.

Joe Calzaghe is undefeated whereas Henry Armstrong suffered numerous losses include many that were before he started to decline. I don't think we can necessarily conclude Calzaghe is greater than Armstrong.

[Ambling Alp II]

Agree that Leonard would have had more losses had he fought to 39 and had 112 fights. He would have had many less losses and draws and close decisions victoires than Griffith did.
Even though Griffith fought much longer, he still did not beat as many of very elite fighters as Leonard beat.
Earlier, I was only pointing out losses before he got old and to people he should have not lost to.
Worth pointing that before his eye injury, Leonard was about as active as Griffith was.

[Jacopodb]

Griffin has beaten all-timers, nevertheless: he was great at middleweight.

[chrisjs1985]

That would have been really close. I hate to open myself up for the ridicule but I think Floyd would have caused ray a ton of trouble.

I can’t see Floyd beating him but yeah I think he gives him fits. It would be close and competitive throughout.

Hearns is the guy that Floyd has no success against.

[Jacopodb]

That would have been really close. I hate to open myself up for the ridicule but I think Floyd would have caused ray a ton of trouble.

I can’t see Floyd beating him but yeah I think he gives him fits. It would be close and competitive throughout.

Hearns is the guy that Floyd has no success against.

I believe that Hearns would be a lot of weight for Floyd: Floyd, thanks to his own work-ethics, might have big chances at welterweight vs Hearns, but the version of Hearns that beat Wilfred Benitez, would be a tougher job for Floyd Jr.

[Onetimeonly]

Floyd has no chance against hearns.

[Nile4000]

Floyd has no chance against hearns.

My feelings exactly.

[Cojimar 1946]

I think Griffiths wins over Rodriguez, Tiger, and Benvenuti are on par with Leonard's best wins.

As far as consistency goes from mid 1960 to 1964 Griffith was extremely consistent. Excluding the Paret robbery he only lost twice one of which was at middleweight, a weight at which Leonard barely fought.

During that period he racked up wins over
Jorge Fernandez
Florentino Fernandez
Luis Rodriguez
Yama Bahama
Gasper Ortega
Benny Kid Paret
Denny Moyer
Don Fullmer

to name just a few.

[oogiebe]

I think Griffiths wins over Rodriguez, Tiger, and Benvenuti are on par with Leonard's best wins.

As far as consistency goes from mid 1960 to 1964 Griffith was extremely consistent. Excluding the Paret robbery he only lost twice one of which was at middleweight, a weight at which Leonard barely fought.

Wasn't one of those losses a 1 round blowout against Carter?

[Cojimar 1946]

Yes, at middlweight a weight at which Leonard barely fought.