Sugar Ray Leonard, what if?

[Onetimeonly]

Sure he could have.

If he felt like getting run over. He fought a great fight. All he could do.

[APerno]

This is a real old argument too.

What has Leonard said?

I wonder how difficult it is for a fighter to change his intended style mid fight once he finds it isn't working?

Ali said he changed/adjusted to Foreman when he realized Foreman's footwork was too good to dance around for 15 rounds; Hearns adjusted well (Leonard-Hearns I) in the middle rounds and made an (almost) comeback after being hurt early.

But I really can't think of too many fighters who can make a major style alteration mid fight.

The question to ask Leonard is: After he was hurt in the fourth (maybe fifth) round why didn't he see that the style of the fight was not to his advantage and make the adjustment then, instead of six months later in New Orleans?

He had to at some point realize he may lose the fight and needed to adjust his style, but he didn't.

This makes me wonder if Duran wasn't by mid fight so imposing himself on Leonard, that Leonard couldn't adjust and was forced into reacting, not acting.

[Onetimeonly]

He was hurt really bad in the second round.

[Onetimeonly]

Past Duran's aggression Padilla let him continuously work on the inside. The two combined gave him zero chance of successfully playing a matador. Bad ass performance, he took that ass whipping like a man. Won the last two rounds.

[Brian Seneca]

He had not had a fight in 6 years before he fought Camacho. It wasn't just that he was 41 years old, he had a ton of ring rust. Had been fighting during these years, he would have looked a lot better against Camacho.

It would have been great if he didn't have the eye injury. He probably has 12-15 fights instead of 1 between 1982-1987. Would have fight Hagler earlier, probably would have fought Duran, Hearns, and Benitez again. Probably would have fought McCallum and Curry as well.

People do come up with lames excuses for his opponents i.e. Benitez didn't train hard enough, Duran and the tummyache/too much partying etc. Hagler fight being 12 rounds instead of 15, size of glove, size of ring etc.

He was one of the top 10 fighters in history. There should be no question about that. The only thing he lacks is about 20-30 wins over fighters that nobody ever heard of. If his career record was 56-3-1 with 20 more wins over nobodies, he would automatically be considered one of the top 10.

He has wins over 4 different opponents who are top 50 all time. How many guys have done that? Less than 10. Pep has one. More has one. Duran has one. Monzon has two. Hagler has two. Charles has maybe two.

People say he had a short career. But he packed so much into it. That is what counts, not longevity. If a baseball player hit more homeruns in 6 years than another guy did in 20, the player who hit more in 6 would be consider the better homerun hitter.
It's what you do that counts. Not how long you did it.

First let me say that I am not a Leonard fan. I do have great respect for him. You do make valid points about the excuses for Benitez and Duran. But the Hagler manipulation is a legitimate gripe. “I’ll only fight you if it’s 12 rounds and bigger gloves and ring big enough for me to run from you.” Even with that I don’t feel he did enough. He SURVIVED and the judges rewarded him. Did he win some rounds? Sure. He would pity pat and the end of a round and run. When Ray was undisputed welterweight champion and say Starling peek a booed a flurried and countered and ran. Would Moochie be awarded a decision? Hell no! You must defeat the champion convincingly. Ray didn’t. He was a media darling. Two titles for barely defeating DONNIE LALONDE is total bs. He manipulated him as well. Hearns was totally screwed in the rematch. After Hearns 1 his career was orchestrated. As for beating top 50 fighters. What about Ray Robinson? Ray is an all time great no doubt. But his record is suspect. The other thing is when he lost he DEMANDED a immediate rematch. He made Duran and Hearns wait 8 and 9 years respectively. When he had in his mind better chances of winning. I don’t know if he beats Hearns at 154 had they met then. I think his career may have had a different ending and not as good had he kept fighting.

[elmersalsa]

The Sugar Ray fans are not fair at all when comparing wins when it came to Duran.

Leonard beats Duran, Hearns and Benitez at 147lbs, in his prime. In his weight class

Duran fought Hearns and Benitez at 154lbs, not at 147lbs. He was not in his prime. It was not his weight class.

But, somehow Leonard is better? How?

If Hearns and Benitez would have beaten Duran at 147, and in Duran's prime, then is the best comparison. You could say that Sugar Ray Leonard was better than Roberto Duran. But, it is what it is.

Sugar Ray Leonard is a great fighter. A top 20 pound per pound fighter in my book. I rated him fair at #18. I think that is fair ranking. He can't be top ten. That would be too much of a stretch. Not too many fights to begin with.

But, Duran? The man was incredible even with his shortcomings. He was champion in 4 weight classifications. The last 2 when he was TOTALLY WRITTEN OFF! That's the greatness that he gave us. When you thought that he was down and out, he came out with an incredible victory. And he did it at 37 years of age! An age that you gotta be retired a long time ago.

[Ambling Alp II]

This is a little confusing.
Duran won a the title at 135. He is forever a lightweight and was not at his best when Leonard stopped him, because apparently a fighter is always at his best at the weight class when he wins his first title.
That is something that just can't be argued against.

Therefore when Benitez won the title at 140, (when he was 17 years old), he was at his all time best. Obviously no possible way that the teenager would have improved by the time he was 21 when Leonard beat him.

However, Hearns won the title at 147. So wouldn't he (going by great rule) be at his best at Leonard beat him?

And wouldn't Leonard not be at his best when he beat Hagler at 160?

And since it's a big deal that Duran won four titles, wouldn't it be even more impressive if someone (we'll call him Ray) won 5 titles?
Just wondering.

[elmersalsa]

This is a little confusing.
Duran won a the title at 135. He is forever a lightweight and was not at his best when Leonard stopped him, because apparently a fighter is always at his best at the weight class when he wins his first title.
That is something that just can't be argued against.

Therefore when Benitez won the title at 140, (when he was 17 years old), he was at his all time best. Obviously no possible way that the teenager would have improved by the time he was 21 when Leonard beat him.

However, Hearns won the title at 147. So wouldn't he (going by great rule) be at his best at Leonard beat him?

And wouldn't Leonard not be at his best when he beat Hagler at 160?

And since it's a big deal that Duran won four titles, wouldn't it be even more impressive if someone (we'll call him Ray) won 5 titles?
Just wondering.

Two titles in one night for Sugar Ray was a big time joke, sir.

We talk about comparing wins and you said plenty of times that Sugar Ray is better than the Hands of Stone. It is not a fair comparison when the others fought a weight class above.

The fairness should be if all of them fought at the same weight class that they felt comfortable.

[APerno]

This is a little confusing.
Duran won a the title at 135. He is forever a lightweight and was not at his best when Leonard stopped him, because apparently a fighter is always at his best at the weight class when he wins his first title.
That is something that just can't be argued against.

Therefore when Benitez won the title at 140, (when he was 17 years old), he was at his all time best. Obviously no possible way that the teenager would have improved by the time he was 21 when Leonard beat him.

However, Hearns won the title at 147. So wouldn't he (going by great rule) be at his best at Leonard beat him?

And wouldn't Leonard not be at his best when he beat Hagler at 160?

And since it's a big deal that Duran won four titles, wouldn't it be even more impressive if someone (we'll call him Ray) won 5 titles?
Just wondering.

Yes he was not, that's why he put on such a poor performance and the theater I was in booed. Not just the decision, but the fight in general. The fight sucked.

[Ambling Alp II]

People were booing in your theatre? wtf? Leonard performed better than anyone thought he would. He was supposed to get an ass whipping, and he won.

[Onetimeonly]

I picked him to win, the fight didn't suck either.

[APerno]

A prize fight never broke out, only got 12 rounds of sparing.

Hagler looked finished, shuffling about ineffectively and Leonard having no intention of engaging (looking for a KO), just waiting for three fat men men sitting ringside to tell him he won. Boring!

You like Charlie Burley, I like Rocky Graziano. You guys see yourselves as efficacious, I'm just a merely fight fan.

We see fights differently.

I expect a fight, not a boxing match. I want to see boxing I'll watch the amateurs (which I don't). If Leonard had told me all he intend to do box and wait out the 12 rounds, so three fat guys could tell him he is a winner, I would have said fine, enjoy yourself, but I'm keeping the $35 in my pocket.

The venue I was at was Sunrise Musical Theater in Florida; the crowd I was with, was not wowed.

[Ambling Alp II]

That's fine if you like more of a brawl than a boxing match. I like both myself. However, it's not a "bad fight" just because the fighters fought more of a boxing match.

[APerno]

Fair enough - but I would add, Leonard boxed, I was never sure what the hell Hagler was up to; it was as if Leonard put him to sleep. I remember thinking (about Hagler), "this guy doesn't know he's losing."