BoxRec

golden oldie wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:

Ambling Alp II wrote:
I said that Leonard landed more big punches than Hearns. Didn't say Leonard was a bigger puncher. There is a difference.

Golden Oldie has reading comprehension issues. He can't read.

Aaah didums, does that mean you will need to take your Ray Leonard posters down from you're bedroom wall?

golden oldie wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:

golden oldie wrote:

Aaah didums, does that mean you will need to take your Ray Leonard posters down from you're bedroom wall?

There you go again making my point for me.

I write: SRL was a great welterweight. He didn't fight Hagler until he thought he could beat him. You read I have Ray Leonard posters on bedroom wall.

I write: Kalule was an undefeated tricky southpaw, but he was never a great fighter. You read Kalule is a great fighter.

I write: I don't like SRL as a person. You read I have Ray Leonard posters on bedroom wall.

That's what I mean by you can't or won't read.

Were you born stupid, or have you spent a lifetime trying to achieve that status?

A lifetime achievement award. Wasn't born that way I earned it.

You wrote you don't like Leonard as a person.

I wrote Leonard the person is NONE of my business, rather his career ABOVE 147 is garbage, and should NOT be given even the merest hint of praise.

Beating Hagler, Kalule, and LeLonde is not garbage. I believe the LeLonde fight had a catchweight of 168, which is the super middleweight division. I never claimed SRL was LH champion.

You wrote Kalule was a tricky southpaw.

I wrote Kalule was at best a B LEVEL fighter on his best night.

This "argument" may be a matter of semantics. if level A is a Great fighter and level B is a very good fighter, then we agree. Hagler, Leonard, and Duran were all Great fighters at Middleweight, Welterweight, and Lightweight respectively. Going 36-0 against a few reasonably decent opponents is impressive. You go 36-0.

And you have the front to accuse ME of lacking reading skills?

golden oldie wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:

golden oldie wrote:
Were you born stupid, or have you spent a lifetime trying to achieve that status?

A lifetime achievement award. Wasn't born that way I earned it.



I wrote Leonard the person is NONE of my business, rather his career ABOVE 147 is garbage, and should NOT be given even the merest hint of praise.

Beating Hagler, Kalule, and LeLonde is not garbage. I believe the LeLonde fight had a catchweight of 168, which is the super middleweight division. I never claimed SRL was LH champion.



I wrote Kalule was at best a B LEVEL fighter on his best night.

This "argument" may be a matter of semantics. if level A is a Great fighter and level B is a very good fighter, then we agree. Hagler, Leonard, and Duran were all Great fighters at Middleweight, Welterweight, and Lightweight respectively. Going 36-0 against a few reasonably decent opponents is impressive. You go 36-0.

And you have the front to accuse ME of lacking reading skills?

You should be honest and write that you just don't like the guy. I don't really either. I find the whole I used to be effed up on drugs and now I'm effed up on the lord is tiresome. I never liked Razor Ruddock, and I don't even know why. Its ok not to like someone. But beating Kalule, Hagler, and LeLonde is impressive. Hagler is only 2 years older, and while LeLonde and Kalule are not great, i have to write again, they were very good fighters and good wins for SRL.

Kalule was NOT a great fighter, in fact he was far from it, and at the time Leonard was being touted as the one of the best fighters on the planet. Beating the Danish based Ugandan was not a good win, it was an expected win.

Yeah, I think I mentioned quite a few times that Kalule is not a Great fighter. All wins are good wins.


The Hagler fight is ONLY given credence because of Leonard's lack of activity building up to it. That doesn't alter the fact that

( a ) it certainly wasn't a dominant performance..or

( b ) Hagler was far from his prime, which again, was when Leonard first TALKED about but made absolutely no attempt to actually " make " the fight. The retina excuse has already been shot down by Leonard's own words in November 82. Lalonde was indeed a catchweight, and therefore by definition counts for less, as was the draw with Hearns for the same reason which people conveniently forget, which is Leonard put a 163 limit on Tommy who had fought at 3lbs heavier just 7 months previously.

Finally if people want to claim those as good wins, as well as credit the draw with Hearns, and the win over Duran in the interest of balance they must say the humiliation at the hands of Norris just 14 months later was dire.

Unfortunately with Leonard fans they want to praise his wins to the rafters, and excuse his defeats. As for your obsession with liking or disliking a fighter personally, that has no relevance to how their careers should be judged.

I personally don't like Mayweather but I would never be stupid enough to deny his genius in the ring, as I wouldn't Leonard's at 147. But i will NOT fall for the bullshit above that weight.

Tom Moore wrote:Frank Bruno and Anthony Joshua:
British
Musclebound
Robotic
Big punchers against lower level fighters.

Joshua seems a bit more fluid and a better boxer, but until he gets his Bonecrusher Smith and Witherspoon equivalents, we'll never know.

Bricks wrote:

Tom Moore wrote:Frank Bruno and Anthony Joshua:
British
Musclebound
Robotic
Big punchers against lower level fighters.

Joshua seems a bit more fluid and a better boxer, but until he gets his Bonecrusher Smith and Witherspoon equivalents, we'll never know.

I see the comparison totally but joshua is levels below in every area to bruno

Bricks wrote:

Tom Moore wrote:Frank Bruno and Anthony Joshua:
British
Musclebound
Robotic
Big punchers against lower level fighters.

Joshua seems a bit more fluid and a better boxer, but until he gets his Bonecrusher Smith and Witherspoon equivalents, we'll never know.

I see the comparison totally but joshua is levels below in every area to bruno

golden oldie wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:
Correct, it wasn't a dominant performance. It was two Great fighters passed their prime and one moved up in weight. Those are all facts, not opinions, including your first sentence which I quoted.

Sorry, but saying the "Hagler fight is only given credence because of Leonard's lack of activity," just doesn't make sense. So, if Leonard had been fighting regularly, but the match was the same it wouldn't have "credence?"

I think you meant to write past, not " passed " but no matter. There is a huge difference between a fighters deterioration being plainly visible ( as was the case with Hagler by 87 ) and people " guestimating " Leonard's deterioration at that time, for obvious reasons.

The emboldened part is nonsense, because it stands to reason had Leonard been active, he would have had no excuses to AVOID the fighters he said in DECEMBER 83, he intended to fight ( McCrory, Curry, Duran, Hearns CULMINATING in Hagler ) instead the self promoting gutless fool, chose to blatantly DUCK any perceived threat, and WAIT for Hagler to regress dramatically, Hearns to get badly beaten, Duran to become a parody of his former self, and lets not even mention the YOUNG McCrory, and Curry. Perhaps I have it wrong ( who knows ) but to me if someone mentions those luminaries, and instead ends up fighting the likes of Kevin Howard then goes and hides for almost 3 years they deserve to be roundly criticised.

Some GREAT FIGHTER you seem to worship.

As stated, he was indeed a fantastic Welter. But the rest of the shite? Go away, I'd rather talk to a stupid double glazing salesman.

golden oldie wrote:
Your emotional clap trap is a perfect example of why that low life garbage Trump could well be the next president of the U.S.A.

.

golden oldie wrote:"Ambling Alp II"

]He looked as good against Mugabi as he did in several of his prime fights.

You have 2 choices,

( a ) you are deliberately lying

or

( b ) you are a fool

Which is it?

The following are your hero Leonard's own words.

I was ringside", Leonard said. "I'm watching John 'The Beast' Mugabi fight Hagler. Of all people, John 'The Beast' Mugabi." It was then that Leonard decided to come back and fight Hagler. He called Mike Trainer and said, "I can beat Hagler".

I apologise, there is also the 3rd FANBOY option, whereby the fanboys CONVINCE themselves they know better than their own hero's.

You are much like the other fanboy Tony, you will do ANYTHING to avoid the issues ( particularly if they involve Leonard's own claims ) and concentrate on promoting your own ego's through your misguided hero worship.

What won the Mugabi fight was Hagler's granite chin, and superior power. NOTHING else. He looked far from good.

Watch Marvin from the late 70's early 80's when he systematically took guys apart then stopped them. What he did with Mugabi was " gutted it out " no comparison at all.

golden oldie wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:

golden oldie wrote:
I think you meant to write past, not " passed " but no matter. There is a huge difference between a fighters deterioration being plainly visible ( as was the case with Hagler by 87 ) and people " guestimating " Leonard's deterioration at that time, for obvious reasons.

The emboldened part is nonsense, because it stands to reason had Leonard been active, he would have had no excuses to AVOID the fighters he said in DECEMBER 83, he intended to fight ( McCrory, Curry, Duran, Hearns CULMINATING in Hagler ) instead the self promoting gutless fool, chose to blatantly DUCK any perceived threat, and WAIT for Hagler to regress dramatically, Hearns to get badly beaten, Duran to become a parody of his former self, and lets not even mention the YOUNG McCrory, and Curry. Perhaps I have it wrong ( who knows ) but to me if someone mentions those luminaries, and instead ends up fighting the likes of Kevin Howard then goes and hides for almost 3 years they deserve to be roundly criticised.

Some GREAT FIGHTER you seem to worship.

As stated, he was indeed a fantastic Welter. But the rest of the shite? Go away, I'd rather talk to a stupid double glazing salesman.

Like I've said, you've been outwitted by people much smarter than you and SRL is your, or one of your scapegoats. Sad, sad, situation.

The only people outwitted here are pathetic fanboys like you, and Alp. I have quoted Leonard's own " proposed " list of opponents from December 83. Rather than address that issue, you have resorted to the typical schoolgirl retort of labelling me a hater.

Childish at best, moronic at worst.

Your emotional clap trap is a perfect example of why that low life garbage Trump could well be the next president of the U.S.A.


2 questions.

1. In December 83 did Leonard announce his intentions of coming back and fighting McCrory, Curry, Duran, Hearns, then Hagler?

a simple yes or no will suffice. ( your opinions on the matter are irrelevant )

2. Did he instead fight the totally insignificant Kevin Howard in May 84, then choose to " retire " for 2 years and 11 months?

again a simple yes or no will suffice, and spare us excuses or opinions.

golden oldie wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:"I didn't get a harrumph outta that guy... You watch your ass"

Keep taking the pills, you never know one day you might actually have something worthwhile to say. Out of interest do you actually know anything about boxing, because as far as I can remember you were the twerp on here with an anti Calzaghe agenda a few years ago, based on nothing more than a list of fighters you claimed he ducked ( unfortunately those guys were merely figments of your over active imagination ) but i remember laughing at your weird attempts to discredit the guy.

golden oldie wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:"I didn't get a harrumph outta that guy... You watch your ass"

Keep taking the pills, you never know one day you might actually have something worthwhile to say. Out of interest do you actually know anything about boxing, because as far as I can remember you were the twerp on here with an anti Calzaghe agenda a few years ago, based on nothing more than a list of fighters you claimed he ducked ( unfortunately those guys were merely figments of your over active imagination ) but i remember laughing at your weird attempts to discredit the guy.

Counter-puncher wrote:

golden oldie wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:"I didn't get a harrumph outta that guy... You watch your ass"

Keep taking the pills, you never know one day you might actually have something worthwhile to say. Out of interest do you actually know anything about boxing, because as far as I can remember you were the twerp on here with an anti Calzaghe agenda a few years ago, based on nothing more than a list of fighters you claimed he ducked ( unfortunately those guys were merely figments of your over active imagination ) but i remember laughing at your weird attempts to discredit the guy.

Your memory is rubbish, I've got an absolutely massive mancrush on Calzaghe, i have watched the Lacy fight about 15 times, making small sex noises the whole way through.

golden oldie wrote:

Tony1244 wrote:

golden oldie wrote:
Keep taking the pills, you never know one day you might actually have something worthwhile to say. Out of interest do you actually know anything about boxing, because as far as I can remember you were the twerp on here with an anti Calzaghe agenda a few years ago, based on nothing more than a list of fighters you claimed he ducked ( unfortunately those guys were merely figments of your over active imagination ) but i remember laughing at your weird attempts to discredit the guy.

That's the best example of the coffee calling the kettle black that I've ever seen.

Everyone laughing at someone's weird attempt to discredit the guy? Umm, who is golden oldie and SRL for $50 Alex?

Again, as opposed to offering up your half baked WORTHLESS OPINIONS, give an example of Calzaghe claiming he would fight 4 or even 5 HIGHLY ranked fighters in their primes ( or very close to it ) then hiding in " retirement " instead.

Stuck are you?

What part of Leonard announced to the world ( in Dec 83 ) he would fight McCrory, Curry, Duran, Hearns, then Hagler BUT DIDN'T is too difficult for your little brain to understand? We are not talking interviews with hack's from second rate magazine's here. Rather we are talking about HUGE stage managed press announcements, that were reneged on.

Then again, perhaps he fought McCrory, and Curry behind closed doors with only fanboy types exclusively invited.

As previously stated, from 77 until 81 ( apart from a couple of dubious wins, and one hiccup ) his career was brilliant, but after that it is similar to the half witted Trump.

" Because I keep telling you I am wonderful, you must believe it "

Idiots do.

golden oldie wrote:"Ambling Alp II"

]He looked as good against Mugabi as he did in several of his prime fights.

You have 2 choices,

( a ) you are deliberately lying

or

( b ) you are a fool

Which is it?

The following are your hero Leonard's own words.

I was ringside", Leonard said. "I'm watching John 'The Beast' Mugabi fight Hagler. Of all people, John 'The Beast' Mugabi." It was then that Leonard decided to come back and fight Hagler. He called Mike Trainer and said, "I can beat Hagler".

I apologise, there is also the 3rd FANBOY option, whereby the fanboys CONVINCE themselves they know better than their own hero's.

You are much like the other fanboy Tony, you will do ANYTHING to avoid the issues ( particularly if they involve Leonard's own claims ) and concentrate on promoting your own ego's through your misguided hero worship.

What won the Mugabi fight was Hagler's granite chin, and superior power. NOTHING else. He looked far from good.

Watch Marvin from the late 70's early 80's when he systematically took guys apart then stopped them. What he did with Mugabi was " gutted it out " no comparison at all.