BoxRec

Of course he wasn't straight off the couch. However, whatever you want to call what he had with Quincy Taylor is nowhere near the same as fighting a real fight.
If a tennis player is off for three years you would not expect him to Wimbledon his first tournament back. Of course practicing helps, but it's not the same thing. Same with boxing. Which is why nobody else in the history of the sport has been able to do anything similar in their first fight back.

Whitaker is not nearly one of your favorites? huh?
If I would make a big deal of something that Ali or Leonard did and say that another fighter who did something similar is not a big deal, then I am being unreasonable. I don't do that. If I do, give some examples.

If make an excuse for Ali or Leonard that I won't for someone else than I am being unreasonable. I don't do that. If I do, give some examples.
I am not being unreasonable. I just happen to like someone that you don't.

Being unreasonable is not giving credit to someone because you don't like them. You know damn well that Leonard coming back like that was a big deal. You also know full well that Hagler was a better fighter at that stage of his career than Robinson at that stage of career. Therefore, at some level, you have to know that Leonard's win was a much bigger deal than Basilio's.
To deny that is being unreasonable and being biased.

I hate Leonard, loved Ali. Whether or not I cheer for a fighter doesn't change my analysis. With Ali & Leonard, you do. Pull up any lengthy discussion on either of them in this forums existence. There are your examples.

"Basilio's win doesn't even compare to Leonard's"

There's one.

Why does that show bias? Leonard was off three years, Basilio was not. Leonard beat a fighter who was clearly better at their stage of their career.
Nobody else has ever beat a fighter of Hagler's caliber in the history of boxing in their first fight back after being off three years. Other fighters have won the welterweight and middleweight titles.

If it was Thomas Hearns or anyone else who did this instead of Leonard I would say the same thing.

PS- Love how you are now an Ali fan.

Ive been an Ali fan for 40 years. Not as much as I was when I was a kid. As for you, I guess you don't even realize how ridiculous you are with those two.

Sugar Ray Robinson beats Leonard, I love them both but it's not the toughest one to call. Robinson could use his height well, punched harder and from more angles, could take anything Leonard had and then some, and I think he had a slightly quicker mind for adjustments. Also think he was physically stronger too. Sugar Ray Robinson is the GOAT.

SFW wrote:Sugar Ray Robinson beats Leonard, I love them both but it's not the toughest one to call. Robinson could use his height well, punched harder and from more angles, could take anything Leonard had and then some, and I think he had a slightly quicker mind for adjustments. Also think he was physically stronger too. Sugar Ray Robinson is the GOAT.

I see your view at middleweight. At welterweight, I pick Leonard

Leonard and Robinson both had very bad nights... Robinson versus, LaMotta, Turpin, Basilio, Ralph Jones, Maxim, Fullmer etc... Leonard vs Norris and Camacho.. When Leonard was on he was better then Robinson -- sharper, faster, trickier, better range, and better defensively.

Kalan wrote:Leonard and Robinson both had very bad nights... Robinson versus, LaMotta, Turpin, Basilio, Ralph Jones, Maxim, Fullmer etc... Leonard vs Norris and Camacho.. When Leonard was on he was better then Robinson -- sharper, faster, trickier, better range, and better defensively.

I don't see it that way. But, Leonard was more complete fighter than Robinson.

We just can't compare them in bad nights when one fighter fought about 200 fights and the other just fought 40.

It's more Middleweight Title Fights... Consecutive Title Defenses is the Gold Standard... Robinson was 3-3 in Middleweight Title Defenses... Leonard ducked some tough Middleweights of the period -- but he defended his 168-pound Title at 160 against Hearns and Duran... He was 2-0 defending that title.

Kalan wrote:It's more Middleweight Title Fights... Consecutive Title Defenses is the Gold Standard... Robinson was 3-3 in Middleweight Title Defenses... Leonard ducked some tough Middleweights of the period -- but he defended his 168-pound Title at 160 against Hearns and Duran... He was 2-0 defending that title.

You got that wrong, mister!

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Ive been an Ali fan for 40 years. Not as much as I was when I was a kid. As for you, I guess you don't even realize how ridiculous you are with those two.

Would it be ridiculous to talk about a guy (Frazier) throwing punches in heaven after he dies?

I certainly didn't think you were a fan of Ali.
Kind of odd that you as an Ali fan are angered that someone is too much of a fan of him.
Maybe it's because I have never seen you say a nice thing about him that I didn't think you were were a fan.
Maybe because you don't say anything in his defense when someone criticizes him.
Maybe it was that when after he died you complained that the media was talking about what he did outside the ring.
Maybe it's because you like to pretend that he was at his very best when he fought Frazier.
Maybe it's because you said that he could be an ass sometimes.

You are just a huige fan, I'm sure. Which means that of course you are are totally unbiased when discussing him, just like you are completely objective when talking about anyone. Good to know.

That's exactly how ridiculous you are. I've never said a nice thing about Ali? Vintage alp, show me something derogatory about his boxing. anyone that doesn't worship Ali or Leonard hates them and has an agenda. You're like a proud parent with their kids.

elmersalsa wrote:

Kalan wrote:It's more Middleweight Title Fights... Consecutive Title Defenses is the Gold Standard... Robinson was 3-3 in Middleweight Title Defenses... Leonard ducked some tough Middleweights of the period -- but he defended his 168-pound Title at 160 against Hearns and Duran... He was 2-0 defending that title.

You got that wrong, mister!

Not wrong... He successfully retained his title against Hearns with the draw... So he was 1-0-1 in W/L's and 2-0 in Title Retentions.

SRR couldn't easily out box super short Welterweight Carmen Basilio, and lost every round to Ralph Jones... NO WAY he wins any rounds from SRL

Kalan wrote:SRR couldn't easily out box super short Welterweight Carmen Basilio, and lost every round to Ralph Jones... NO WAY he wins any rounds from SRL

I don't see SRL beating SRR at 154 and beyond.

..kalan.....yeah robinson had some bad nights against lamotta....when he was a welter he spotted one of the strongest and toughest middle weights ever about twelve pounds and beat him four out of five fights. as a middle he stopped lamotta. these match ups with leonard are supposed to be at their peaks. robinson was past his peak when he won the title and still pulled off some great fights. as most amateur debaters do, you cherry picked robinson's poorer showings.

But it's all in who beat you... It's no disgrace to lose to the best.

Leonard had 2 poor showings -- but against damned good boxers... Duran and Norris were both fast, smart, slick, elusive, and could crank some blistering shots in there.. On a given night they could beat anybody---and they only had a single defeat (1) each in about 100 fights between them ... However, Fullmer.. Basilio.. Ralph Jones.. LaMotta.. and Maxim??? Those guys were slow.. soft punching,. easy to hit.. not very bright.. and all suffered more defeats than Norris or Duran had to that point.

And Duran lost to Pat Lawlor, Jorge Fernndez Castro, William Joppy and Omar Eduardo Gonzlaez. So I'm surprised you would think Duran was any good.

You have to look at the stages of a fighter's career and the stages of his opponents as well.

Leonard was well past it when he fought Norris.
Robinson was well past it when he was fighting Fullmer, Basilio, Jones and Maxim.
He beat LaMotta 4 of 5 when he badly outweighed and stopped him when he himself was a middleweight. That pretty damn good.

Robinson and Leonard were two of the greatest fighters ever. Both could do it all. If they are both close to their primes, they would have have had a great fight at wleter, jr. middle or middle. I would lean towards Robinson but it is very close.

no point in trying to educate kalan.i'll try to resist the temptation from now on.

Ambling Alp II wrote:And Duran lost to Pat Lawlor, Jorge Fernndez Castro, William Joppy and Omar Eduardo Gonzlaez. So I'm surprised you would think Duran was any good.

You have to look at the stages of a fighter's career and the stages of his opponents as well.

Leonard was well past it when he fought Norris.
Robinson was well past it when he was fighting Fullmer, Basilio, Jones and Maxim.
He beat LaMotta 4 of 5 when he badly outweighed and stopped him when he himself was a middleweight. That pretty damn good.

Robinson and Leonard were two of the greatest fighters ever. Both could do it all. If they are both close to their primes, they would have have had a great fight at wleter, jr. middle or middle. I would lean towards Robinson but it is very close.

SRR has much of his Championship career in front of him when he lost to Maxim and Jones. He was dead prime. Duran was a old fatty when he lost those.

elmersalsa wrote:

Kalan wrote:It's more Middleweight Title Fights... Consecutive Title Defenses is the Gold Standard... Robinson was 3-3 in Middleweight Title Defenses... Leonard ducked some tough Middleweights of the period -- but he defended his 168-pound Title at 160 against Hearns and Duran... He was 2-0 defending that title.

You got that wrong, mister!

jaclem3 wrote:no point in trying to educate kalan.i'll try to resist the temptation from now on.

Better late then never atleast you know now

Kalan wrote:

Ambling Alp II wrote:And Duran lost to Pat Lawlor, Jorge Fernndez Castro, William Joppy and Omar Eduardo Gonzlaez. So I'm surprised you would think Duran was any good.

You have to look at the stages of a fighter's career and the stages of his opponents as well.

Leonard was well past it when he fought Norris.
Robinson was well past it when he was fighting Fullmer, Basilio, Jones and Maxim.
He beat LaMotta 4 of 5 when he badly outweighed and stopped him when he himself was a middleweight. That pretty damn good.

Robinson and Leonard were two of the greatest fighters ever. Both could do it all. If they are both close to their primes, they would have have had a great fight at wleter, jr. middle or middle. I would lean towards Robinson but it is very close.

SRR has much of his Championship career in front of him when he lost to Maxim and Jones. He was dead prime. Duran was a old fatty when he lost those.

Dead prime? He was 33, and been back for two weeks after a long layoff against Jones.
Maxim was the light heavyweight champion, Robinson still weighed under the middleweight limit.

Yeah... 33 is dead prime... Do you think anybody is going to cry for Gennady Golovkin if he loses to Kell Brook, 36-0, at age 34??? ... Robinson had a tune-up fight 2 weeks earlier so there was no excuse... Vitali Klitschko came back from a 4-year-layoff and won the Heavyweight Champions versus Sam Peter,30-1, with no tune-ups... and he was 37 years old.