BoxRec

This rematch argument is another myth about Leonard. The rematch with Duran was not quick.The rematch was more than 5 months after their first fight. It is yet another lame excuse to say that Duran didn't have time to train.
As for not giving rematches to others, who are we talking about? Benitez and Hearns moved up in weight shortly after losing to Leonard at welterweight. They had to know that they would eventually get another chance at Leonard at welterweight if they stayed at welterweight themselves. If any anything, you could argue that they ran from Leonard.
Hagler didn't want to fight again after he lost to Leonard. He really wanted a rematch badly, he could have fought other top fighters, screamed for a rematch and he would have gotten it.

As for Robinson, what I am saying is that if it was Leonard who didn't finish a fight like that instead of Robinson, he would have been ripped for it constantly. He is already called things like "candy ass" by people for absolutely no legitimate reason.

Btw, Robinson himself was known for making shrewd stipulations throughout his career. It is smart to do.

Robinson was the welterweight of all time. However, Leonard was a close #2 and would have had a serious chance to beat him. Many of the things that Leonard get criticized for is absolutely ridiculaus.

Ambling Alp wrote:This rematch argument is another myth about Leonard. The rematch with Duran was not quick.The rematch was more than 5 months after their first fight. It is yet another lame excuse to say that Duran didn't have time to train.

Well, in the “modern” boxing world, 5 months would be considered inadequate time between fights, but back then it was acceptable. And of course in even earlier times rematches would be held within 6 weeks and no one ever complained about inadequate prep time. Of course, back then I think fighters tended to stay in training and din’t extended time off between fights. Clearly a different breed from what we have now…

Robinson was a cut above Leonard... he was a better Welter and Middle... Robinson would have been too good all round for the second Ray...

say silkov.

So then does SRR beat that plodding hero of yours named Hagler, easily?

ringsider wrote:

Robinson was a cut above Leonard... he was a better Welter and Middle... Robinson would have been too good all round for the second Ray...

say silkov.

So then does SRR beat that plodding hero of yours named Hagler, easily?

Shouldnt you be in school... ?... 8)

This is tough one for me, because I have never seen any of Robinson's welterweight fights, whereas, Leonard is one of the finest welterweights I've ever seen.

I'm not saying that SRL would have won, but just that it would not be the cake walk that some are saying it would have been.

Leonard was one of the few fighters that had every single quality needed to be called truly great.

He had blistering handspeed, decent power, great footwoork, titanium chin, could box or punch & had the heart of a lion.

Sugar Ray Robinson would have had a tough time against Leonard, no question.

Just answer the question silkov....does he or doesn't he beat your hero? Those are your words, not mine.... Maybe you best keep your trap shut, so you don't give yourself away.

Ringsider

For some strange reason, I'd really like to see your top 10 PFP fighters of all time.

Well I can tell you who is not in my top 10 all time Seamus....neither Marvin Hagler or SRL makes the cut.

..hey..the ambler writes that PEOPLE are calling his welterweight "candy ass". hey..i'm the one who tagged him with that pet name....now others are using it? darn....i should have copywrighted it.

on the other hand, if the first writer to giver carnera his nickname had held a copyright, the alpster would have had to use a different name on this forum. (actually, i think it's a clever and amusing user name)

ringsider wrote:Just answer the question silkov....does he or doesn't he beat your hero? Those are your words, not mine.... Maybe you best keep your trap shut, so you don't give yourself away.

You must be smoking something strong mate, where did I say anyone was my 'hero'... not my words, certainly not on this thread... all that crack will destroy your brain you know!... or rather what there is left of it!...
try keeping to what we're talking about here which is the two Rays, not Hagler... or cant you even read dumbass eh???! 8)

ringsider wrote:Well I can tell you who is not in my top 10 all time Seamus....neither Marvin Hagler or SRL makes the cut.

You're deluding yourself that someone actually cares about your 'ratings' ....they dont!...

Answer the question....mate!!

ringsider wrote:Answer the question....mate!!

Give me a semi-lucid question and I may answer it... 8)

Pistols at dawn gentlemen?

mrbassie wrote:Pistols at dawn gentlemen?

I doubt Ringsider has a pistol... a handbag perhaps!... 8)

Actually silkov, I do have a pistol. A Ruger GP 100 .357 magnum revolver. But I really don't think you are in much danger from it. My bare hands and fistic skills would be all I needed to subdue you, should you get out of hand.

ringsider wrote:Actually silkov, I do have a pistol. A Ruger GP 100 .357 magnum revolver. But I really don't think you are in much danger from it. My bare hands and fistic skills would be all I needed to subdue you, should you get out of hand.

Yeah, ...I'm really scared mate!!!

...if your 'fistic skills' are of the same level as your boxing knowledge, then I dont think I've got much to worry about from your 'bare hands'.... you'll probably need the pistol...

ringsider wrote:Actually silkov, I do have a pistol. A Ruger GP 100 .357 magnum revolver. But I really don't think you are in much danger from it. My bare hands and fistic skills would be all I needed to subdue you, should you get out of hand.

Bet you've got a handbag too!.....

What are you a purse snatcher? You sure seem fixated on a hand bag.

Decagon wrote:Ringsider, I recently found out that I'm naturally left-handed. How can I cope with this alarming situation?

Stick it up your arse!... best place probably!... 8)

Just curious Ringsider, I have never seen you talk about any of you're favorite fighters. Just wondering if their are any? Leads me to believe that you have not followed boxing very closely.

He's just a hillbilly troll... probably related to PARM.... 8) ...they're certainly as stupid as eachother... if thats possible

Answer the question silkov.

.. i am aware that there was an attempt to create a junior middle division back in the walker days....and noone paid any attention to it. (well..maybe SOMEONE did....someplace....) there was a revival in the early sixties when denny moyer beat joey giambra in what was considered for a vacant title. any one here who thinks that was a fight of the century is free to do so. that household name.....kotchi wajima won it in 1971 and defended it six times...which is why his name ranks up there with babe ruth and ted williams in the sports pantheon .

......dec..actually i checked an old ring record book..... same thing though. i agree with you about the walker law and it's enormous influence....can't imagine how long it would have taken boxing to come into the "modern day" without it. is there one good source for details about it? would appreciate knowing. my knowledge of it is based on reading ring magazine through the years....and it appeared in individual articles and a long time ago.

....when this division came up in this thread, it kicked off a memory of a junior middle fight i actually saw. in the afternoon, so it obviously was in the days when the networks carried boxing on weekends....emile griffith lost in a challenge to edward dagge (sp?)....in a 15 round decision....in germany. i thought griffith had the edge....but gil clancy's influence didn't spread that far.