Thread: WAS SUGAR RAY LEONARD A BIT OVERRATED???

i mean many belive hagler beat him and also hearns in the second fight. if he had those 2 losses on his record hw different wud his legacy be??

Originally Posted by pretty boy

i mean many belive hagler beat him and also hearns in the second fight. if he had those 2 losses on his record hw different wud his legacy be??

We could say that about anyone even Sugar Ray Robinson got gift decisions in his career and arguably Ali could have 8 losses on his record Leonard was 3 years ring rust and moved up to fight top 3 Middleweight of all time and won yes it was controversial but he still won by 1 point in my eyes and Hearns draw yes that was a robbery but i like to think Hearns is better over 12 rounds Leonard is better over 15 rounds.


But in no way should that make him overrated.

Benitez
Duran
Hearns
Hagler

Enough said.

What i did not like about Ray Leonard is that he only fought Hearns in rematch when he thought he was shot and he ducked Aaron Pryor.

In a word... Yes

But only slightly. He was still great and his victory over Hagler despite the controversy is nothing short of amazing given the circumstances.

I truely believe Hearns would've beaten him at any weight over 147.

Originally Posted by The Rookie Fan

In a word... Yes

But only slightly. He was still great and his victory over Hagler despite the controversy is nothing short of amazing given the circumstances.

I truely believe Hearns would've beaten him at any weight over 147.

yes no doubt under the circumstances he faced against hagler ray did incredibly well 2 pull of the victory, only if the rematch was made that wud have bin incredible!!!!!

hearns i believe over 12 rounds wud hav beaten ray both times.and if he had a better chin wud hav beat them allin that era..... oh well sum things were jus not ment 2 b!!!!

Let's look at the round robin:

SRL W-4 L-1 D-1
MH W-2 L-1
TH W-1 L-2 D-1
RD W-1 L-4

No, SRL was not overrated.

He could be a total prick but he was definitely not overrated. Sure he was in some very close fights...but he never embarrassed himself and fought/won in one of the best era's in boxing.

you could make a case for pretty much every top 10 all time boxer being overrated to a degree...

I personally don't believe SRL was, he was one of the greatest ever.

Originally Posted by zhubin

He could be a total prick but he was definitely not overrated. Sure he was in some very close fights...but he never embarrassed himself and fought/won in one of the best era's in boxing.

:yh no doubt he neva embarrsed himself and always lived up 2 his word!!!! coolclick:

Originally Posted by Ted The Bull

Let's look at the round robin:

SRL W-4 L-1 D-1
MH W-2 L-1
TH W-1 L-2 D-1
RD W-1 L-4

No, SRL was not overrated.

If you actually see the fights you'll know it should read

SRL W-2 L-2
MH W-3 L-0
TH W-2 L-2
RD W-1 L-4

No Leonard was not a little overrated. He was a lot overrated

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

Originally Posted by Ted The Bull

Let's look at the round robin:

SRL W-4 L-1 D-1
MH W-2 L-1
TH W-1 L-2 D-1
RD W-1 L-4

No, SRL was not overrated.

If you actually see the fights you'll know it should read

SRL W-2 L-2
MH W-3 L-0
TH W-2 L-2
RD W-1 L-4

No Leonard was not a little overrated. He was a lot overrated

Numbers don't lie. Oh, I'll give you the draw against Hearns, but remember, he also stopped Benitiz and beat some other pretty good fighters.

[quote=tedsares;368695
Numbers don't lie. Oh, I'll give you the draw against Hearns, but remember, he also stopped Benitiz and beat some other pretty good fighters.[/quote]

Numbers do lie .... you can make a set series of numbers to prove any point at all, that's why politicians do so well.

I must admit that I never did like Ray Leonard ... I thought he got everything on a plate (earning more in his pro Debut that Hagler did after 50 odd fights), he played around with the sport and didn't respect it by defending his titles and then retiring and unretiring all the time. He could be an arrogant prick at times and - to the day I die - I don't believe that he beat Hagler or drew with Hearns.

Still, having said that, he was a helluva fighter and I would never cast doubt on his ability, heart or skill in the ring. He always had a good chin and was as brave as they come (when he had to be). He would have taken Floyd Mayweather into a corner and ripped him apart. He could box, he was fast and he could hit.

A great fighter, definitely an all-time great ....... but IMO not the absolute legend of boxing that he is sometimes seen to be. The only reason I say this is because he did not have longevity ... which sounds strange as he was around for ages, but his lack of defences - or motivation to dominate a division - counts against him in my book.

(note: Marvin defended his title and reigned undisputed for years, Duran dominated the lightweights for a decade, and Hearns would fight anyone anyplace anytime ....... Hearns was a destroyer)

PS - the Adelphi is a shithole.

Originally Posted by Violent Demise

Originally Posted by Ted The Bull

Let's look at the round robin:

SRL W-4 L-1 D-1
MH W-2 L-1
TH W-1 L-2 D-1
RD W-1 L-4

No, SRL was not overrated.

If you actually see the fights you'll know it should read

SRL W-2 L-2
MH W-3 L-0
TH W-2 L-2
RD W-1 L-4

No Leonard was not a little overrated. He was a lot overrated

I totally agree those SHOULD be the records, but even if Ray lost to MH and in the second TH fight, beating Benitez, Duran, and most importantly, his first defeat of Hearns makes him no more than somewhat overrated.

I don't think he is overrated but i think he knew what he was doing when he avoided Hagler and Hearns until they were ready to be beat and and he ducked the hell out of Aaron Pyror, but hell a lot of fighters choose this same formula to reach the top.

No way. He could have retired before even fighting Hagler and still be a legend. He was an unbelievably talented fighter like him or not.