How can someone say SRL is overated. The only reason he lost to Duran the first time was because he wanted to trade with him instead of boxing, we have seen fighters make that mistake before (Meldric Taylor). But he came back and clearly outboxed Duran in the second fight, you could see who the better boxer was. Second off it does not matter if Tommy Hearns was up on the scorecard, KO's count in boxing, it's the goal of every fighter to KO their opponent. It was a mega fight and for Leonard to score a KO is simply brilliant, specially over someone the caliber of Hearns (Undefeated). Third is the Hagler fight where niether fighter was impressive, it was a lackluster fight that did not live up to the hype. Hagler dominated that division in even though I scored the fight in favor of Hagler in a close decision his performance in that fight was poor and he should have dominated. Leonard beat every legion in that generation (Near his weight) so whoever believes that he was not a great fighter should not even be debating on this forum because their knowledge of fighting his very poor. Like Wacko said don't let your emotions take over, call it like you see it not what you want it to be.

One last thing, Leonard Vs Hearns 2 took place years beyond their prime, and the fight was built on the two boxer's legacy. Hearns should have one on points, but why is it such a big deal. You saw what happened in their prime. If Roy Jones fought Evander Holyfield and outboxed him but lost a decision would it make a difference. NO!