What if? Floyd Mayweather vs 1981 Ray Leonard

[ICB]

ACK! Who sad clicked me! Whoever did is a loser.

Just opinions. Anyone can make a case for a fighter. Mine are not so far out of wack that they get sad clicked.

Hey Skyler, sadclicker. Your creds go down the pipe when you say Floyd takes Hearns 10 out of 10 at 147. Realistic........NOT! You think Floyd at 147 has the goods to pressure Hearns the same way Leonard did and wear him out.

Like I said earlier, Floyd is head over heals better technically than anyone in the game today. But he hasnt even sniffed the level of prime fighters that Leonard and Hearns were at 147. Yeah I know Floyd is superior in every catagory. Hand speed the works..right.

Oh yeah and a BS right back at you.

Hey moron, I didn't sadclick you.  I don't give out sadclicks because it's stupid, so try finding out what's going on before you jump out and accuse someone of something they didn't do.  And are you not aware of the concept that styles make fights?  Mayweather doesn't have to pressure Hearns.  People who compare Mayweather's style to Leonard's style are as misguided as people who compare Tyson's style to Frazier's style.  They fight almost nothing alike.  The only 2 fighters out of the 4 greats with a realistic shot of beating Floyd would be Hagler and Duran because they go to the body on a consistent basis, NOT Leonard and Hearns.  And who Floyd has faced only places him lower than Leonard at the moment in terms of greatness, not who's better.  There's a difference between who's greater and who's better.  Greatness has to do with accomplishments, being better means who would win, and Floyd is better than Leonard (who by the way is by far the most overrated of the 4 greats of the 80s and in alot of people's estimations ranks 4th). 

i disagree i think hagler and duran would prolly have worse chance against mayweather i think leonard is better than mayweather and leonard is not most overrated out of the 4 he beat duran hearns and hagler and what makes it amazing is that leonard before hagler fight hadnt fought in 3 years and still beat the best middleweight at that time and no way leonard ranks 4th out of the famous 4

You need to go watch the fight again, kid.  Slapping with your punches for the last 30 seconds of each round should not win fights.  Leonard did not beat Hagler.  He was given a gift.  And Leonard did not fight for 3 years cuz he was waiting for Hagler to show signs of aging.  Leonard could of faught if he wanted to.

ive watched it many times and leonard did enough to win he won first 4 rounds easy as pie then it got close with hagler winning middle rounds i had it 7 rounds to 5 for leonard people didnt give leonard a chance against hagler plus hagler had just had two of best wins of his career against mugabi and hearns where as leonard had been knocked down by howard and didnt look impressive so yea it was amazing that he was able to win even if it was close still good performance for not fighting for 3 years hagler didnt do much either it wasnt really good fight but leonard done enough to win hagler gave away first 4 rounds by trying to box with leonard so its haglers fault for giving away first 4 rounds

[Samson3000]

I also rank Leonard 4th out of the big 4 because I thought Hagler was robbed and thought Hearns was robbed in the rematch. Also, all of the other 4s big wins are decisive, while Leonard's are the only one's that remain cloudy (except for the first Hearns fight). However where he ranks among those guys is a matter of opinion and everyone can see it differently.

[Rotten Apple]

ACK! Who sad clicked me! Whoever did is a loser.

Just opinions. Anyone can make a case for a fighter. Mine are not so far out of wack that they get sad clicked.

Hey Skyler, sadclicker. Your creds go down the pipe when you say Floyd takes Hearns 10 out of 10 at 147. Realistic........NOT! You think Floyd at 147 has the goods to pressure Hearns the same way Leonard did and wear him out.

Like I said earlier, Floyd is head over heals better technically than anyone in the game today. But he hasnt even sniffed the level of prime fighters that Leonard and Hearns were at 147. Yeah I know Floyd is superior in every catagory. Hand speed the works..right.

Oh yeah and a BS right back at you.

Hey moron, I didn't sadclick you. I don't give out sadclicks because it's stupid, so try finding out what's going on before you jump out and accuse someone of something they didn't do. And are you not aware of the concept that styles make fights? Mayweather doesn't have to pressure Hearns. People who compare Mayweather's style to Leonard's style are as misguided as people who compare Tyson's style to Frazier's style. They fight almost nothing alike. The only 2 fighters out of the 4 greats with a realistic shot of beating Floyd would be Hagler and Duran because they go to the body on a consistent basis, NOT Leonard and Hearns. And who Floyd has faced only places him lower than Leonard at the moment in terms of greatness, not who's better. There's a difference between who's greater and who's better. Greatness has to do with accomplishments, being better means who would win, and Floyd is better than Leonard (who by the way is by far the most overrated of the 4 greats of the 80s and in alot of people's estimations ranks 4th).

i disagree i think hagler and duran would prolly have worse chance against mayweather i think leonard is better than mayweather and leonard is not most overrated out of the 4 he beat duran hearns and hagler and what makes it amazing is that leonard before hagler fight hadnt fought in 3 years and still beat the best middleweight at that time and no way leonard ranks 4th out of the famous 4

You need to go watch the fight again, kid. Slapping with your punches for the last 30 seconds of each round should not win fights. Leonard did not beat Hagler. He was given a gift. And Leonard did not fight for 3 years cuz he was waiting for Hagler to show signs of aging. Leonard could of faught if he wanted to.

ive watched it many times and leonard did enough to win he won first 4 rounds easy as pie then it got close with hagler winning middle rounds i had it 7 rounds to 5 for leonard people didnt give leonard a chance against hagler plus hagler had just had two of best wins of his career against mugabi and hearns where as leonard had been knocked down by howard and didnt look impressive so yea it was amazing that he was able to win even if it was close still good performance for not fighting for 3 years hagler didnt do much either it wasnt really good fight but leonard done enough to win hagler gave away first 4 rounds by trying to box with leonard so its haglers fault for giving away first 4 rounds

Either you really love Leonard or really hate Hagler or you just can't judge a fight.

[ICB]

ACK! Who sad clicked me! Whoever did is a loser.

Just opinions. Anyone can make a case for a fighter. Mine are not so far out of wack that they get sad clicked.

Hey Skyler, sadclicker. Your creds go down the pipe when you say Floyd takes Hearns 10 out of 10 at 147. Realistic........NOT! You think Floyd at 147 has the goods to pressure Hearns the same way Leonard did and wear him out.

Like I said earlier, Floyd is head over heals better technically than anyone in the game today. But he hasnt even sniffed the level of prime fighters that Leonard and Hearns were at 147. Yeah I know Floyd is superior in every catagory. Hand speed the works..right.

Oh yeah and a BS right back at you.

Hey moron, I didn't sadclick you.  I don't give out sadclicks because it's stupid, so try finding out what's going on before you jump out and accuse someone of something they didn't do.  And are you not aware of the concept that styles make fights?  Mayweather doesn't have to pressure Hearns.  People who compare Mayweather's style to Leonard's style are as misguided as people who compare Tyson's style to Frazier's style.  They fight almost nothing alike.  The only 2 fighters out of the 4 greats with a realistic shot of beating Floyd would be Hagler and Duran because they go to the body on a consistent basis, NOT Leonard and Hearns.  And who Floyd has faced only places him lower than Leonard at the moment in terms of greatness, not who's better.  There's a difference between who's greater and who's better.  Greatness has to do with accomplishments, being better means who would win, and Floyd is better than Leonard (who by the way is by far the most overrated of the 4 greats of the 80s and in alot of people's estimations ranks 4th). 

i disagree i think hagler and duran would prolly have worse chance against mayweather i think leonard is better than mayweather and leonard is not most overrated out of the 4 he beat duran hearns and hagler and what makes it amazing is that leonard before hagler fight hadnt fought in 3 years and still beat the best middleweight at that time and no way leonard ranks 4th out of the famous 4

You need to go watch the fight again, kid.  Slapping with your punches for the last 30 seconds of each round should not win fights.  Leonard did not beat Hagler.  He was given a gift.  And Leonard did not fight for 3 years cuz he was waiting for Hagler to show signs of aging.  Leonard could of faught if he wanted to.

ive watched it many times and leonard did enough to win he won first 4 rounds easy as pie then it got close with hagler winning middle rounds i had it 7 rounds to 5 for leonard people didnt give leonard a chance against hagler plus hagler had just had two of best wins of his career against mugabi and hearns where as leonard had been knocked down by howard and didnt look impressive so yea it was amazing that he was able to win even if it was close still good performance for not fighting for 3 years hagler didnt do much either it wasnt really good fight but leonard done enough to win hagler gave away first 4 rounds by trying to box with leonard so its haglers fault for giving away first 4 rounds

Either you really love Leonard or really hate Hagler or you just can't judge a fight.  

i like leonard and i like hagler when i watch a fight i dont pick favourites i split it down the line leonard won first 4 rounds easily and he done enough to win and i can judge fights very well thats not right what ur saying just because i had leonard winning alot of people had leonard winning and alot had hagler winning i think its about 50-50 to who won it was close fight not very good fight either but leonard won it by 7 rounds to 5 in my opinion anyway alot of people have different reviews about that fight doesnt mean u cant judge a fight i could say that about u with hagler but i wont because it was close fight could of gone either way and people are split 50-50 to who won

[cockey cockney]

I also rank Leonard 4th out of the big 4 because I thought Hagler was robbed and thought Hearns was robbed in the rematch. Also, all of the other 4s big wins are decisive, while Leonard's are the only one's that remain cloudy (except for the first Hearns fight). However where he ranks among those guys is a matter of opinion and everyone can see it differently.

Bollocks, IMO he tops it.

[Samson3000]

I also rank Leonard 4th out of the big 4 because I thought Hagler was robbed and thought Hearns was robbed in the rematch. Also, all of the other 4s big wins are decisive, while Leonard's are the only one's that remain cloudy (except for the first Hearns fight). However where he ranks among those guys is a matter of opinion and everyone can see it differently.

Bollocks, IMO he tops it.

IMO, he doesn't

[Scrap]

On the whole Leonard was the best at his best I remember an old saying , Woman have more hair on head than man but Man has more hair on body than Woman but on the hole woman has more hair or something like that

[Taeth]

I also rank Leonard 4th out of the big 4 because I thought Hagler was robbed and thought Hearns was robbed in the rematch. Also, all of the other 4s big wins are decisive, while Leonard's are the only one's that remain cloudy (except for the first Hearns fight). However where he ranks among those guys is a matter of opinion and everyone can see it differently.

Really? I though Duran quiting, and Hearns being ko'ed were pretty decisive... IMO Leonard won a close but decisive fight against Hagler, at least as much as when Hagler beat Duran. Also Leonard did lose the rematch against Hearns, but they weren't the same fighters they were in 1981. He is IMO the best of the 4.

[Samson3000]

As I said, the first Hearns fight was not controversal. However, IMO, he lost to Hagler clearly, as I don't see anything worthy of scoring about flurrying the last 10 seconds of a 3 minute round. I gotta put him 4th (which is nothing to be ashamed of when you're being ranked next to 3 of the all time greats).

[DaxxKahn]

OK I know all you Floyd lovers out there will hate me for this but....IMO Ray hurts him....Judah was winning for the first few rds of their fight...Floyd gave him too much respect. Ray is in another universe in terms of skill when compared to Judah....Ray was stronger than most gave credit for...Ray could box his ass off but....HE COULD ALSO FIGHT HIS ASS OFF!!!!!!.......Plus his chin was very good at 147 he showed that against Hearns....Floyd could not hurt Ray nor would he land as many shots against him as he has against guys like Corrales, Gatti and Baldo....Ra would bully him into submission by the 7th.....

[Wacko3205]

Here's the thing with me on this question...& I haven't read through anyone else's responses...so unbiasedly...let me say this...I'm a huge fan of Floyd...& truly I am no fan of Leonard...but I think that he's to fast, too strong, & too skilled...but...& you know me being a Floyd fan...I'm gonna bring out up a BUT ( )...there is the issue of whether or not Floyd's style would cause Leonard problems...Leonard never faced anyone with the defensive skills of Mayweather, IWO.

Floyd is slick & crafty...but in the end...maybe Leonard could work it out...but then again...Floyd has always had an answer for everything that anyone has ever had.

Still...I gotta go with Leonard on this one.

[JT Rock]

This is just my opinion, but Floyd would have to fight in these contests and hes outgunned by both fighters. He wont out speed Leonard, and Hearns power would be his death march.

Ah I love the nostalgia, 15 years from now you will all be saying how Floyd is a legend and could of beat the current fighter at the top...Human nature thats all

Again...You cant formulate an opinion on Floyds Quote on Quote unwillingness to fight because of the Baldomir contest....

I mean Floyd Landed over 50% of his punches while his opponent landed less than 13%....Floyd damaged his right hand 1/2 way thru the fight and still pitched a shutout...Myswell say he beat him with one hand tied behind his back...

Floyd could outbox Leonard and Leonard can Outbox Floyd all depends on who executes and adjusts to the other one.....Floyd is definatly Smarter and faster and not as open as Tommy Hearns Floyd can counter Tommy and throw him off his game very easily not to mention Floyd could TKO Tommy as well its not a one way street on that..Defense is the big key and a Muther of an equalizer for Floyd

You Forget Diego trying to stalk Floyd while Floyd is popping Chico and making him wonder what the hell is going on...Tommy is on a whole nother level than Diego but its not Floyds 1st rodeo with a bigger man..

[Scrap]

What I have noticed about Mayweather is his punch technique isnt very good compared to the formentioned but I suppose today it hasnt got to be

[Syntax Error]

Sugar Ray fairly comfoftably.

He had all Floyd's attributes, but he was bigger, stronger & he could be devastating when he needed to be.

SRL W12 PBF.

[Wacko3205]

What I have noticed about Mayweather is his punch technique isnt very good compared to the formentioned but I suppose today it hasnt got to be

Gotta disagree with you. Floyd's technique is pretty damned sweet...Floyd just wastes very little punches. Watch Floyd work...really sit down & watch a fight...he does a lot more mind work than any other fighter IWO.

Thinks out his shots before he throws them & works out a gameplan on the way up through the rounds.

IWO, Floyd is a damned fine fighter.