I noticed there are a few people that rate SRL very highly and those who think he is totally overated…So i wanted to see what the rest of the board think. IMO he is one of the best p4p fighters ever.
Def a p4p great, but his career had flaws. Credit to him for winning the first fight with Hearns, but the first 13.5 rounds of that showed one of 2 things. How great Hearns was, ro that Leonards was ‘slightly’ overrrated. A fighter who is schooled in their prime raises question marks imo.
That said, he won the fight so what do I know!! 
p4p I would say…
Duran
Hagler
Leonard
Hearns
Very overrated. He was a good fighter. But not a great one. His constant retirements and ducking of fighters hurt him.
wtf? he beat the greatest fighters of his generation and all hof
duran
hearns
benitez
hagler
I can’t let my emotions take over…but I couldn’t stand the fwocker.
But he was one of the G.O.A.T.S.
Hey Wacko, for the unenlightened like myself what does that stand for?
I’d say he was def top 10 all time, maybe top 5. By the way I’d put Duran right up there as well.
I’m well aware of who he beat. Like I said, he was good. But if you look close, you see he also lost to Duran, Hearns (draw, yeah sure) Hagler (without a doubt it was a lost) and Terry Norris. He refused to rematch Hearns and fight Hagler when they were in there prime. Instead waiting till when he taught they were shot. And he also ducked Aaron Pryor and Michael Nunn. Good fighter. Not great.
Who do you think was the best of that era violent demise? Leaonard, Hagler, Hearns or Duran?
Personally for me it’s Duran because he succeeded in so many weight divisions and over so long a time span. Absolutely awesome fighter.
Hearns is my favorite, but I’ll have to say Hagler. His wins over Hearns, Duran and Leonard (it was a win) are the reason why. Unlike Leonard he ducked nobody. Actually Hearns and Duran also never ducked anybody, either. Just Leonard.
Yeah but Hagler only ever won at middleweight, Duran was unbeatable at lightweight, then won titles at light welter, welter, junior middle and middleweight. Plus he reigned for about 20 years, whereas Halger only ever won at middleweight if I remember and then quit after the Leanard fight.
If you going by all there fights in other divisions, than I got no problem with saying Duran was the best. You got to remember Hearns won titles in mulitple division as well. He went from Welterweight all the way up to Light Heavyweight. Which is very impressive
Greatest
Of
All
Time
GOAT
Yeah agreed, although he was big even for a middleweight and simply should not have been allowed to fight at 147!
I liked Tommy but his chin and the fact that he was physically the most gifted makes me favour Duran. He wasn’t very big but just was hard as nails.
I remember watching him fight Barkely, he looked about 50 years old and I thought there was no way on earth he would win but he was awesome. One round he got caught flush, back on the jaw whilst thowing a punch, the sort that Castillo KO’d Coralles with, Duran barely even staggered. Probably top 4 or 5 all time I reckon.
Ahh pretty obvious really! :-[ ;D
For some reason I had in mind that GOATSE image that you see on the net :o
Duran was overrated at lightweight imo
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!
:coolclick: gbrandon.
Good post…but I still think that Hagler did enough to win. ;D
Heh heh heh.
Fwock emotions!!! SRL can suck my balls! Heh heh heh heh.
GOAT my ass!!! ;D
CC back, and for the record I believe Hagler should have one a close decision, it upset me when he left boxing because the only people he hurt by doing that was himself and his fans.
In boxing there are always some fighters who give problems to some fighters, its how you adjust to them that shows your greatness. Leonard was getting schooled by Hearns because of his height, his quick long jab and his power and he didn’t want to leave the fight for a rematch and in the end Koed hearns. I think that kind of defies the notion that he was overrated plus Hearns is no slouch, the only other fighter who did that to hearns was hagler.
SRL overrated??? Heck no… ONe of the G O A T.