Do you rank SRL higher or lower because of his small number of fights?

I have seen the argument both ways so let's make a poll.

Do you think Sugar Ray Leonard's all-time status is better, since he only fought the very best and his 'average opponent level' is among the best ever?

Or, would he rank even higher, if he had fought more often and completely cleaned out his divisions by facing all comers?


Is it more difficult to concentrate on the biggest fights against the best, or to keep in shape all the time and face all types of comers?

What do you say?

 

Lower but still really high because of the staggering quality of comp

 

Increasing a guy's ranking because of having fewer fights is like being more impressed by a .400 hitter with 300 at bats than a .400 hitter with 600 at bats... Makes absolutely no sense at all

 

Would he rank higher? Yes, because he'd have more wins and might've been able to add names like Curry, Starling, McCallum (any one of those, if not all three) to an already sick resume

 

REED Ranks Leonard HIGHER Because of his Low Number of Fights...There's Little to NO Fat to Trim from his Resume...

Floyd (& Many Others) Fought MORE Bouts, yet his Resume PALES in Comparison...




REED:mj:

 

THIS....


In 40 fights you fight...Duran x3, Hearns x 2, Hagler, Benitez....ALL hall of famers....Duran an all time top 10 great....Hagler top 3 greatest middleweight ever and TOP 30...Hearns top 10 Welter and TOP 100 all time...and Benitez TOP 100 alltime....

 

Not Only Fought, but BEAT Them All...

That's Gangsta!!!...



REED:mj:

 

Leonard have losses!

 

he never beat camacho

 

Or Keenan Ivory Wayans.

 

If there's an Inordinate Level of HIGHER Quality Pitchers, in those Fewer @ Bats, as Compared to the .400 Hitter w/MORE @ Bats, it Makes Sense...

Riding the Baseball Wave, Sandy Koufax had a BRIEFER Career than just about Every Great Pitcher he's Compared w/...






REED:mj:

 

Or Tommy Davidson, for Doing a Pretty Good "Sugar Ray" Impersonation...



REED:mj:

 

Like I said before, Ray Leonard - he was a TOUGH, hungry, COMPETITOR. But he have a blueprint.

 

That's wasn'the the question though. The question isn'the one of quality vs. quantity. Cdogg sums it up well.

As far as pbf, srl's resume beats his regardless. It beats it as is and it certainly would beat if if ray had fought more often.

Compared to srr? Or Ali even? That's where srl's fewer fights hurt him.

 

By the time Ray was 24 or 25 he'd already faced and beaten Benitiz, Duran and Hearns.

It took Floyd 5 1/2 years to fight Pacquaio.

 

Like I said before, he have lost to Duran though. Now, I take nothing away from Duran - he was a tough, hungry, COMPETITOR, but he have a blueprint too!

 

Ray deserves respect and disrespect for what he did while still a very young man.

While, in my opinion, he was lucky he fought old Hagler, old Hagler is probably lucky he was fighting Lay-Off Ray.

Ray's earlier career was so impressive that he was one of the few guys who could come back, do what he did, and still do more damage to his reputation with those wins than a new fighter could have done good with wins over the same guys {Hagler, draw with Hearns, win over Duran, win over Lalonde}

 

Comparatively speaking, Ray Charles Leonard, also known as "Sugar" Ray Leonard, fought a relatively low number of professional boxing contests.

 

Bert Sugar Ray Charles Bronson Pinchot

 

Chuck Branson and Burk Simson, two of the heroes of my "Cant afford the image Rights" childhood :bears:

 

Bronson may have been the ugliest guy to ever be a leading man in the movies

 

Ray Leonards looks faded pretty badly too, must have been all that coke and cock he was doing.

"And then I went to a soup kitchen and this guy called Pusher or Slusher or some shit said he gone make a movie about my life"


::

 

Dude turns 60s soon, tbf

 

do you feel the result would have been different 5.5 years ago?

 

If a prime, 25-year-old Leonard was at 147 currently there'd be an astronomical gap between him and the second best welter in the world.

Maybe the Floyd of years ago could present Ray with some issues (but lose), but sure as Hell not a 38-year-old Floyd.

Leonard stops any version of Pac.

Garcia, Brook, Porter, Bradley, Khan, and Thurman vs a young Leonard would be laugh worthy.

 

Makes no difference. It's the relevant opponents he fought that matter. Fighting a few extra tune ups wouldn't and inflating his record wouldn't do much. And he beat such quality fighters I think even beating guys like Pryor, starling and curry wouldn't elevate him much. They'd just be seen as second tier guys that lost to Leonard like ayub kalule and not the nostalgic 80's legends they are now.