This would have been a great fight if it ever happened. Leonard the classic boxer versus Pryor the thrashing machine.

Who would have taken it??

My money would have been on Pryor if it was around the time of the first Arguello fight. He would've been too hungry and too angry and would of put too much pressure on Sugar. I know SRL had great wars with Duran and Hearns around this time but I don't think it was a coincidence that all of the great fighters of this era avoided Pryor like the plague. It's a great shame that we didnt see him go to war with the likes of SRL,Hearns and Duran.

I'd give Pryor a good chance, depends what Leonard showed up.

I know SRL had great wars with Duran


** Actually Leonard only had one "war" with Duran which he lost much worse than the biased scoring.

True, he became a tougher, better fighter for it which prepped him for what he needed to beat Hearns, but Pryor was in the mold of Duran. Cast iron chin, angles out the kazoo, matching quickness and unstoppable work rate.

Pryor could box classically very well when he wanted as he showed late in the Arguello fight, an additional wrinkle. I favor Pryor as there was some history there in the amateurs and it favored Pryor, a bad, bad, superduper bad assed little assassin in the ring who was invincible in his day, unlike Leonard.

Just to be clear though, not accusing Leonard of ducking Pryor when he had bigger fish to fry, and not downgrading his own chance to win. Just feel Pryor has matching talent and all the intangibles which favor him.

The Hawk over SRL

Leonard would bet Richard Pryor easily, the guy was a stand up comedian!

TBH, I don't think the other Pryor would be good enough either. SRL is too slick, and only someone as great as Duran could make him fight the wrong fight and beat him in his prime.

I would pick Leonard without too much doubt.

I don't like Pryor's chances against the top guys at 147, where the talent pool was so deep at that time.

LEONARD DUCKED PRYOR FOR A REASON... :boxing:

LEONARD DIDN'T WANT ANYONE TO TARNISH HIM AT A TIME HE WAS GOING STRONG.. SAME AS dlh DUCKING FORREST, MARGARITO, COTTO, WILLIAMS, ETC. ETC. :boxing:

Leonard would kill Pryor in 2-5 rounds.Aaron style would be decimated by Leonard especially the post-80 Leonard.

The Ring Magazine had this article in it about The Hawk...and how Duran manager did not want to fight Pryor. Hearns called out the Hawk, but he was beaten by Pryor already in the amateurs and this was for paybacks, none of the top guys wanted to fight Pryor, except Arguello, who was thrashed twice by the Hawk. Leonard called out the Hawk too, but instead chose to fight some guy called Kevin Howards, who dropped Ray in that fight. Ray chose to fight Hagler after Hawk retired and everybody else was getting old...even then, Hearns dropped him twice in their re-match and should have gotten the decision. Well, you guys saw the fight, so I wont repeat myself.

This would have been a great fight if it ever happened. Leonard the classic boxer versus Pryor the thrashing machine.

Who would have taken it??

My money would have been on Pryor if it was around the time of the first Arguello fight. He would've been too hungry and too angry and would of put too much pressure on Sugar. I know SRL had great wars with Duran and Hearns around this time but I don't think it was a coincidence that all of the great fighters of this era avoided Pryor like the plague. It's a great shame that we didnt see him go to war with the likes of SRL,Hearns and Duran.

Not even close. Srl stops pryor in 4. You think pryor got hit often by a fighter that moved up 3 times before fighting at 140 and actually stunned him. Arguello. Leoard bigger faster better combinations. Not even a close fight

As for those that believe rumors. Pryor and leonard never had a time when they could fight. simple time line shows this. Pryor never was a welter, at the time he called out Ray (during Rays promotional tour for the hearns fight) pyror only had beaten old cervantex 100-10-4 at the time or something close to that. Pryor was not relevant back in those days until after he beat Arguello which was on 11/12/82 after Ray had already retired due to detached retina. When Ray came back vs Howard, pryor had already had major issues with Cocaine was not relevant then, and was retired by the time ray fought hagler.

Also, i use to spare with a contender named Jimmy matz a very good middleweight contender. SRL used him in his training camps for geraldo and Chavarini. Matz witnessed the sparring sessions between pryor and leonard, and said Leoanrd would beat pryor so bad in those sessons and that Pryor would get his shots in but Pryor looked up to leonard and would talk to ray aobut his balance and try to get dundee to come in early to work on his balance. However dundee would not come to training camps until 1-2 weeks before the fight, it was mostly olllie dunlap.

There are a lot of myths out there for sensatinalism because Ray was the man, the money etc.. Pryor used rays name to call him out to hopefully get a big payday. They where close friends at one point in Ray's early career, with Ray's mother actully helping out aaron.

** Actually Leonard only had one "war" with Duran which he lost much worse than the biased scoring.

True, he became a tougher, better fighter for it which prepped him for what he needed to beat Hearns, but Pryor was in the mold of Duran. Cast iron chin, angles out the kazoo, matching quickness and unstoppable work rate.

Pryor could box classically very well when he wanted as he showed late in the Arguello fight, an additional wrinkle. I favor Pryor as there was some history there in the amateurs and it favored Pryor, a bad, bad, superduper bad assed little assassin in the ring who was invincible in his day, unlike Leonard.

Just to be clear though, not accusing Leonard of ducking Pryor when he had bigger fish to fry, and not downgrading his own chance to win. Just feel Pryor has matching talent and all the intangibles which favor him.

London what history...that favored aaron in the amateurs. I know many of theose that sparred with Ray when ray was in DC and at the kronk. Pryor never had an advantage on Ray in anything. He was always a weight class behind. As for styles, pryor had poor balance, wide open and was open to counters all night long.

Pyror had all types of issue with arguello in the first fight, and contrary to your false post, the first leoanrd duran fght was very close. I had Ray winning. Now that takes into account duran gave the last round away, but after the first 4 rounds leonard and duran where pretty much even with leoanrd using boxing skills in rounds 5-7 to get back into the fight. I suggest you review the fight. for all those that follow this thread, you will hear london rules go on and on, i suggest you go to youtube an look for yourself, It was a very very close fight. I can live with Duran winning it, as it was his night, but dont try to get on here an make it like duran whipped leonard ass cuz it just did not happen. You do leave out that leoanrd embarrased durad and made him quit in the rematch.


Name one top jr welter or welter that was prime in weight and age that Pryor ever beat?

Name one top jr welter or welter that was prime in weight and age that Pryor ever beat?

** Well, well, looks like yesterday was honorary juicy sweety pinky thingy day.

Couldn't help notice you plastered all over that racist Duran thread in NS with the kiddies. What a sorry position you represent.

Pryor had his very first jr welt bout late in 1980 against a HOF great champ who compiled a better title record than your poster boy. Cervantes a bit long in the tooth, but much like the beat down Manny did on Oscar, nobody, NOBODY ever got to Cervantes like that in his 18-3 title history. That was in the sweet middle of Pryor's 26 KO streak BTW, a fantastic run at the top.

Benitez already moved up to jr mid, Duran/Hearns to shortly follow, that wiped out the big money high profile fights he craved, leaving only Goldy Ray.

Lest their be any doubts about HOFer Cervantes, he was born a tough Columbian sans the silver Sugar spoon. He came up hard in one of the world's fetid backwaters. Unlike Goldy Ray who turned pro with a multimillion dollar guarantee and mighty US network promotions, Cervantes has to travel to other's backwater hometowns for his opportunities, 18-3 title record fought mainly in other's backyard sums Cervantes up very nicely.

This thread is about the proposed matchup that never came off. I don't care if you want to promote Goldy Ray as the winner, to each his own.

Pryor was as live a dog in any fight who has ever existed, and prime to prime he never took the kind of beating Ray took against Duran and Hearns, indeed, Pryor one of the all time great beaters, not beatees. It's ridiculous to claim that Pryor has no chance since Duran was near the end of his best in a long career and Hearns a young still growing gangly fighter moving many divisions past Goldy Ray.

Shoot, well known now that Benitez barely trained a week for their fight and holds Goldy Ray close based entirely on feints and reflexes.

Leonard won his gold medal as a jr welt, so Pryor is no farther off than Duran was as far as natural weight classes go. Pryor was less than a year apart in age, so Goldy Ray was his natural rival given the network promotions and lack of other jr welt/welt stars to fight. Pryor was even willing to move down for Mancini's lightweight belt until that fell apart when he lost the belt.

At any rate, Pryor handled his jr welt title seamlessly until his retirement, unlike your boy Goldy Ray who seemed to be angling more for the Drama Queen award his first go round the big time.

Like I stated previously, it was Goldy Ray's right not to accept the challenge. OK by me as he had bigger fish to fry. Nor would I ever dismiss the credible chance he has to win the bout. However, the risk/reward factor got to be such that given the choices Goldy Ray had between Pryor, Duran rubber match, Hearns rematch, and Hagler match, he opted for the Mighty Bruce Finch Flight of Fancy and beat a quick path to first of many, many, perhaps even more in the future, who knows how many retirements.......:cool:

London you want to know why you where bounced off of certain websites, and on may peoples ignore list, it is becasue of stupid post like this. You show you know nothing about boxing. It actually is embarrsassing to debate with you, because my father always told who is the bigger dummy, the dummy or he who argues with a dummy...

So let me be the bigger dummy.

Your evaluation hyping up Cervantes is for what reason. Who on here slammed Cervantes. I pointed out that Cervantes was old, and had over 100 fights by the time Pryor faced him. The question is Name 1 top jr. Welterweight in Pryor career who was peak in age, and weight that Pryor beat. NAME 1

I never said it was Pryor's fault, in fact if you read before opening your mouth, I said Pryor unfortunately came along a year to late, and 7 pounds to lite.

Now you sound stupid and show your bias, when you the most uncredible source on here, say Ray took a beating in the Duran and hearns fight..

Lets see...Duran fight never went down, came back after the 4th round to win more rounds than Duran did on EACH OF THE JUDGES scorecards on this so called beating, resulted in a win by duran that had one round ( for example if the judges had given leoanrd the 1st round, a round in which duran landed 0 punches to the head*** go research the first round for yourself http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_sUM90P20Y. =) been scored differently then Ray wins... Hmmm that sounds like a great beat down. Get your facts straing idiot!

Hearns beating.. lets see rounds 6 and 7 Leoanrd damaged hearns ribs, almost had hearns ko'd,,,hearns starts running for the next 3 rounds,avoiding any exchanges from Ray. Round 13 leoanrd drops hearns twice, one not scored a knockdown for whatever reason, 14th Hearns gets stopped, had to be carried out the ring..But your dumbass, say's leoanrd got beaten up..:wow:

I think with your summary of those two fights, you just exposed two things, your obvious bias against ray, and how ignorant you are of boxing.

Now lets examine this stupid post even further...
who prime did Pryor ever beat that was a solid jr welter. Remember Arguello had moved up, this being his fourth jump. So no Arguello was not a solid jr welter having only one tune up vs kevin Rooney.

On one hand you say Duran was at the end of his best in his career (false, and I will address that stupid statment in a second) but isnt the only credible win on Pryor's resume vs a fighter that was much more past it than Duran was, as far as their careers go...hmmmmmm

Now for Duran. Duran was only 28.I repeat 28 years old when he faced Leoanrd, and 29 when he quit. Sounds very old to me. Duran went on to have wins and titles at jr middle and middle. No these where wins vs hagler, hearns or close to it but it does dispell this constant myth that somehow duran was peak in june of 80, but past his peak in Nov of 80...wow

You then do your next try to tear down Ray's accomplishments tactic. Attack hearns. You say hearns was young still growing gangly fighters....Hmmmm lets see this young (in your logic not qualified fighter to challenge Ray at that time and some how Ray was picking on hearns..) fighter was 32-0, 30 ko's just stopped a man with a chin know for being granite...Cuevas. This man was the WBA undefeated champion...Hmmm name on fighter on Pryor resume that he stepped in the ring with that met these qualifications as a professional. Hmmmm I will help you. You can't!!

Shoot, well known now that Benitez barely trained a week for their fight and holds Goldy Ray close based entirely on feints and reflexes.

Another attempt to attack Ray's accomplishments with false accusations.... It is Generally accepted that Benetiz trained only a week before most fights, however he had a solid training camp for leoanrd, and was in the best shape of his life...fast forward to the 3:43 point it points out that Benetiz was in the best shape of his life, and had never trained harder for a fight. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yz6i6jUFNIU&feature=related.

Also in Sugar Ray's autobiography called a fistful of sugar, Benetiz commented in the book, that he thought that he may have trained to hard for the fight, as he trained for 6 weeks for this fight. He mentioned that this fight came between he and Sugar's sister whom he had a relationship with, and that he wanted a rematch with Ray to avenge this fight. He had hoped to catch Ray at jr middle, but Ray had retired.

London you know nothing about boxing...man. You make up **** as you go, and i have repeatedly had to show you and Boxing scene members just why you where kicked off of Cyberboxingzone... and now your on here with stupid lies. Please..

How close was this fight? judge luirie had Ray up 137-130, harry gibb 136-134, randy solis 137-133. Hmmm 15th round was not scored due to the stoppage but since there was a knock down...the scores would have been 147 138, 146-142, 147-141. Very close huh.....What a dumb factless, as usual Londoon rules statment. Close my ass! Hmmm maybe you should have researched a bit before posting. Ray had dropped Benetiz twice, and when it was stopped Benetiz offered no complaints even seemed relieved. Since we are on Benetiz, how many fighter did Pryor beat that where prime like Benetiz, undefeated and a 2 division champ all at the same time..NONE!!


Goldy Ray, you so affectionatly call him...(which shows your jealousy of him) did win a gold, so thanks for acnowledging this... however this little rant..

At any rate, Pryor handled his jr welt title seamlessly until his retirement, unlike your boy Goldy Ray who seemed to be angling more for the Drama Queen award his first go round the big time.

Drama queen...Hmmm Ray fought in a two year period probably the best level of competiton and beat them (except for the one loss to duran)that you can imagin. Benetiz, duran, hearns, kalule...But according to you, he was a drama queen, etc..etc..

Pryor fought at 135 when ray was Jr welter. At the time he and ray where good good friends. Not sure what your angle was. They were not rivals until Pryor needed to make money,and Ray was the name to make it off of. Pryor to this day thanks ray for the times they spent together early one...I have several dvd fights of Ray, when during his post fight interviews with cossell, Pryor is holding little ray.

Pryor was not a rival..he was not even being considered as a challenger for Ray, until Ray had retired and the speculation was circulating about him coming out of retirment. Every magazine, every interview every thing was Ray vs Duran, then Ray vs hearns, then in 5 months, he was having surgery for a detached retina that he (unlike popular myth) had first damages vs Marcus geraldo and reinjured weeks leading up to the hearns fight, by catching a elbow to the eye. Hearns great jab reaggrivated it, but did not cause it.

Now for the grand finally.... your last paraghaph.
Your right about a risk reward factor. For ray to fight a fighter who had not beaten a top peak fighter yet, who had not fought at welterweight, like duran did (he had 8 fights at welter before they fought), who was a relative nobody to the average fight fan, until NOV 12, 1982, when he beat Arguello the first time. I think if you research the Bruce finch fight you will find out 3 rather startling points.

1. It was a mandatory defense.
2. It was before Pryor earned a right to move up and fight for a championshp in a division he never even campaigned in. That right was earned on 11/12/82, the Bruce Finch fight occured 2/15/82. Generally fighters fight in a division and show thier worth at that weight, unless they are marketable enough and the demand is there enough and they have beaten some great fighters at the division below or dominated for a long time. Hmmm Pryor at the time had accomplished 0 of the 4 stated general paths to being able to leap frog all the mandatory challengers in a higher division.
3. Leoanrd had fought in 4 legendayr fights in less than 2 1/2 years. He was still fighint the number one WBC contender, he just unified the belt, i guess he didnt deserve the right to fight fighters along the caliber that Pryor at the time made a living on. So we knock ray for fighting a Bruce Finch, Pryor is not addressed for fighting akio kemeda or Miguel montilla...These where the two fighters Pryor faced prior to Arguello.

I distinctily remember that leonard did have rematches with Hearns, and Duran. Unfortunately for you who may have not been concerned about his health and the fact that in 82 a detached retina meant blindness if reinjured..Naw you simply wanted ray to fight, and become like Greb, Sugar Ray Seales, or hmmm Pyror himself all who are blind in at least one eye. Naw Leoanrd should have called you up and not headed his physicians, the best eys docs in the world who flew in to baltimore to operate on his eye as John Hopkins and told him intially that his eye was back 100 percent, but reinjurey meant permanent blindness. Yes technology made is so later this concern is negated, but at the time Ray had ot make a decision for him and his family. Also, Didnt Ray come back after 5 years and no tune up take on hagler. Hmmm I guess that must be my mind playing tricks on me. I must be hallucinating that he beat hagler at middleweight making it 4 top all time legends that he beat...vs how many for pryor..One.

I am not saying pryor didnt want to fight duran, hearns, Leonard. Yes he did, however it made no sense for Ray to fight pyror before he became worth the risk reward, which he became worth that, when he beat Arguello. Unfortunatley, it was after Ray had retired, and he developed a cocain habit that destroyed any chance of this happening in the future.

London you know nothing about boxing...man.

** Nothing would be a quantum leap compared to what you know my dearest sweety juicy pinky thingy.

My dear, you don't know me from Jack, but I know you act like Jill and bragged about being an in house shill for some pharmco. You know, the industry that has 3 lobbyists for every congressman in Washington that writes bills for Congress to keep your supersized trousers well larded.

You can't even stay on topic, which is the proposed match of Pryor against Ray. I gave legit reasons by Pryor wins this bout, summed up quite nicely in the first Duran/Leonard fight where Ray shows he can't deal with a fast, skilled, active waterbug type pressure fighter. Pryor more prime than Duran without the mileage of 70 fights weighing on him just hands out a bigger beatdown on Ray, probably KO.

You can blabber about never beating a prime welter, blah, blah, blabber, blabber, but facts are that the only reason Pryor fought as a jr welt was because he couldn't get a title shot at lightweight or welter so he made short work of what came his way. A bad, bad, superbad, greatly feared little motor scooter unlike your Goldy Ray who was coronated like some network drama queen for all you sorority gals to emulate.

You disagree with anything that might challenge the primacy of your boyfriend. Fine, always given Ray a decent chance in this dog fight since I have a balanced view of fighters, so end of story.

Now, get lost and go find a psychotherapist to sell a box of ritalin or whatever snake oil you peddle for children or old folks and take your insipid utube clip of Uncle Howie dribbling on about nonsense with you. Already seen the fight several times and it changes nothing.

Pryor beats not one single great prime fighter and now he is apparantlly a world killer. Hmmm Ok if you say so. We have seen many of those apparently great fighters get their ass handed to them when they are truly tested.

I have nothing against Pryor, in fact I like him, but generally you are judged by what you DO INSIDE THE RING vs THE BEST OUT THERE.. Not that this is Pryor's fault, because he did want to fight everyone. However, he beat no one that was a solid 140 pounder that was not either very old and past their peak, or who had to move up 4 divisions to fight him. So to take it another level and say he moves up and beats Sugar Ray, who Pryror himself, said Ray "used to lump him up in sparring sessions" and I have sparring mates, on by the name of Jimmi Matz, who witnessed several of these sparring sessions in Md, say that Pryor used to get his ass handed to him when he and Ray fought. I tend to accept their word since it matches perfectly with what Pryor said in leoanrd book, "a fistful of Sugar" and it a interview where he admitted Ray used to beat him up pretty badly, because of his bad balance, was on-line Labled, "hbo- where they are now". Last time i looked for it, the link was not active anymore.

I will not argue that when leonard stood flat footed and allowed duran to march right in on him, that he had some issues, that in fact he solved after the 4th round of the fact, to be honest. At least in the judges eyes, who all 3 awarded more rounds for Ray after round 4 than they did for Duran. Howeveer he lost, so we will take it that Ray had issues with Duran when he was flat footed. What makes you think a fighter like Ray who has shown the ability to fight many different styles in order to win and had sparred with Pyror, and had the experience of Duran I, and then in the 2nd Duran fight he made the smaller man fight his fight. What makes you think that he would not box pryor. Leoanrd was hurting pryor in sparring due to his bad balance, imagine how it would be when the punches where live.

In fact, my friend. Pryor got dazed several times by Arguello, who did nto have the size, reach, power, speed of leonard. Imagine that being leoanrd in their first fight, Pryor gets stopped. What many forget is the first fight was anyone fight going into the 14th round, when mysteriously a bottle appeared that had according to pryor own manager a special mix in it. In other fights your hero pryor an dhis manager where caught removing stuffing out their gloves.

We will never know who would win, but odds are Pryor would get destroyed by Leoanrd, who beat much bigger and badder fish, and oh yeh he also did come back and outbox the smaller fast skilled better defensive fighter in Duran. So bad Duran quit.

London you want to know why you where bounced off of certain websites, and on may peoples ignore list, it is becasue of stupid post like this. You show you know nothing about boxing.

Would that be the same reason so many on CBZ put you on ignore? Your duel obsessions with Ray Leonard and Roberto Duran, your lack of boxing knowledge beyond Boxrec, and ludicrous assertions like Duran's only claim to fame is beating Leonard.

People in glass houses, etc.

Would that be the same reason so many on CBZ put you on ignore? Your duel obsessions with Ray Leonard and Roberto Duran, your lack of boxing knowledge beyond Boxrec, and ludicrous assertions like Duran's only claim to fame is beating Leonard.

People in glass houses, etc.

Funny you bring that up. the only ones that i have issues with on CBZ is hawkins and his girlfriends, because I dont bow down to the Duran nuthuggerism.....

Never have Nevere will. As far as lack of knowledge, I get my knowledge from more than Hawkins, and simply saying Duran is the best because he fought 70 bumes..... and only one great win (leonard) as evidenced by my most recent post on another thread on here. It was either you or jab, that asked me to back up my claim that duran did not beat a single other person on Bert sugars top 100, the rings top 80, and espn's top 50. I have shown the facts. Now what. This is not Box rec either, it is using the same historians that you hand on their joc and say "look see he says duran is top ..etc" So now I use these same historians, resources to show just how Duran's resume compares to leoanrd an Jones. I wonder what excuse you will come up with now. Hmmm disregard these sources maybe. Great I hope you say that, because then based on what now will you have to show Duran who lost almost every fight (before the age of 34) he had vs the elite fighters he faced, unless of course you consider bums like Marcel, Kyobashi, and a good but not great fighter in Buchanon. Hey don't take my word, just use your resourced and historians that you all use repeatedlly to support Duran being so great...

It is great to expose people who dont know jack **** about boxng. Did you like my point vs london when he ws on her saying tht leonard benetiz was close, and unlike him I use facts to support my case. Pretty much blew him out the water when I showed him the scorecard that showe exactly opposite of another false statment (like his continued rant the Tyson had a tougher resume than Ali).

Kid i will admit you have some very good points about Mayeather vs Duran.. I agree there. Mayweather can not be ranked ahead of Duran, not yet. But Jones is clearly to be ranked ahead of Duran. It is not even close unless you are going to become crazy and consider what he did vs Tarver and Johnson and later when it clearly was a shot Roy, a roy that was 36 years old....I have always been consistent when I say fighters should be for the most part measured on what they did up until age 34 or so.

I disagree totally with your methodology, Pink. There's more to a fighter than just his opposition. Enter Shergar into the donkey derby and he'd still be Shergar.

Take the Ring's list for instance. Joe Louis is 1-2 against their listed fighters. Does that mean he's no good? Of course it doesn't. Archie Moore is 4-6 against listed fighters (take away Harold Johnson and he's 0-5). Willie Pep is 1-3. Larry Holmes didn't beat one fighter on that list (other than a decrepit Muhammad Ali), and in fact never beat a prime all-time great fighter. Yet virtually everyone ranks him a top ten heavyweight.

There's also no consistency in your rankings. You rate Leonard all-time top five for four wins against Hall of Famers, yet Ezzard Charles beat more Hall of Famers than Leonard did, and beat them all multiple times, and is not in your top five. If Duran peaked at lightweight, and wasn't that great anyway, then why does Leonard beating him count as a great win? That's before you consider that Leonard actually lost to Duran.

Iran Barkley was variously described as bum and a club fighter on the other thread, yet he beat Hearns not once but twice - he knocked him out in 3 rounds where Ray took 14, and then decisioned him in the rematch when Ray got a questionable draw - yet in your view Leonard beating Hearns puts him in the top five. How does that work?

If you want to rely on lists of great boxers for examining how good Duran's opposition was, you also have to accept that all of these lists rate Duran higher than Leonard. You can't have it both ways.

In your attempts to claim that Pryor beating Arguello doesn't count as a win against a prime great 140lber, you said Arguello "had to move up 4 divisions to fight him", so presumably losing doesn't affect Arguello's all-time rating. Yet you credit Leonard for beating someone who moved up two divisions to face him, while Duran is cut no slack when he moves up several divisions to take on Leonard, Hagler and co. You also appeared to say that had Duran retired after Leonard I you'd rank him higher. So you're actually demoting him for being prepared to take on the top guys into his 30s and well above his peak weight. Some logic.

Furthermore, only someone who has no idea what he is talking about would refer to Ernesto Marcel as a "bum", which you did on that other thread. What do you know of him, other than what's on Boxrec, to make such a claim?

As for scorecards, they're just the opinion of the three men judging the fight, and quite often do not reflect what happened in the ring. There are many, many times when I've disagreed with the official scoring of a fight...Mayweather-Castillo, Holmes-Spinks II, Ali-Norton III, Lewis-Holyfield I, Leonard-Hagler, etc etc. I'm sure you've also claimed elsewhere that Leonard actually won the first Duran fight, which flies in the face of your assertion that the scorecards are proof of anything other than what the official scoring was.

I disagree totally with your methodology, Pink. There's more to a fighter than just his opposition. Enter Shergar into the donkey derby and he'd still be Shergar.

Take the Ring's list for instance. Joe Louis is 1-2 against their listed fighters. Does that mean he's no good? Of course it doesn't. Archie Moore is 4-6 against listed fighters (take away Harold Johnson and he's 0-5). Willie Pep is 1-3. Larry Holmes didn't beat one fighter on that list (other than a decrepit Muhammad Ali), and in fact never beat a prime all-time great fighter. Yet virtually everyone ranks him a top ten heavyweight.

There's also no consistency in your rankings. You rate Leonard all-time top five for four wins against Hall of Famers, yet Ezzard Charles beat more Hall of Famers than Leonard did, and beat them all multiple times, and is not in your top five. If Duran peaked at lightweight, and wasn't that great anyway, then why does Leonard beating him count as a great win? That's before you consider that Leonard actually lost to Duran.

Iran Barkley was variously described as bum and a club fighter on the other thread, yet he beat Hearns not once but twice - he knocked him out in 3 rounds where Ray took 14, and then decisioned him in the rematch when Ray got a questionable draw - yet in your view Leonard beating Hearns puts him in the top five. How does that work?

If you want to rely on lists of great boxers for examining how good Duran's opposition was, you also have to accept that all of these lists rate Duran higher than Leonard. You can't have it both ways.

In your attempts to claim that Pryor beating Arguello doesn't count as a win against a prime great 140lber, you said Arguello "had to move up 4 divisions to fight him", so presumably losing doesn't affect Arguello's all-time rating. Yet you credit Leonard for beating someone who moved up two divisions to face him, while Duran is cut no slack when he moves up several divisions to take on Leonard, Hagler and co. You also appeared to say that had Duran retired after Leonard I you'd rank him higher. So you're actually demoting him for being prepared to take on the top guys into his 30s and well above his peak weight. Some logic.

Furthermore, only someone who has no idea what he is talking about would refer to Ernesto Marcel as a "bum", which you did on that other thread. What do you know of him, other than what's on Boxrec, to make such a claim?

As for scorecards, they're just the opinion of the three men judging the fight, and quite often do not reflect what happened in the ring. There are many, many times when I've disagreed with the official scoring of a fight...Mayweather-Castillo, Holmes-Spinks II, Ali-Norton III, Lewis-Holyfield I, Leonard-Hagler, etc etc. I'm sure you've also claimed elsewhere that Leonard actually won the first Duran fight, which flies in the face of your assertion that the scorecards are proof of anything other than what the official scoring was.

You are absolutely one of the best posters I have seen on any board, Kid. Not only do you know your facts, you know how to convey them. Nice job!

I disagree totally with your methodology, Pink. There's more to a fighter than just his opposition. Enter Shergar into the donkey derby and he'd still be Shergar.

Take the Ring's list for instance. Joe Louis is 1-2 against their listed fighters. Does that mean he's no good? Of course it doesn't. Archie Moore is 4-6 against listed fighters (take away Harold Johnson and he's 0-5). Willie Pep is 1-3. Larry Holmes didn't beat one fighter on that list (other than a decrepit Muhammad Ali), and in fact never beat a prime all-time great fighter. Yet virtually everyone ranks him a top ten heavyweight.

There's also no consistency in your rankings. You rate Leonard all-time top five for four wins against Hall of Famers, yet Ezzard Charles beat more Hall of Famers than Leonard did, and beat them all multiple times, and is not in your top five. If Duran peaked at lightweight, and wasn't that great anyway, then why does Leonard beating him count as a great win? That's before you consider that Leonard actually lost to Duran.

Iran Barkley was variously described as bum and a club fighter on the other thread, yet he beat Hearns not once but twice - he knocked him out in 3 rounds where Ray took 14, and then decisioned him in the rematch when Ray got a questionable draw - yet in your view Leonard beating Hearns puts him in the top five. How does that work?

If you want to rely on lists of great boxers for examining how good Duran's opposition was, you also have to accept that all of these lists rate Duran higher than Leonard. You can't have it both ways.

In your attempts to claim that Pryor beating Arguello doesn't count as a win against a prime great 140lber, you said Arguello "had to move up 4 divisions to fight him", so presumably losing doesn't affect Arguello's all-time rating. Yet you credit Leonard for beating someone who moved up two divisions to face him, while Duran is cut no slack when he moves up several divisions to take on Leonard, Hagler and co. You also appeared to say that had Duran retired after Leonard I you'd rank him higher. So you're actually demoting him for being prepared to take on the top guys into his 30s and well above his peak weight. Some logic.

Furthermore, only someone who has no idea what he is talking about would refer to Ernesto Marcel as a "bum", which you did on that other thread. What do you know of him, other than what's on Boxrec, to make such a claim?

As for scorecards, they're just the opinion of the three men judging the fight, and quite often do not reflect what happened in the ring. There are many, many times when I've disagreed with the official scoring of a fight...Mayweather-Castillo, Holmes-Spinks II, Ali-Norton III, Lewis-Holyfield I, Leonard-Hagler, etc etc. I'm sure you've also claimed elsewhere that Leonard actually won the first Duran fight, which flies in the face of your assertion that the scorecards are proof of anything other than what the official scoring was.


Headed to the gym to burn off this holiday weight, but i cant wait to address this actually very good post. However, simply off base, and a good attemp to slant my opinions and words...


For example, Duran. When have I ever said Duran was not a top fighter. I am not slamming Duran for not being a great. He is. Every single post I have said states this. In fact I have duran above Mayweather. I simplly think Leonard and Jones are better. That does not mean Duran is not great. Jeez...

Secondly, Ezzard charles, is clearly a top fighter. However, you ignored what I have said, I am ranking only those fighters which I have saw a lot of their fights. I do not subscribe to ranking fighters simplly because Bert Sugar says they are the best. I will listen to experts when they say these are good fighters, but ranking a fighter top 10, is not a objective issue, it is subjective. So unlike many subjective means you use your own intelligence not simply copy cat off of others...

I will be back. Contrary to what you may think. I enjoy debating you and McCoy and Machine. You all know your stuff. You just always give Duran exemptions.....Yes i am biased to Ray but I do try my best to be objective. I do not see the same from you all. That aside I enjoy our debates. The person I cant stand debating cause they simply dont know **** about boxing, and it shows by his repeated debates that benetiz Leonard was a very close fight....on what planet. Benetiz got dropped twice, the final round not even scored yet was about to be a 10-8 roound, and he was already down 7-8 points on 2 of the 3 cards. He also gets on here and says Tyson had a tougher resume than Ali. No I dont respect this idiot, whom I will leave his name out of this, but he knows who he is.

You all are intelligent, but while I am at the gym, please try to look at Roy's Career objectivly, and compare it to Duran. Tell me honestlly how Roy comes up short. We are not talking about Mayweather, as I agree, but roy is a different story.

I disagree totally with your methodology, Pink. There's more to a fighter than just his opposition. Enter Shergar into the donkey derby and he'd still be Shergar.

Take the Ring's list for instance. Joe Louis is 1-2 against their listed fighters. Does that mean he's no good? Of course it doesn't. Archie Moore is 4-6 against listed fighters (take away Harold Johnson and he's 0-5). Willie Pep is 1-3. Larry Holmes didn't beat one fighter on that list (other than a decrepit Muhammad Ali), and in fact never beat a prime all-time great fighter. Yet virtually everyone ranks him a top ten heavyweight.

There's also no consistency in your rankings. You rate Leonard all-time top five for four wins against Hall of Famers, yet Ezzard Charles beat more Hall of Famers than Leonard did, and beat them all multiple times, and is not in your top five. If Duran peaked at lightweight, and wasn't that great anyway, then why does Leonard beating him count as a great win? That's before you consider that Leonard actually lost to Duran.

Iran Barkley was variously described as bum and a club fighter on the other thread, yet he beat Hearns not once but twice - he knocked him out in 3 rounds where Ray took 14, and then decisioned him in the rematch when Ray got a questionable draw - yet in your view Leonard beating Hearns puts him in the top five. How does that work?



Furthermore, only someone who has no idea what he is talking about would refer to Ernesto Marcel as a "bum", which you did on that other thread. What do you know of him, other than what's on Boxrec, to make such a claim?

As for scorecards, they're just the opinion of the three men judging the fight, and quite often do not reflect what happened in the ring. There are many, many times when I've disagreed with the official scoring of a fight...Mayweather-Castillo, Holmes-Spinks II, Ali-Norton III, Lewis-Holyfield I, Leonard-Hagler, etc etc. I'm sure you've also claimed elsewhere that Leonard actually won the first Duran fight, which flies in the face of your assertion that the scorecards are proof of anything other than what the official scoring was.


Back, now. Doing my cardio in the morning, weights plus interval training in the evening, sparring on weekends. Gotta get my weight back down for this bball tournament starting 1/26. Harder to do as you get older.

BTW..... Kid McCoy, my man...I will address this post.


First off, to say that we should disregard scoring, puts you in the whole doesent it. The ONLY major win, vs a fighter that is considered an all time top fighter, was decided by the what.....hmmmm not a ko, but the SCORECARDS. So based on this, Duran has no credible wins vs all time top fighters. His credible record would be 0-2 then since we cant consider the 1st or 3rd leonard fights, nor the hagler or Benetiz, fights. We can only consider the fight he was getting his but handed to him and quit, and the fight he got stopped in. Hmmm see how much sense your arguement makes.

Sure we will always have decisions we dont agree with. I dont agree with Whitacker- chavez, you dont agree with hagler-leonard, many people disagree with DLH-Trinidad, but in order to have some conformity and avoid all out chaos, we have a common bond, that we all have to accept as fact whether we like it or not. That is the judges decision. Now we can argue the merits of this, but what is on the card is on the card. So the issue being Benetiz vs Leonard being close, hmmmm Ray knocked him down twice, the final round was not even scored yet, about to be another 10-8 round, had benitez rocked several times in the fight, knocked out his mouthpiece with a great right cross, and the scoring was ray by 7-8 points on 2 of the 3 cards and he also had a pretty much insurmountable lead on the 3rd, unless Benetiz dropped him twice in the last round, which he did not, in fact it was Benetiz who got dropped. HMMMMM THIS WAS A CLOSE FIGHT?

Oh yeh in my opiniion Leoanrd did win the 1st duran fight or it was a draw..However that is because I gave Ray the 1st round, and there where some rounds say the 10th-13th that could have gone either way. I am perfectlly fine with Duran getting the decision because even a blind man can see who controlled the fight, and whose night it was. Duran's all the way. However what many leave out is that Duran did not enforce this style of fight on Ray, Ray welcomed this type of fight. I have repeatedly challenged Duran fans to point to any section in that fight where he cut off the ring on Ray, when he tried to move. He didnt, cuz ray did not move except for 3 rounds, 5-7. Rounds in which he won, and rounds in which we got a prelim of duran actions in the 2nd fight, as even in the 1st fight duran grew frusterated by Rays movement and started to mock him and beckon ray to fight him toe to toe. Ray accepted this challenge and the fight turned back into a brawl. Great for fans, great for duran, in the long run Great for Ray, but wrong for Ray to win a decision, as it appeared that Duran was beating Ray, simply because Ray was fighting a style he was not use to the public seeing. His back was on the ropes..etc. However after round four most of the time he was giving as good as he was recieving. Duran fans will never ever admit this, and they will not willing review the fight on youtube or wherever and objectively score each round.

About 5 years ago, I was at the Parrish house with this cool ass latino fighter who swore up and down Duran whipped Ray' ass. I asked him and his two friends to come on over to my house and lets all get out a sheet of paper a pen and score the fight. 4 people, 3 duran fans, 1 leonard fan. We all boxed, knew what they look for, and discussed each round at the end, after we had scored the round. Guess what....2 people had it for Ray, 1 for Duran, 1 draw. Same thing with the hagler fight. My man Cameron a bouncer from MA, and his boy always on this Mayweather and hagler tip. The respect Ray but he swore up and down hagler won. He kept on saying Leonard only flurried at the end of rounds with that weak ****.... We put in the tape, Ray was up on everyone scorecard 4-0, after 4. Then we got into the tougher rounds. Guess what, all that Ray only flurried to steal rounds was correct. The thing that I pointed out to cam, and his boy was tell me what did Hagler do effectively the first 2:30 of the round to offset what Ray did the last 30 seconds. This fight was easy to score, once you focus on EFFECTIVE AGGRESSION, not just simply aggression or following your fighter. Hagler was missing badly the entire night, and yes ray was only landing arm punhes,, but they where scoring, and if they were so weak, why didnt hagler walk through them and punish Ray?

I for one thought this was a weak fight for both. However, it was a great spectacle. Many hagler fans whine about this so called myth you have to beat a champion. Very stupid and easy to dispell.

Lets see, the champion does get to retain the title in a draw, but the fight is scored on a 10pt must. The champion does not get any head start. At the end of the fight, you add up, tally, and submit, who has the most wins. Where is this You have to beat a champion. You merely have to outpoint a champion or even simpler win 7 out of 12 rounds on at least 2 of the judges scorecards, and that my friends is exactlly what Ray did. OH before I forget, all 3 of us had Ray winning this fight. Funny how simply sitting down, objectively scoring a fight the way it is supposed to be scored, changes a lot of things. Like the trinidad fight, Many people forget that DlH gave away the 1st 2 rounds. Yes he won the action rounds, yes he was clearly giving trinidad a boxing lesson, but hmmm Dlh ran rounds 9-12. Add that up, you have 6 rounds already in the bag for Trinidad. DLH simply gave that fight away. All trinidad had to do was some how eake a round between 3-8, that is he could lose these action rounds 5-1, the best rounds of the this particular fight, and since these where the action rounds, many simply remember dLH giving trinidad a lesson and run off and swear he was robbed. Not according to how a fight is scored.

Finally rankings. I always said I do not rank those I have not seen a lot of. Thus I have never lowly ranked charles, or highly ranked him, as My top fighters are those I have seen. This does not mean they are the best of all time, simply the best I have seen. Which IMO is how we all should rank fighters, because this is completely subjective. How can you use your opinion, when you simply echo those of another. How many peopel actually saw greb's fights, or Langsfords, or even Burley, but people try to act like they are knowledgable and follow the lead of oldr historians and simply add these names to THEIR top ten....etc... Fine if you want to follow the leader. IMO that is like jumping from a building because your idol does.

Charles based on his resume and rumors,, and those that rank and are respected, clearly is up there. This debate (well the debte on the other thread, which is where this discussion should be) is do YOU think Duran is all time top 10. That is completley subjective. However, many of you through darts by saying, all the historians, rank duran as top 5. Then on the other hand when I show you that your beloved marcel, kyobashi,Buchanon is not on any of these experts or respected resources (espn, the ring mag) duran fans are quick to disregard them, and trash them. Hmmmmmmm seems to me to be another Duran exemption....

If you want to rely on lists of great boxers for examining how good Duran's opposition was, you also have to accept that all of these lists rate Duran higher than Leonard. You can't have it both ways.

In your attempts to claim that Pryor beating Arguello doesn't count as a win against a prime great 140lber, you said Arguello "had to move up 4 divisions to fight him", so presumably losing doesn't affect Arguello's all-time rating. Yet you credit Leonard for beating someone who moved up two divisions to face him, while Duran is cut no slack when he moves up several divisions to take on Leonard, Hagler and co. You also appeared to say that had Duran retired after Leonard I you'd rank him higher. So you're actually demoting him for being prepared to take on the top guys into his 30s and well above his peak weight. Some logic.

Oh to address this bit of an attempt to misrepresent my statments. Good try, though.

First off, I have always said Duran is a top top fighter, just not above leoanrd or Jones. When have I said duran is not a top fighter. You have me and someone else confused. I have even stated he is above Mayweather, for right now.

Secondly, I lay out reasons for Leoanrd and Jones to be above him. NOT I repeat, NOT to say Duran is not a all time top fighter.


Our main lines of division appear to be how much we truly value dominating a division that does not have any one, I repeat anyone, that is regarded by BERT Sugar, ESPN, or THE RING magazine, or any other list that i have ever seen, as being a top 1-100 fighter pound per pound. That is a fact. I have provided the links to these list.

I think that dominating this type of division means simply duran was the best of that division. This qualifies him to be considered one of the best lightweights of all time. However, I ask you how does Duran dominance at lightweight when it had fighters that simply are not regarded as being on the same level as a hearns, Dlh, hagler, toney, Hopkins, etc. how does this force you to rank him higher than a person that has a resume that included Duran himself, Benetiz, and hearns. All 3 are ranked in 2 of the 3 respected pound per pound list, and everyone else I have seen.

So we then in order to solidy duran greatness you have to include his win over SRL. This is truly a great win. Regardless of the style that Ray fougth, Duran deserves the credit for beating ray at welter. This win along with Duran's dominance at Lightweight significantly moves Duran up in any all time ranking. However does this mean he is top 10?

Then we get to the part where all the excuses come in. Starting with 2nd Duran-Leonard fight. Duran was not past his peak. He even said himself in his book Hands of stone, yes he partied between the fights, but he did this all the time. Nothing new. Duran simply met a mentally physicall stronger Leonard, and one that was not going to fight Durans style. NO cramps, no diarrhea, nothing. Duran exact words when he retired was " I am not fighting this clown" in his native language.

Then we have duran only age of 29 through 33 losing repeatedly to great fighters. Duran fans want to say this era should not be considered as he was a lightweight, or he was older or he had a bunch of fights..BS... Everyone else EVERYONE ELSE is judged by how they fare as they move up, arent they? Duran didnt have a lot of wars, that destroyed his body, if anything it was his focus and bad habits. However, that is part of being a champion. Are we suppossed to lower our standards for Duran because he didnt take care of his body. Are you all giving Roy a break? Duran simply got beat 5 out of 6 times he met fighters that are ranked top pound per pound fighters. Save the whinny he ws smaller. Leonard was smaller than hagler. Mayweathe smaller than Baldomir. Jones smaller than ruiz, and many of the Light heavy's he faced. Save it.!

Finally we have Jones who had a career that simply is better than Duran and he is better than duran.

He had more title defenses
he had more wins vs all time top fighters 2-1
He did not lose except for dq until he was 35. Duran first lost 21 years old.
He did not lose except or dq until his 50th fight. Duran lost his 32nd fight.
He did not lose except for dq for 15 years, Duran lost in his 4th year.

Roy beat 23 past present and many who went on to be future champions. Duran could not have beaten this many as he only had 22 total championship fight, and many of these he lost.

Roy beat 18 world champions. Duran beat no more than 7.

Roy defended his middlewieight, supre middleweight, and Light heavyweight titles all at least 5 times. Duran defended his lightwight title a lot, but never successfully defended his title above 135. 0 successful defenses.

Duran effective career started at 135. He did have 5 fights at 118 none meaningful, he did have 10 at featherweight, none meaningful. Roy fought at middleweight and won a title. then he moved up from that weight 40 pounds to win a heavyweight title vs a fighter who outweighed him by 33 pounds, he moved up with out a tune up at that weight. Duran won the title at 160 vs Barkley, who outweighed him by 3 1/2 pounds, also unlike Roy, Duran had been at middleweight or above for 8 years, dating back to his fight with nino Gonzalez in 81. Duran failed in his three previous attempts at a jr middle and middle weight championshp.

Roy dropped off at 35 noticeably, after he added 18 pounds of muscle to his frame to fight at heavyweight then had to shed this, which most know is common knowledge to possibly have permanent impacts to fast twitch muscle. Roy never was the same after the Ruiz fight. Never. Yes Duran has some good showing at a much older age,, and deserved kudos for this, but Roy clearly had a better career than Duran did. Only thing Duran has on roy is the name SRL, and he was 1-2 vs him. Both moved up, and Roy didnt suffer loses like Duran did. Duran fans want to say Duran had fights with better fighters. Well you still cant give duran credit for losses. And also Duran had loses to Dejesus, adn Laing. There are no loses like that on Roy's resume until he was shot. If you want to bring up Tarver, then I can easily bring u Lawlor, sims, Joppy etc... So I think it is generally fair to rate fighters up until about 34.

I think Leonard would have beaten him pretty easily actually. Yes, I know all about Pryor's intense style and punching ability, but he had plenty of flaws. dont forget, the first Arguello fight was very close before the stoppage. and while Arguello was still a fantastic fighter, you have to remember he WAS pretty close to the end of his career, and I believe at his 4th weight class.

I think its pretty safe to say that Leonard was much bigger, faster and a more powerful puncher than any version of Arguello. he may not have been as technical a counter puncher as Arguello, but Pryor left himself open quite a bit, and I dont see Leonard having a real hard time hitting him. 7thish round stoppage in my mind, but Leonard would get hit.

I dont consider Pryor to be the best 140lb fighter ever. I think Chavez would have beaten him, although Pryor would have stomped all over Kostya. always liked Tsyzu, but Pryor was completely wrong for the guy. it probebly would have been bad

LEONARD DUCKED PRYOR FOR A REASON... :boxing:

You mean he offered Pryor a fight for half a mil, but Pryor turned it down?

You "Legendary Nights Era" of boxing fans crack me up.

Leonard would beat Pryor.

I mean Pryor was real good, but Ray had the stuff to beat him.

Leonard would beat Pryor.

I mean Pryor was real good, but Ray had the stuff to beat him.

Yep. Pryor was a beast at 140 (and would've most likely been a champ at 135 too).

Against the top guys at 147 around then, he doesn't fare well. SRL would beat him handily.

And Hearns? Yikes. A pro, welterweight Hearns would've wasted Pryor in ugly fashion.

Yep. Pryor was a beast at 140 (and would've most likely been a champ at 135 too).

Against the top guys at 147 around then, he doesn't fare well. SRL would beat him handily.

And Hearns? Yikes. A pro, welterweight Hearns would've wasted Pryor in ugly fashion.

Pryor would have his moments with that workrate, but damn, Ray was so quick and could put up a hell of a combo in a matter of a second and be 6 feet away from you in the next.

I think both are legends. But, seeing the tapes again...Pryor was far above the fighters of his era in terms of intensity. As a Pro, he got even better. He corrected some of his flaws that you all keep mentioning. To the point where many top fighters avoided a superfight with him. The Hawk was an 80`s version of Manny Packio. He beat Hearns in the amateurs, but you all know this. Ray Leonard was phenomenal...but being knocked out by Hector Camacho is just plain unforgivable. The Hawk would beat this clown and then take on Leonard in a classic and win in the last rounds via his secret weapon...That BLACK BOTTLE.

I think both are legends. But, seeing the tapes again...Pryor was far above the fighters of his era in terms of intensity. As a Pro, he got even better. He corrected some of his flaws that you all keep mentioning. To the point where many top fighters avoided a superfight with him. The Hawk was an 80`s version of Manny Packio. He beat Hearns in the amateurs, but you all know this. Ray Leonard was phenomenal...but being knocked out by Hector Camacho is just plain unforgivable. The Hawk would beat this clown and then take on Leonard in a classic and win in the last rounds via his secret weapon...That BLACK BOTTLE.


This is simply a stupid post. Sugar ray leonard was never knocked out be Hector comacho. A shell of Sugar ray leonard was knocked out by hector. He was 40 yrs old, had not fougth in 6 yrs, and you want to even discuss that fight. Was he ever ko'd while he was active, was he ever dropped before he retired, did he face big hitters and handle it.

This shows to me either you hate ray, or you know nothing abouit boxing. If anyone is out of boxing for 6yrs and they are 40, then their ability to take a punch is badly damages, not only because they are not use to taking punches, but their reflexes are not there anymore so they are not able to minimize the impact of all these punches he would never been hit before with, he does not automatically roll with punches thus these punches are landing flush, etc...etc...etc...

How can any person even factor in hector camacho fight vs ray. It like factoring the trevor berbick fight, when judging Ali.

I think both are legends. But, seeing the tapes again...Pryor was far above the fighters of his era in terms of intensity.

He was no more intense than the Duran who chose to be more aggressive (Buchanan, Leonard I).

As a Pro, he got even better. He corrected some of his flaws that you all keep mentioning.

As a pro, he still made lots of mistakes, like leaving his chin in the air and leaving himself open. Luckily for him, he took a good shot, and came back from his knockdowns strong.

To the point where many top fighters avoided a superfight with him.

The guys who avoided him were the lightweights, and they would not have been "superfights". The guys who were heavier than Pryor who allegedly "ducked" Pryor, such as Leonard and Duran, actually offered Pryor fights, but management issues, pride (or greed), and circumstances prevented it. Pryor wasn't even in the same class as the big names like SRL, Duran, Hearns, Benitez, etc...

As a Pro, he got even better. He corrected some of his flaws that you all keep mentioning. To the point where many top fighters avoided a superfight with him. The Hawk was an 80`s version of Manny Packio. He beat Hearns in the amateurs, but you all know this. Ray Leonard was phenomenal...but being knocked out by Hector Camacho is just plain unforgivable. The Hawk would beat this clown and then take on Leonard in a classic and win in the last rounds via his secret weapon...That BLACK BOTTLE.

The Hawk was an 80`s version of Manny Packio. He beat Hearns in the amateurs, but you all know this.

Yes, all of us (with common sense) know that the amateur win means very little, as Hearns changed and grew dramatically as a pro.

Ray Leonard was phenomenal...but being knocked out by Hector Camacho is just plain unforgivable. The Hawk would beat this clown and then take on Leonard in a classic and win in the last rounds via his secret weapon...That BLACK BOTTLE.

And Pryor lost to Bobby Joe Young. Neither that loss or Ray's loss to Camacho (who was an outstanding fighter in the mid 80s) mean *****, as both guys were shells of what they once were.

The Hawk would beat this clown and then take on Leonard in a classic and win in the last rounds via his secret weapon...That BLACK BOTTLE.

And how (Black Bottle aside) do you see Pryor beating Leonard? What in their styles do you see would you pick Ray to lose to Pryor?

And no, "I watched a documentary where Pryor called him out and Leonard didn't answer" does not apply.

What a stupid comment is was bringing up Leonard's loss to Camacho. :lol1:

i pick the hawk from the 2nd arguello fight to beat leonard.

i pick the hawk from the 2nd arguello fight to beat leonard.

Prime Leonard is bigger, stronger and faster than any version of Arguello let alone that faded version. As good as Pryor was, Alexis gave him fits in their first fight. If Ray hits him the way Arguello did I think he puts Aaron to sleep somewhere around the 9th round of a very exciting (all Pryors fights were) fight.

I am going by the tapes of the fights I saw...My personal bias don`t exist, I have none. I already said both were legends and great fighters. The Post said `Who will win`. I picked Pryor to win and I get crapped on. O.k. I offended some Leonard fans. Here are the facts. He got dropped about 7 or 8 times total, Ko`d by Hector Camacho and seriously beaten up by Terry Norris. I thought Hearns beat him up pretty good in the re-match, they called it a draw. Hagler fight was close...I thought Hagler won that one. Ray won a split decision (one jugde gave Hagler 2 rounds WTF?) O.k. whatever. Pryor lost to Bobby Joe Young after he came out of Coke Re-hab...but still manage to close out his career on a winstreak afterwards. Pryor never lost his intensity or balls or whatever you guys think Leonard lost. If Hearns could improve as a pro...why can`t Pryor? You all don`t like Pryor...good for you. At least his Pro record was better than Leonard`s. 39-1-0 36 ko`s

I am going by the tapes of the fights I saw...My personal bias don`t exist, I have none. I already said both were legends and great fighters. The Post said `Who will win`. I picked Pryor to win and I get crapped on. O.k. I offended some Leonard fans. Here are the facts. He got dropped about 7 or 8 times total, Ko`d by Hector Camacho and seriously beaten up by Terry Norris. I thought Hearns beat him up pretty good in the re-match, they called it a draw. Hagler fight was close...I thought Hagler won that one. Ray won a split decision (one jugde gave Hagler 2 rounds WTF?) O.k. whatever. Pryor lost to Bobby Joe Young after he came out of Coke Re-hab...but still manage to close out his career on a winstreak afterwards. Pryor never lost his intensity or balls or whatever you guys think Leonard lost. If Hearns could improve as a pro...why can`t Pryor? You all don`t like Pryor...good for you. At least his Pro record was better than Leonard`s. 39-1-0 36 ko`s

Honestly you need to learn the norms of boxing.

point 1. Leonard was never dropped, until he came back out of retirement. Not when he faced Duran, hearnd, benetiz, or even after retirment vs hagler. I imagine the person who posted this, was meaning peak forms of each fighter not the forms when they where shells of themselves. You may want to go back and do your research. How many times was peak Pryor dropped, and vs lessor foes. Now carry this up to a fighter that he has never came close to dealing with the total package that leonard offered at that size. Size, Speed, Power, balance (whicch is huge), reach, stamina, experience.... You have got to be smoking.

You keep bringing up Camacho, even he said he use to look up to Ray when Leonard fought Hearns. He said beating this form of Ray, is by no means "me trying to say I could be Ray of the 80's". You have to be one of a few ever,to even mention the Camacho fight as a gadge on Ray and how he would fair vs fighters, when he was peak. You must have forgotten, ray was out of boxing for 6 years, after a stretch when he was out of boing for 6-8 years..

2nd, all your recaps of Ray was AFTER his peak years. How about his two wars with Duran, his beating of Benitez, his stoppage of hearns. Name one fighter on Pryor's list that was as good at 147, as Benetiz, duran, hearns was. Hmmm. You can't. Pryor has never even dreamed of the beating he would recieve when he would have stepped up, to face a peak fast, bigger, harder hitting, boxing phenom with experience of fightering better, fast, just as aggressive, better defensivley, more reach, harder hitting fighters. This would be a easy fight, for Ray. Did you realize that Norris fight happened when ray was 35 had been out of boxing for 6 out of the last 8 years. What happened to Pryor when he was out of boxing for hmmmm 2 years. He came back and fought Bobby Joe Watts at welter and got Knocked the Fuc! out. Versus Bobby Joe Watts. However, you disregard this, and try to knock ray when he was 40+, out of boxing for 6 years, and go stopped by a much better fighter, or slamm ray his loss (he did not get stopped ) to Norris when as mentioned above he was out for 6 of 8 years. You have a lot to learn.

Bragging on Norris and he got his ass whipped and stopped by Bobby Joe Watts. Remember is you bring up the cocaine abuse excuse, well it fits for leonard too>

Pryor SD.........

Cincy Hawk.... Like it was said before, sugar refused to fight him for a reason...

learn your facts.....Leonard never refusd a legitimat fight with Pyror. Anothr bandwagon, rumor believer who simply jumps on the 1st rumor they hear.

Do your time line. When was Ray supposed to fight Pryor?

Duran is a lot craftier than Pryor, he's also bigger. It would be a good fight, Leonard is 5'10, Pryor is 5'6 (not that it matters to Pryor) I see him eating a lot of shots to the face if he does manage to take Leonard down, which I don't think would happen.

Duran is a lot craftier than Pryor, he's also bigger. It would be a good fight, Leonard is 5'10, Pryor is 5'6 (not that it matters to Pryor) I see him eating a lot of shots to the face if he does manage to take Leonard down, which I don't think would happen.


Good points. This fight would not have even been close. In fact no one wanted to see this fight at the time, because pryor was a nobody until after he beat Arguello, and the 1st time this fight was disputed due to a mysterious bottle.

Now i again ask all the bandwagon people get on sites and post a lot of bull, with no facts. When did Pryor become relevant? Was this before or after Ray leonard had retired? What if, what if Ray had decided to fight a irrelevant jr welter who as history would show his only fight vs a welter he lost. What if Ray fought this irrelevant fighter, instead of Hearns. Hmmmm.

That shows just how stupid the notion that Leonard ducked Pryor.

Cincy Hawk.... Like it was said before, sugar refused to fight him for a reason...

Like it was said before, people watch too much Legendary Nights.

Like it was said before, people watch too much Legendary Nights.


Yep could not agree more. They never bother to look at the facts and then simpy do a time line themselves, to see that Pryor leonard was never a viable fight. It would have been stupid for Ray to fight a unproven jr welterweight, who at the time beat noone but a washed up lightweight champ with over 100 fights and had lost to Benetiz 4 years earlier (cervantes).

Yep could not agree more. They never bother to look at the facts and then simpy do a time line themselves, to see that Pryor leonard was never a viable fight. It would have been stupid for Ray to fight a unproven jr welterweight, who at the time beat noone but a washed up lightweight champ with over 100 fights and had lost to Benetiz 4 years earlier (cervantes).

In a very good Sports Illustrated article on Pryor in the early 80s (remember when SI used to cover boxing with regularity?), it was reported that Pryor wasn't happy with a $500,000 offer from Leonard's camp, so he rejected it.

Of course, things like this, such as doing research and reading articles around this time period, or other logical things such as looking at weight classes, is too much to ask for some. They'd rather use a 5th grade mentality of "oh my god, Pryor challenged Leonard and Leonard didn't fight him!! Leonard must be scared!!"

Funny that I'm always defending Leonard on this "he feared/ducked Pryor" myth. I'm not much of a Leonard fan, I used to dislike him, actually. But I have a stronger dislike of revisionist history than I do of any fighter.

The knock-downs that Pryor suffered were off-balance ones...he was never really hurt, he came out just too fast and awkward. You guys are boxing afficinados so I don`t know why you even bring that up. Leonard got $10 million for Hagler while Hagler got about $13 million. But Leonard asked for 12 rounds and a ring the size of a 5th graders skating rink to dance around in. This is facts. It pains me to bring up stuff you all should know. Even then, Hagler won the fight IMO. Ray`s most impressive fight though, He was beaten up by 3 of his next 4 opponents pretty good however. He should have stayed retired like somebody said. His last fight, Hector Camacho (himself pretty washed up) took him apart and Leonard stayed away from boxing for good. Pryor IMO would have beaten Ray, Mayweather, and Chavez. Whittaker only one I see beating Pryor.