Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Who ranks higher at 147 lbs: Jose Napoles or Sugar Ray Leonard?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Sugar ray Leonard is number 1 in my opinion......no one was better at welterweight

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by GhostofDempsey View Post
      I would rate Leonard slightly higher. His rematch with Duran was on very short notice, when his people got word that Duran had packed on 40+ pounds after their fight and was partying like a rock star, Duran was given short notice to prepare for the rematch and nearly ruined himself trying to make weight. Otherwise, Leonard's wins over Hearns and Benitez rank higher than Napoles wins over Griffith and Cokes, but not by a wide margin. Griffith and Cokes were great fighters.
      How were Griffith & Cokes age-wise when Napoles beat them? I didn't notice him much in his day until he stepped up to lose to Monzon. Just surviving against the galoot was impressive.

      From any film I have ever seen, though, his speed rating would be rather pedestrian but his boxing IQ high. He is not fast--but he is slick!

      The tail of the horse never kills the fly, and that would be Napoles attacking Leonard, wouldn't it?

      Comment


      • #23
        Agree. Going solely off resume without a shadow of a doubt for me. To the eye though I have them ranked fairly equal and think they'd both fare similarly against one another's opponents.

        Comment


        • #24
          Originally posted by The Old LefHook View Post
          How were Griffith & Cokes age-wise when Napoles beat them? I didn't notice him much in his day until he stepped up to lose to Monzon. Just surviving against the galoot was impressive.

          From any film I have ever seen, though, his speed rating would be rather pedestrian but his boxing IQ high. He is not fast--but he is slick!

          The tail of the horse never kills the fly, and that would be Napoles attacking Leonard, wouldn't it?
          Age wise there was only a 2-3 year difference between them, and they were all at around the same number of fights when they fought. In a head to head fight I'd have to favor Leonard by decision in a close fight.

          Comment


          • #25
            Napoles was supremely skilled but also an alcoholic. Leonard had coke issues but we saw his prime without any cocaine at least.

            Leonard IMO ranks higher, beat better fighters and really showed up when it matters. True champion.

            Comment


            • #26
              Leonard gives Robinson all he wants, the only difference being that Robby would get him in trouble a few times.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by The Old LefHook View Post
                How were Griffith & Cokes age-wise when Napoles beat them? I didn't notice him much in his day until he stepped up to lose to Monzon. Just surviving against the galoot was impressive.

                From any film I have ever seen, though, his speed rating would be rather pedestrian but his boxing IQ high. He is not fast--but he is slick!

                The tail of the horse never kills the fly, and that would be Napoles attacking Leonard, wouldn't it?
                Leonard is for sure faster. but smooth is fast, and napoles is smooth as hell.you can't see his punches coming because he never explodes. kinda like Ali.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by The Old LefHook View Post
                  How were Griffith & Cokes age-wise when Napoles beat them? I didn't notice him much in his day until he stepped up to lose to Monzon. Just surviving against the galoot was impressive.

                  From any film I have ever seen, though, his speed rating would be rather pedestrian but his boxing IQ high. He is not fast--but he is slick!

                  The tail of the horse never kills the fly, and that would be Napoles attacking Leonard, wouldn't it?
                  ....
                  Originally posted by GhostofDempsey View Post
                  Age wise there was only a 2-3 year difference between them, and they were all at around the same number of fights when they fought. In a head to head fight I'd have to favor Leonard by decision in a close fight.
                  You guys aren't serious that Griffith had any business taking that fight are you?

                  Cokes and Lewis were just fine when they fought Napoles. Napoles out-classed them.


                  To answer the question, I dunno how well Napoles does H2H against many of the best Welterweights, but if you weren't good enough to avoid or overcome his wheelhouse, the effect was pure violence. Gorgeous violence, but a massacre none the less.

                  Leonard was Rodriguez 2.0. Outside of Robinson and Duran, I really don't think anyone bests him. He's too mobile. And his power will prevail across 15 rounds.

                  I really like Napoles. And he might even have been too small for it to be fair to compare him to other Welterweights (most of the greats were really just Middleweights waiting to happen, anyway). I think his performances are better eye-candy than Ray's, but Ray certainly beat the better competition, and was a much more mobile fighter.

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by lopez12 View Post
                    Agree. Going solely off resume without a shadow of a doubt for me. To the eye though I have them ranked fairly equal and think they'd both fare similarly against one another's opponents.
                    Napoles has no business in the ring w/ Hearns.

                    Leonard might not quite brutalize Napoles' competition quite like Jose did. He'll rely more on his wheels and stamina; drag them into deep waters before finishing them.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by Rusty Tromboni View Post
                      ....


                      You guys aren't serious that Griffith had any business taking that fight are you?

                      Cokes and Lewis were just fine when they fought Napoles. Napoles out-classed them.


                      To answer the question, I dunno how well Napoles does H2H against many of the best Welterweights, but if you weren't good enough to avoid or overcome his wheelhouse, the effect was pure violence. Gorgeous violence, but a massacre none the less.

                      Leonard was Rodriguez 2.0. Outside of Robinson and Duran, I really don't think anyone bests him. He's too mobile. And his power will prevail across 15 rounds.

                      I really like Napoles. And he might even have been too small for it to be fair to compare him to other Welterweights (most of the greats were really just Middleweights waiting to happen, anyway). I think his performances are better eye-candy than Ray's, but Ray certainly beat the better competition, and was a much more mobile fighter.
                      According to Griffith himself; “I was in the best shape of my career but I just couldn't get up in the fight. But I must say Napoles is a very good champion." - Emile Griffith.

                      He may have been on the tail end of his prime, but he was still game. After the Napoles fight he went on a ten fight win streak before losing to Monzon.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP