The Most Complete Boxer Ever

[The plunger man]

I followed SRL entire career amateur and Pro. Their is no denying his greatness. He was a great boxer, excellent puncher to either head or body, ultra quick hands, ultra quick feet, tough, killer instinct, tremendous will to win. I actually was no huge fan but if you look back upon all the great fighters the past 50 years Ray checks more boxes that any other in terms of the attributes that make a fighter great.

your right and I was lucky enough to see all the fighters in the 80’s and that was probably the best era for the welterweights and middleweights ...same as the 70’s with the heavies with Ali .....and again like the late forties early 50’s with SRR ....and they all have one thing in common they had great dancing partners that defined there greatness.
Respect fella

[DeeMoney]

Actually, I did want to throw another name out there for consideration: Finito Lopez.

I know I am biased towards him as a fan, but he did everything technically well. I could listen to an argument about him not being as athletically gifted as others, but for your consideration: Ricardo Finito Lopez.

[Rusty Tromboni]

I followed SRL entire career amateur and Pro. Their is no denying his greatness. He was a great boxer, excellent puncher to either head or body, ultra quick hands, ultra quick feet, tough, killer instinct, tremendous will to win. I actually was no huge fan but if you look back upon all the great fighters the past 50 years Ray checks more boxes that any other in terms of the attributes that make a fighter great.

Maybe you should watch his fight in Montreal?

[Rusty Tromboni]

Also Lomanchenco has no business being on any best of the best lists. He has had only 15 pro fights. Wait until the book has been written about a fighter (career is over/nearly over) before you jump to final conclusions.

Obviously, this will all change once you see him in person from ring-side... then every post you make will reference the occasion, and laud his greatness.

[Rusty Tromboni]

Actually, I did want to throw another name out there for consideration: Finito Lopez.

I know I am biased towards him as a fan, but he did everything technically well. I could listen to an argument about him not being as athletically gifted as others, but for your consideration: Ricardo Finito Lopez.

I think it's a worthy mention.

Lopez, Marquez, Johnson, Holyfield, Liston these were all exceptional technicians.

[Rusty Tromboni]

your right and I was lucky enough to see all the fighters in the 80’s and that was probably the best era for the welterweights and middleweights ...same as the 70’s with the heavies with Ali .....and again like the late forties early 50’s with SRR ....and they all have one thing in common they had great dancing partners that defined there greatness.
Respect fella

And yet you can't tell me how any of them top Jofre, or Duran and Lomachenko.

[Rusty Tromboni]

I don't know if there is anyone else who deserves to be on the list. I try to run through some names in my mind (Monzon, Gans, Holyfield, Ali, Napoles, heck Crawford) and they all seem to come up less 'complete'. But maybe I am missing someone.

I forgot Mayweather.


I think it shows being "complete" is difficult to pull off, but it's not the true indication of a fighter's greatness.

[DeeMoney]

I forgot Mayweather.


I think it shows being "complete" is difficult to pull off, but it's not the true indication of a fighter's greatness.

Agree wholeheartedly. Some guys are great because they are complete, others because they are dominant in one or two aspects.

Just because one fighter is more complete (checks more boxes) than another, doesnt mean he is the better fighter.

[Anthony342]

Do you have any idea of the history of Leonard and Duran 3.
Let me educate you so you understand....after Duran quit ....Duran hit rock bottom , he lost to Kirkland Laing , almost lost to jimmy batten and went into exile because no promoter would touch him and even his management left him and don king would not touch him.....he finally got resurrected when he strung a few wins together and them beat Davey moore....he then signed for hagler in 1983 when leonard was retired ...Duran lost to hagler in 1983 and then faced hearns in 1984 and was koed brutally , 2 years later then faced off with haglers half brother in Robbie Simms and lost a wide decision .......when exactly did Duran prove himself worthy of a 3rd fight.
Don’t talk out your ****ing ass...Duran only when he beat Iran Barkley was again a fighter that could be sold as a viable opponent for leonard.
If your gonna try and talk about the 4 kings with me at least know the history.
Duran lost all his major fights from 1982 to 1988 and Yet Leonard avoided giving him another shot according to you.
Had nothing to do with the fact Duran lost to hagler in 1983 , hearns in 1984 , Simms 1986 and never boxed for a world title till 1989 in Iran Barkley and coincidentally straight after leonard boxed him.
From December 1980 to 1982 ...Duran went awol . Lost to Benitez and Laing and yet it’s Leonard’s fault why Duran never got a rematch.
Know your history son we are on the history section

According to Leonard himself, not me. I don't know why you deny his own statements. A major star can make any fights he wants. He could've signed that fight after Hagler, instead of Lalonde if he wanted to.

[Anthony342]

I followed SRL entire career amateur and Pro. Their is no denying his greatness. He was a great boxer, excellent puncher to either head or body, ultra quick hands, ultra quick feet, tough, killer instinct, tremendous will to win. I actually was no huge fan but if you look back upon all the great fighters the past 50 years Ray checks more boxes that any other in terms of the attributes that make a fighter great.

This right here.