More Impressive Resume? Bernard Hopkins or Sugar Ray Leonard

[RayLeonard82]

Ray Leonard's big victories

Duran
Benitez
Hearns
Hagler
Kalule
Lalonde
Terry Norris - Lost Decision


B-Hopkins

Pavlik - Was undefeated
Tito - Was undefeated back in 2002
Oscar
Winky
Glen Johnson - Glen was undefeated in 1997
Tarver
Calzaghe - Lost Decision
Roy Jones - Lost Decision

I think you can make a argument that Hopkins resume is better. I think you can make a case that Pavlik and Hearns are equally as dangerous with there power and both guys were knocking out everyone. I think Tito at that particular time is a more dangerous fight than Ray Leonard fighting Duran the 2nd time when he was clearly out of shape and Benitez who doesnt have a lot of power that you have to worry about. Tarver and Glen Johnson are better fighters than Lalonde and Kalule.

The Marvin Hagler fight. Hagler was clearly past his peak in that fight and Ray knew it. Still a great victory, but i would have liked to see them fight back in 1982 when both were in there primes.

Im a huge SRL fan but i think Hopkins has the better overall resume of elite fighters he fought and beat more convincing that were still at the top of there game.

[Silencers]

Definitely Leonard.

[Porter's Dad]

Leonards. He beat ATGs.

Hopkins has beaten Hall of Famers.

[krispy kreme]

It's kind of hard to say, but I go with Sugar Ray. He fought everyone but Arron Pryor, who was smaller and lighter than him anyways. He even moved up when he was past his prime and beat a great prime MW, Marvin Hagler.

[IwatchBoxing]

Of couse its Leonard.

[TheGreatA]

For a huge Ray Leonard fan you sure don't seem like much of a fan. I'm not only talking about this topic but others you've made as well.

Leonard was a welterweight while Hopkins was a middleweight, it's hard to compare their resumes.

[RayLeonard82]

This is how i looked at it

Are Duran and Benitez more dangerous than 2002 Tito? Remember that particular Duran was out of shape and Benitez was not knocking guys out like Tito was. Tito had also beat prime Oscar.

Is Hearns more dangerous than 2002 Pavlik? I think there equally as dangerous. Both were tall fighters with great length with 1 punch KO power.

Is 1987 Hagler more dangerous and difficult to deal with as Winky Wright, Calzaghe and 2004 Tarver? Now if this were prime Hagler then he would win this easy, but 87 Hagler was very slow, his timing was way off. Im going by how they were when they fought.

And you have to add Calzaghe's name in there also on the resume since they fought and it was a close fight.

[krispy kreme]

This is how i looked at it

Are Duran and Benitez more dangerous than 2002 Tito? Remember that particular Duran was out of shape and Benitez was not knocking guys out like Tito was. Tito had also beat prime Oscar.

Is Hearns more dangerous than 2002 Pavlik? I think there equally as dangerous. Both were tall fighters with great length with 1 punch KO power.

Is 1987 Hagler more dangerous and difficult to deal with as Winky Wright, Calzaghe and 2004 Tarver? Now if this were prime Hagler then he would win this easy, but 87 Hagler was very slow, his timing was way off. Im going by how they were when they fought.

And you have to add Calzaghe's name in there also on the resume since they fought and it was a close fight.

Hell yeah, Hearns was more than just a great puncher.

[TheGreatA]

This is how i looked at it

Are Duran and Benitez more dangerous than 2002 Tito? Remember that particular Duran was out of shape and Benitez was not knocking guys out like Tito was. Tito had also beat prime Oscar.

Tito was at his best as a welterweight/light middleweight and barely won against Oscar.

Great performance by Hopkins but it's not really greater than Leonard's wins over Benitez and Duran.

Is Hearns more dangerous than 2002 Pavlik? I think there equally as dangerous. Both were tall fighters with great length with 1 punch KO power.

At 147 lbs Hearns is (p4p) much more dangerous than Pavlik at 170 lbs.

Like the poster above me said, Hearns was not just a puncher, he could outbox the best.

Is 1987 Hagler more dangerous and difficult to deal with as Winky Wright, Calzaghe and 2004 Tarver? Now if this were prime Hagler then he would win this easy, but 87 Hagler was very slow, his timing was way off. Im going by how they were when they fought.

Wright, Calzaghe and Tarver weren't exactly in their prime when they fought Hopkins either.

Leonard moving up from 147 to 160 to beat arguably the greatest MW of all time 33 year old Marvin Hagler is better than Hopkins moving up from MW to LHW to beat the best LHW at the time 37 year old Antonio Tarver.

Hopkins' win was more dominant however and that's the point you should've made. There's no way Tarver is better than Hagler was at any point of his career.

[Ryn0]

Leonard definately. Hagler won their fight though....