Better Boxer Floyd or Sugar Ray Leonard?

[Godsfly]

Also I just realize who u were talking about in "body bags" btw I love body bags content. The guy is only defending against the bull. He is defending against alot of silliness in these Floyd atg (let me be bias & get off steam) threads. Let me refraise the idiot comment. I know he is only defending against so much of the ******ity on these message boards I love body bags content. Its from a mirrors perspective. Show u who u are perspective. I love it.

[djtmal]

The breakdown of Floyd opponents is another story i actually think the time that he fought his opponents is greatly under exergerated in order to denounce his wins. Floyd is one guy where he has true die to die turds.

its simple either you beat the fighter in their prime or you did not...what floyd boys want you to do is accept the excuses why he ducked fighters and backed out of fights,and that is not happening.

[Godsfly]

its simple either you beat the fighter in their prime or you did not...what floyd boys want you to do is accept the excuses why he ducked fighters and backed out of fights,and that is not happening.

According to Duran, sugar didn't beat a prime Duran, sugar didn't beat a prime Hagler, the prime thing has just become another way of denouncing where u see fit. Don't get me wrong. Ali was shot to s against holmes so there are clear cases of this. but a lot of it in mordern times is just fanboy picking and choosing horse sh*r.

[The plunger man]

Leonard probably has the better resume overall but I think Floyd is the better fighter skill wise. Leonard was a stick and move kind of fighter. Floyd was the more complete fighter in my opinion.

leonard was not just a stick and mover .....he was ruthless and vicious in that ring and quite few times he was actually the hunter in that ring...he turned out to be the puncher against hearns and Benitez ......he stopped kalule who had never been of his feet ...he brutalised Dave boy green with a devastating show of combination power ....,he took out a natural light heavyweight and took him to deep water and koed him .....leonard was the perfect fighter who could box on the front foot and back foot........leonard is probably greatest boxer fighter of all time
....leonard beating Benitez ,Duran, Hearns and hagler is far beyond floyds best wins........mayweather was corrales , cotto , oscar and a 36 year old manny pacquiao .........Benitez was 21 , duran was 29 , hearns 22 and hagler 32 when leoanrd beat them.....leonard is a true legend of the sport

[hugh grant]

The one who took risks will be rewarded for being greater. Being catious don't get you far in boxing royalty circles.
I won't name names but I'm confident you know who I'm talking about, and referring to, so you know I'm not picking on anyone, because you're thinking it too, and I'm not influencing your thoughts and not putting ideas in your head

[LeOoze]

Greater encompasses more than beating 3 guys, its the magnitude of the all. I think Floyd achieved more and influenced the sport more this is where greater has meaning which has nothing to do with who is a better boxer, it's very hard to compare guys from different eras, Hearns Duran and Leonard were all beaten by lesser fighters than Mayweather, which does not imply Floyd beats them, but what it does do is humanize them because people are starstruck by the long time hype around the golden eras, with the idea they can't be beaten, and that's not true there is very little between the true greats, enough so that one being in the zone and the other being an inch outside it and he loses.

Greater doesn't mean better.

Floyd is definitely more iconic and influenced the sport more, but Leonard definitely accomplished more even if his prime wasn't as long.

[Roadblock]

Floyd is definitely more iconic and influenced the sport more, but Leonard definitely accomplished more even if his prime wasn't as long.

What do you mean accomplished more ? I see he won the gold where Floyd was robbed of a gold medal , but as a pro what do you mean.

[djtmal]

According to Duran, sugar didn't beat a prime Duran, sugar didn't beat a prime Hagler, the prime thing has just become another way of denouncing where u see fit. Don't get me wrong. Ali was shot to s against holmes so there are clear cases of this. but a lot of it in mordern times is just fanboy picking and choosing horse sh*r.

No time and memorial who you beat and when you beat them separates the men from the boys. This is the real deal no fanboy faking it here.

Hearns and Benitez Ray beat in their absolute peak, Duran and Hagler even if they were slightly past prime, were still dominant fighters not some raked thru the coals fighter that he would get half credit beating. On top of that, Hagler is considered top 2 all time at mw, and Duran top 5 all time p4p.

This is what Floyd boys do. Try to downplay fighters who didn't cut any corners because they know their guy seriously lacks.

[Roadblock]

No time and memorial who you beat and when you beat them separates the men from the boys. This is the real deal no fanboy faking it here.

Hearns and Benitez Ray beat in their absolute peak, Duran and Hagler even if they were slightly past prime, were still dominant fighters not some raked thru the coals fighter that he would get half credit beating. On top of that, Hagler is considered top 2 all time at mw, and Duran top 5 all time p4p.

This is what Floyd boys do. Try to downplay fighters who didn't cut any corners because they know their guy seriously lacks.

They were great fighters, it doesn't mean Floyd couldn't beat them its all subjective opinion he wasn't in their era making the entire thing fantasy, that's the thing with eras if you don't have other greats you cant get those history fights, Floyd beat the greatest fighters of his era and you cannot do more than that, Floyd was prime 130/140 so outside of those weights Floyd is not in prime so all this prime talk is BS when they are in the same era, its such a lame context when you only talk about one side in prime or not like Floyds prime is irrelevant.

The only downplaying I see is from you, never have I seen so many double standards coming from a guy other than you.

[djtmal]

They were great fighters, it doesn't mean Floyd couldn't beat them its all subjective opinion he wasn't in their era making the entire thing fantasy, that's the thing with eras if you don't have other greats you cant get those history fights, Floyd beat the greatest fighters of his era and you cannot do more than that, Floyd was prime 130/140 so outside of those weights Floyd is not in prime so all this prime talk is BS when they are in the same era, its such a lame context when you only talk about one side in prime or not like Floyds prime is irrelevant.

The only downplaying I see is from you, never have I seen so many double standards coming from a guy other than you.

Say what Floyd was still in his prime at 147.

Look man if you want to help Floyd out and make excuses for him be my guest.

Even if Sugar Ray only had prime Hearns and Benitez, that would still trump anything Floyd did at the weight.

The homework has already been done Srl sits comfortably at top 10 on most all time great lists, while Floyd around top 30.

You don't want to accept the criteria fine, just run for cover when you try to convince somebody that beating a prime Marcos Madonna is better than beating Duran or Hearns.