Sugar Ray, the king of the Leonards? Sorry, not for me!

Afternoon chaps, hope it’s been a fine bank holiday for everyone so far. As All Time Great continues his work of counting up our votes for all-time pound for pound list, one thing I’ve noticed is that, so far, most people tend to be ranking Sugar Ray Leonard ahead of his 1910s / 1920s namesake, Benny. Now obviously, the majority of most people’s pound for pound lists are going to include at least one of these names, and so the fact that Ray seems to be ahead doesn’t really miff me all that much. But that said, I do disagree and so, for anyone who’s interested, I’ll present my argument for why Benny, rather than Ray, was the king of the Leonards and deserves to be ranked as so.

First off, I’ll admit that I used to, until fairly recently, give Ray the edge in this contest. And let me make it clear; I still regard him as an absolutely fabulous fighter, a true all-time great and I appreciate all he and his profile has done for the sport. And as I’ve said before, how many other fighters, even if they are legends of the sport, can claim to have the four best fighters they’ve beaten read as Wilfred Benitez, Roberto Duran, Thomas Hearns and Marvin Hagler? All while they were at or near the very top of the sport and all while they were still world champions, no less.

Let’s compare that to the four greatest fighters (in my opinion, at least) that Benny beat: Ted ‘Kid’ Lewis (although there are varying accounts of who certain newspapers gave the decision to), Freddie Welsh, Lew Tendler and Jack Britton. Based on quality then, it’s fair to say that the tip of Sugar Ray’s proverbial iceberg is a bit greater than that of the ‘Ghetto Wizard.’ But when it comes to strength in depth, it’s a no contest. Underneath those four fighters previously mentioned, Ray’s record boasts Ayub Kalule, Dave ‘Boy’ Green and very, very little else of note. On the other hand, the depth of Benny’s record has to be seen to be believed; aside from the four men already mentioned, there’s wins over Featherweight greats Johnny Kilbane and Johnny Dundee, Lightweight champions / title claimants Rocky Kansas and Willie Ritchie, as well as sometimes inside-schedule victories over top Lightweights / Welterweights of that era in Charlie White, Richie Mitchell, Soldier Bartfield and Pal Moran.

What’s impressive, though, is not so much who Benny beat, but the manner in which he had a grip over his greatest rivals. Many people have pointed to the superb 18-4 record which Ezzard Charles holds over his most outstanding contemporaries of his time, Archie Moore, Jersey Joe Walcott, Joey Maxim and Teddy Yarosz included amongst them. Collectively, the ‘Ghetto Wizard’ cam make a similar claim, having gone (allowing for ‘Newspaper Decisions’, admittedly) 2-1 against Welsh, 2-0 with Tendler, 2-1 with Britton, 1-1 against Kilbane, 4-3-1 with Dundee, 4-0 against Kansas, 1-1 with Ritchie, 1-0 against White, 2-0 with Mitchell, 4-0 with Bartfield and 3-0 against Moran. Even allowing for the disputes over the Lewis result, that’s one hell of a record against the best rivals your era has to offer.

Now obviously, a lot depends on how you rate good wins against great wins in terms of ratio. But for me, it’s clear that Benny’s record has the depth which Ray’s so severely lacks and, in my opinion, it’s equally clear that Benny established himself as THE dominant performer of his era in a way that Ray, quite simply, never did. Sugar Ray may finish top of this mythical ‘league table’ of the four kings, but the incredibly contentious decision against Hagler, the fact that the third fight with Duran was rendered practically meaningless by the time it happened in 1989 and the fact that his draw with Hears second time round was, to put it mildly, very fortunate, mean that there is certainly a lot more scope for uncertainty regarding Ray’s dominance than there is for Benny’s.

Moreover, I’d have to say that Benny’s exploits at Lightweight trump those of Ray at Welterweight, which I’m sure you’d all agree are the two divisions in which they both did their best work. As someone who doesn’t subscribe to the modern idea that ‘whoever has titles in most divisions is automatically the better fighter’, this is arguably what seals it for me. In short, I feel that although Ray’s Welterweight exploits feature the more flashy names, Benny’s consistency and longevity at 135 lb are key, as is the fact that most of the men who he vanquished at the weight were at their best in that very weight class, as opposed to Duran and Benitez in the case of Ray, who both did their finest work in other weight classes outside of the 147 lb which Ray (relatively briefly) reigned in.

As harsh as it may sound, the second half of Sugar Ray’s career was, at times, an embarrassment, too, in which he became (not dissimilarly to Floyd Mayweather Jr, come to think of it) a bit of a ‘business man first, boxer second’ type of character. Yes, Benny was forced in to a comeback after the Wall Street Crash which was a sad sight compared to his glorious prime, but even then it took a fighter as wonderful as Jimmy McLarnin, in the form of his life, to end his days in the ring once and for all. Moreover, Ray’s continued leapfrogging of more worthy contenders, slyness in negotiating the La Londe fights for two ‘world titles’ and avoidance of rematches when they made the most sense and is what was often called for are traits which simply can’t be aimed at Benny.

The esteemed Monte Cox argues that Benny Leonard is one of only five men who can claim to have the best professional record in the whole history of boxing, and I would agree that he definitely has a superior claim to his eighties namesake. In fact, had Benny not shown that famous lapse in concentration against Britton (who I rate as a top ten all-time Welterweight) when trying for the 147 lb crown, I’m sure we’d be talking about him as possibly the nearest rival to Ray Robinson for the title of the greatest fighter of them all.

I don’t need to go in to the details of each fighter’s skills inside the ring, we know them all well. Both superb technicians, and while Ray may have been flashier at times, I certainly think that Benny can hold his own in that department, too.

So there it is, my reasoning for Benny, rather than Ray, being the king of the Leonards. Sorry that the article has dragged on – but I guess when you’re trying to separate two fighters of such greatness, it’s never going to be a two minute exercise. Cheers for sticking with me, and fire away with any comments if you’re interested.

Cheers, everyone.

Sugar Ray has without doubt the four biggest wins in boxing history albeit 2 of those being against guys who's best work was at lower weight classes but both Duran and Benitez went on to win titles at higher weights themselves. Aside from those four wins though Rays record is a non event with wins over relatively weak fighters. You mentioned Bennys top wins which in all honesty aren't far behind, Lewis and Britton were in my opinion better welterweights than Hearns, Duran or Benitez while in Welsh we're talking about a genuine great at lightweight whom is on the fringes of a top ten place. Tendler is possibly the weakest of the eight but had an incredible, was only knocked out only once in well over 100 fights I believe.

Beyond those 4 wins it's a not even a contest with Benny trumping Ray very easily, overall would have to place Benny higher.

Cheers for that excellent contribution there, TFF. Glad that someone else can see my reasoning. As you alluded to, it says a lot that while Benny was primarily a Lightweight, he still beat better Welterweights that Ray managed, although of course Ray still has that extra luxury of having won the 147 lb title (which Benny really should have done, too) and unifying against a genuinely wonderful Welterweight in Hearns.

As I said, it doesn't bother me if people rate the more modern Leonard higher, but I think there's far more reasons to give Benny the higher placing of the two. Cheers again.

Winning a title isn't the be all and end all though is it, who's going to argue that Charles and Tunney aren't the elite light heavyweights

We're all aware that multiple titles looks more impressive in pound for pound terms but if your standard of opposition includes Kalule and LaLonde for three of those titles what does it really mean.

Have to disagree with all of the article!! I dont know alot about the older Leonard but at the end of the day he was a good champion at light weight. But look at sugar ray! World champion in 5 weight divisions, and beat all the super stars of his time. He was also much more stylish then anyone else really, I think hed beat any other boxer apart from maybe Ali, obviously I mean pound 4 pound here.

I just think that when you look at who he beat, sugar Ray Leonard just has to be a top four fighter in history along with Ali, Robinson and Mayweather. But thats only my opinion.

Little doubt in my mind that Benny Leonard had the superior record of the two, though in terms of sheer ability I could change my mind each time I ponder the question. Each was a sublime boxer ; resilient, fast, displaying superb ' generalship ' and anticipation, and each had heart and guts a plenty.

Today, I'd pick Sugar Ray because he carried genuinely destructive power, whereas Benny Leonard, although he packed a wallop, was probably not in the ' devastating puncher ' bracket.

All in all it's Sugar Ray today and Benny tomorrow, for me.

Thanks for the contribution there, Windy. As I said in the article, I didn't really feel the need to differentiate between their actual talents in the ring, as they could both do it all really, although as you said Benny was more of a 'hurtful' rather than devastating puncher.

Again, I'll stress that I have no problem with anyone plumping for Sugar Ray (in all honesty, they're only separated by a couple of places in my mind) but I simply think that Benny proved himself to be THE outstanding performer of his era in a way that Ray never quite managed. Still, horses for courses and I reckon the contributions so far show just how evenly matched the two of them are in many ways.

You're welcome, Chris, and thanks to you for a most interesting article.

I definitely agree with you about Benny's dominance and his record. Mighty difficult to separate them, overall, and as I say I'll probably change my mind tomorrow and put Benny a whisker ahead.

Windy

How do you rate Sugar Ray Leonard's in-ring ability compared to Eder Jofre's?

I notice on the all time P4P thread Jofre has quite a few top 10 votes, despite having a record equally as lacking in depth as Ray Leonard's, yet he gets the nod on his ability despite SRL having just as much ability, and is more proven IMO.

p.s. Chris - sorry for the mini-hijack! this seemed like a good place to bring it up.

wow_junky wrote:Windy

How do you rate Sugar Ray Leonard's in-ring ability compared to Eder Jofre's?

I notice on the all time P4P thread Jofre has quite a few top 10 votes, despite having a record equally as lacking in depth as Ray Leonard's, yet he gets the nod on his ability despite SRL having just as much ability, and is more proven IMO.

p.s. Chris - sorry for the mini-hijack! this seemed like a good place to bring it up.

I think Jofre is right up there with Robinson as a boxer / fighter, wow_junky.

He could do everything. As amply demonstrated in the Medal fight, ( his US debut, I believe, ) he possessed sublime skills, could brawl, carried knockout power in either hand, tremendous chin, inexhaustible stamina, will to win and everything else besides. On the inside he looked like Dempsey ; at range he was silky smooth, and he seldom wasted a punch.

To top all that off, his coming back after a lengthy layoff to step up to featherweight, claim the world title, knock out Saldivar and retire with only the Harada losses on his record, probably entitles him to a claim to the ' greatest ever comeback ' slot.

I can think of one esteemed historian who has Jofre second best fighter of all time, and even Fleischer, who favoured the fighters of his youth, dubbed Jofre ' The bantamweight Sugar Ray. '

HumanWindmill wrote:

wow_junky wrote:Windy

How do you rate Sugar Ray Leonard's in-ring ability compared to Eder Jofre's?

I notice on the all time P4P thread Jofre has quite a few top 10 votes, despite having a record equally as lacking in depth as Ray Leonard's, yet he gets the nod on his ability despite SRL having just as much ability, and is more proven IMO.

p.s. Chris - sorry for the mini-hijack! this seemed like a good place to bring it up.

I think Jofre is right up there with Robinson as a boxer / fighter, wow_junky.

He could do everything. As amply demonstrated in the Medal fight, ( his US debut, I believe, ) he possessed sublime skills, could brawl, carried knockout power in either hand, tremendous chin, inexhaustible stamina, will to win and everything else besides. On the inside he looked like Dempsey ; at range he was silky smooth, and he seldom wasted a punch.

To top all that off, his coming back after a lengthy layoff to step up to featherweight, claim the world title, knock out Saldivar and retire with only the Harada losses on his record, probably entitles him to a claim to the ' greatest ever comeback ' slot.

I can think of one esteemed historian who has Jofre second best fighter of all time, and even Fleischer, who favoured the fighters of his youth, dubbed Jofre ' The bantamweight Sugar Ray. '

Which Sugar Ray was he referring to though?

Seriously though, do you not think Ray Leonard showed as much all round ability as Jofre, and against a better calibre of opponent as well?

wow_junky wrote:Windy

How do you rate Sugar Ray Leonard's in-ring ability compared to Eder Jofre's?

I notice on the all time P4P thread Jofre has quite a few top 10 votes, despite having a record equally as lacking in depth as Ray Leonard's, yet he gets the nod on his ability despite SRL having just as much ability, and is more proven IMO.

p.s. Chris - sorry for the mini-hijack! this seemed like a good place to bring it up.

No need for apologies, Junky. Interesting question, that. I see Windy has offered his own reasoning, but I'll just say that as Bantamweight champion, Jofre established himself with a dominance that Sugar Ray didn't quite show at any weight. The names he faced at 118 lb may not have been household (although not all that many Bantamweights are), but I do feel that his opposition is underrated somewhat. Medel is as good as anything most greats from the sixties owards have faced before even fighting for a title, and Miranda was a wonderful fighter, too. And then in his tenure as champion you have Caldwell, one of Britain's most underrated fighters in my opinion, as well as that fantastic comeback at Featherweight, where he did (if not the impossible) the highly inprobable by winning the title while a good few years after his best.

As I said though, it's not so much who he beat, but how he beat them. There were very few touch and go affairs (the first Medel fight aside, and he put that right with a crushing win later on) such as Leonard-Hearns I or Leonard-Hagler, he simply swatted his rivals with contempt, totally outclassed them most of the time.

Suppose I should apologise now for hijacking a question aimed at Windy!

I can't help remembering that Leonard was hustled out of it by Duran, wow_junky. No shame in that, of course, since Duran is a genuine ATG. However, coupled to the fact that Hearns was outboxing him for long periods during the first fight and Leonard, to me, doesn't seem QUITE so invincible as Jofre did until the Harada fights.

Such was Jofre's dominance that the entire boxing world deemed him unbeatable, and the shockwaves which followed his first loss to Harada could have been measured on the Richter scale.

Always difficult to separate ATGs, isn't it ?

Chris, Windy,

Ray Leonard may not have looked as dominate, but you need to bear in mind that Duran, Hearns, Benetiz and Hagler are 4 of the finest fighters of the 80s - I'd be suprised to see them outside of a top 50 all time list and all would feature comfortably inside a top 100 list.

You can't make that same claim for Jofre, and it's only Saldivar (who was 3 years removed from his title reign) and Harada (who gets in on virtue of beating Jofre) who would make a top 100 list IMO. The bantam division of the 60s may be underrated but it still isn't a star studded cast!

I just feel that Ray Leonard was proven against a higher calibre of fighter, and each with a differing style.

HumanWindmill wrote:Such was Jofre's dominance that the entire boxing world deemed him unbeatable, and the shockwaves which followed his first loss to Harada could have been measured on the Richter scale.

Up there with Mike Tyson then?

Either way, it's a tough job to split them, wow_junky, and with margins being so thin it's going to come down to opinions. Although ours differ on this issue, I certainly understand your logic, though I'm still sticking with Jofre.

Scottrf wrote:

HumanWindmill wrote:Such was Jofre's dominance that the entire boxing world deemed him unbeatable, and the shockwaves which followed his first loss to Harada could have been measured on the Richter scale.

Up there with Mike Tyson then?

In terms of shock, yes. Probably more so, in fact, even though Jofre was at what should have been at the tail end of his career, was having difficulty in making weight, and despite the fact that the result of the first fight was widely disputed.

But yes.

HumanWindmill wrote:Either way, it's a tough job to split them, wow_junky, and with margins being so thin it's going to come down to opinions. Although ours differ on this issue, I certainly understand your logic, though I'm still sticking with Jofre.

Fair enough

Jofre would fit in the 15-25 bracket for me so it is really splitting hairs with this argument! With the amount of votes he received you should be pleased that your preaching for Jofre is working, he definitely deserves the recognition 8)

Wow_Junky, it's absolutely fair enough that you're giving the nod to Ray Leonard above both Benny and Jofre, like I said I don't take issue with anyone who sees it like you do.

In fact, as it goes, when asked to give an all-time top ten on ATG's thread, I had Benny at nine, Jofre at ten, and decided that Ray Leonard would be my eleven; the three of them all bunched together. Another reminder of how little there is between these guys and how hard it is to separate them.

wow_junky wrote:

HumanWindmill wrote:Either way, it's a tough job to split them, wow_junky, and with margins being so thin it's going to come down to opinions. Although ours differ on this issue, I certainly understand your logic, though I'm still sticking with Jofre.

Fair enough

Jofre would fit in the 15-25 bracket for me so it is really splitting hairs with this argument! With the amount of votes he received you should be pleased that your preaching for Jofre is working, he definitely deserves the recognition 8)

I wouldn't flatter myself that anybody would be influenced by my opinion in the matter. I'm sure that those who voted for Jofre did so on the basis of their own research, just as that would apply to those who rate Leonard above him.

Windy,

I hadn't even heard of Jofre until yourself and the Captain bought him up on the 606 forums, so I'm sure you have more influence than your realise

Well, that's a very nice compliment, wow_junky. Thank you.

Benny the better record, but better fighter ? No - Leonard the welterweight is the greatest fighter I've seen box in my lifetime. He had everything.

Ray Leonard, the master boxer and tactician, sits on the ropes and fights Duran at his own game and *just * comes up short. This takes nothing from his legacy in my opinion, it just proves how durable and tough Leonard was. In the rematch he uses his full array of skills to win easily. The comeback against Hearns - as inevitable and irresistible as a hurricane, the humbling of Hagler and the destruction of Benitez. These wins are of the very highest order and he did it with such class and drama that the fights almost looked staged.

He brought Hollywood for real to the ring.