Why is Benny Leonard so Great

[IronDanHamza]

I wasnt trying to discredit his resume in terms of ATG, i just dont see how he can be considered so highly as the GOAT, over guys like duran, etc...
He was clearly a great fighter no doubt, but if you think all the other greats beat the guys he did, than how can you say for certainty he is the GOAT...
I just feel leonard doesnt separate himself far enough from duran, etc to be universally declared the GOAT,, whose to say henry armstrong would bum rush leonard and beat all those other guys if he was in that era...
Ali is considered the GOAT at heavy because his resume is outstanding, and other great ATGs would be hard pressed to match Ali's success in the 60s and 80s.. I dont think joe louis or holyfield, or lewis, or wlad, or marciano would have been as successful in Ali's era as Ali was,, but on the other hand I think duran, ortiz, ike, armstrong, pernell, floyd, etc would achieve the same success has leonard did,,
I personally feel that leonard gets high praise for being the one of the first true well known lightweight kingpins and dominant champ,, Now nearly a hundred years later, we have a long history of champs, so it is harder to stand out

But who has a better resume? I don't think anyone has. In my eyes it's quite clearly the best LW resume there is. You said he doesn't have the resume to be #1 at LW, but how? He clearly does.

Leonard isn't "universally" considered #1 at LW I wouldn't say, that tends to be Duran. In my eyes Duran's LW resume absolutely pales in comparison to Leonard's.

Saying "So and so would beat everyone Leonard beat" doesn't really mean anything that's hypothetical. And it goes both ways. I'd pick Leonard to beat everyone Duran beat, I'd pick him to beat everyone Gans beat, I'd pick him to beat everyone Whitaker beat.

What it boils down to, to me, is Leonard has the best resume IMO at LW so I rank him #1. Not only that but he's also one of the most skilled LW's ever.

You say you can't see how he could be considered the #1. Well here's two reasons; His resume, and his skills. Both are arguably the best ever at LW.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

But who has a better resume? I don't think anyone has. In my eyes it's quite clearly the best LW resume there is. You said he doesn't have the resume to be #1 at LW, but how? He clearly does.

Leonard isn't "universally" considered #1 at LW I wouldn't say, that tends to be Duran. In my eyes Duran's LW resume absolutely pales in comparison to Leonard's.

Saying "So and so would beat everyone Leonard beat" doesn't really mean anything that's hypothetical. And it goes both ways. I'd pick Leonard to beat everyone Duran beat, I'd pick him to beat everyone Gans beat, I'd pick him to beat everyone Whitaker beat.

What it boils down to, to me, is Leonard has the best resume IMO at LW so I rank him #1. Not only that but he's also one of the most skilled LW's ever.

You say you can't see how he could be considered the #1. Well here's two reasons; His resume, and his skills. Both are arguably the best ever at LW.

Fair enough,, you make valid points and use good logic, cant argue that much,,
I do think his resume is comparable to duran, etc..
But i honestly believe duran, floyd, ortiz, pernell are better skilled fighters IMO,,, Leonard might be better fundamentally than armstrong, but i also think armstrong would beat him H2H

Just my 2 cents,, thanks for your input IronDan, always a pleasure hearing your thoughts

[IronDanHamza]

Fair enough,, you make valid points and use good logic, cant argue that much,,
I do think his resume is comparable to duran, etc..
But i honestly believe duran, floyd, ortiz, pernell are better skilled fighters IMO,,, Leonard might be better fundamentally than armstrong, but i also think armstrong would beat him H2H

Just my 2 cents,, thanks for your input IronDan, always a pleasure hearing your thoughts

Yeah it's comparable perhaps but I think it's a tough ask to say Duran's is better. Where I'm sitting, Leonard's is certainly better and I'd also say it's the best. I don't see anyone with a better resume at LW.

Mayweather might be more skilled but what's he done at LW? Very little in comparison to Leonard. That's why skills and ability and H2H match ups only have a small part on where and why I rank a fighter.

I also think Leonard is at the very least arguably more or as skilled as any LW that's lived. It's atleast arugable. He's extremely skilled, his resume shows it, his tapes show it.

And for those two reasons is why I rank him #1.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Yeah it's comparable perhaps but I think it's a tough ask to say Duran's is better. Where I'm sitting, Leonard's is certainly better and I'd also say it's the best. I don't see anyone with a better resume at LW.

Mayweather might be more skilled but what's he done at LW? Very little in comparison to Leonard. That's why skills and ability and H2H match ups only have a small part on where and why I rank a fighter.

I also think Leonard is at the very least arguably more or as skilled as any LW that's lived. It's atleast arugable. He's extremely skilled, his resume shows it, his tapes show it.

And for those two reasons is why I rank him #1.

What fights do you consider to be leonard's best, that are viewable,,,

I havent seen any good quality footage really, Do you have any suggestions?

[IronDanHamza]

What fights do you consider to be leonard's best, that are viewable,,,

I havent seen any good quality footage really, Do you have any suggestions?

Considering the time it's been difficult to get full and good quality footage but there's some out there and from what's out there you can see he's very gifted and very skilled.

The Lew Tendler fight for example, the first one.

[Sugar Adam Ali]

Considering the time it's been difficult to get full and good quality footage but there's some out there and from what's out there you can see he's very gifted and very skilled.

The Lew Tendler fight for example, the first one.

Yes, i have seen that one, but not sure if it was the first one, i assume so because it didnt have a number next to it, but im not 100% certain

From what i have seen, he does look to be really gifted, but i havent seen enough to declare him the GOAT at 135

[Young Money]

So do you now see why he is considered the king of lightweights?

[Sugar Adam Ali]

So do you now see why he is considered the king of lightweights?

No,, why do you think he is??????

Is he better than duran, pernel, ortiz, armstrong, ross,


He may have a great resume, but I cant say for certainty that he is #1 of all time

Could lew tendler beat buchanon??? or lou ambers???


Why do you think he is #1, or do you just say that because others have told you that

[Humean]

i have been reading alot about benny leonard recently, and the thing that sticks out most to me, is that i have no idea how people rate him #1 ATG at lw..

Dont get me wrong, he seems like a helluva fighter, good all around boxer, but his resume IMO is not that impressive enough to be the lightweight GOAT..

historians claim he was a slick defender, with good movement, and good punching power and ring IQ, but when you really break it down, from what i have read, his ko% was less than 50%, and he was stopped few times early in his career, when he was prime, and later in his career, so i dont understand where all this great defense talk comes from, and he was stopped by very random people sometimes,,

I think he is an ATG and HOFer caliber fighter, i just dont see him being the GOAT at lw, and in all honesty i dont think he measures up to carlos ortiz, pernell, duran, chavez, or even arguello

I really cant understand how he is the GOAT or even top 3,,, Dont get me wrong, i think he was a great fighter, just dont think he deserves all the high praise he gets as being the GOAT of lw....


Can someone explain to me or set me straight on benny leonard

1: He's an old guy who was highly rated at the time, boxing historians seem to rate fighter's higher the farther into the past that they fought.

2: Ray Arcel basically thought he was the best, i'm not sure if he ever specifically stated that Leonard was better than Duran but he might have. Many boxing historians pretty much take his word for gospel regardless of what he is saying. Arcel basically thought that boxing was declining and that the guys from his earlier days, such as Leonard, were better than the later incarnations. Personally I think it is the boxing specific equivalent of older people always thinking everything is going to the dogs, a ubiquitous phenomenon.

3: Quite a substantial number of older fighters had surprisingly low knockout percentages despite being claimed to being quite big punchers. There are many possible explanations for this, the lover of the older fighters say that the competition was so much better then that it was harder to knock guys out then than it is now. Another possible, and surely more likely, explanation is that they just weren't as powerful as more recent punchers because their skill level and physical conditions was lower.

You did dispute it, didn't you? You said that his resume isn't strong enough to be the #1 at LW.

From where I'm sitting, that's the best LW resume that I've seen, atleast.

It doesn't matter if they could beat the guys listed. What matters is their resumes and none of their resumes compare to Leonard's IMO.

I think Arguello would beat most of those guys. I think Mayweather would beat most of those guys. I don't rank neither even anywhere near to Leonard. Not even anywhere close to Top 10 either.

Leonard is extremely skilled aswell. Pretty much ticks every box.

Surely this highlights, at least what I think is, a strange way of measuring greatness. Leonard undoubtedly defeated some of the best fighter's of his era around his weight class but how good were they? Surely it matters because it would seem to me to be strange to say that beating ten guys, who were the best of their era, ranks higher than some later fighter defeating five guys who were also the best of their era but who were also significantly better than the fighters that the old fighter defeated. Do you believe that the best lightweights of the 1920s were as good as the best lightweights of the 1970s? There are plenty of historians who seem to seriously think that and the main premise of their argument to justify that odd conclusion is that there were more fighter's then and that a deeper pool should produce better fighters. However nobody ever seems to provide evidence of the claim that there were more active fighters then compared to later periods.

Ken Buchanan and De Jesus are surely quite considerably better than any of Benny Leonard's defeated opponents, and that includes Freddie Welsh.

Also the number and quality of the video evidence doesn't really offer evidence of Leonard's greatness although admittedly it works both ways as it doesn't disconfirm it either. In short, the video evidence reveals almost nothing, which is unfortunate as I'd love to have seen good quality footage of Leonard in his prime.

[StarshipTrooper]

No,, why do you think he is??????

Is he better than duran, pernel, ortiz, armstrong, ross,

He may have a great resume, but I cant say for certainty that he is #1 of all time

Could lew tendler beat buchanon??? or lou ambers???

Why do you think he is #1, or do you just say that because others have told you that

Yes, actually Tendler could beat Buchanan who was a very good but not great fighter.

That being said, I rate the Lightweights this way:

1. Duran
2. Leonard
3. Gans
4. Whitaker

I'm not a strictly resume guy like many are. If I was then Leonard would be in the top spot. It's far and away the best resume in the weight class.