is there anyway floyd could have beaten leonard?

[Ghazan]

Larry has NEVER debated with the severity that I have. You would have beaten him in a debate by now. Your not going to beat me because Im real and I dont let anyone get over on me without saying something real. Whether you want to admit it or not, SRL at his BEST is not even as dominant as Floyd at his WORSE. Floyd would possible STOP this guy. Accept it and move along.

This video doesnt tell you anything that you didnt already know prior. With or without this video you already know that its NO WAY SRL would beat Mayweather. But watch and enjoy anyways my lil dawg, No beef!

LOL..i think your a d1ck..but thanks for making this thread a superhit

[puga]

no , coz floyd would've *****ed out to get in the ring...

[Ham Porter]

I don't think you know how to use the word 'fallacy' properly.

No, my use of the term was fine. But hey, when you have no valid response.....

It was Hagler's last fight. Herp derp.

And this negates the fact that Hagler was a heavy favourite and expected to destroy Leonard how, exactly? Do you actually know anything about that era?

[StarshipTrooper]

Larry has NEVER debated with the severity that I have. You would have beaten him in a debate by now. Your not going to beat me because Im real and I dont let anyone get over on me without saying something real. Whether you want to admit it or not, SRL at his BEST is not even as dominant as Floyd at his WORSE. Floyd would possible STOP this guy. Accept it and move along.

This video doesnt tell you anything that you didnt already know prior. With or without this video you already know that its NO WAY SRL would beat Mayweather. But watch and enjoy anyways my lil dawg, No beef!

Just click the X Jackazz, you're just stealing oxygen around here. Seriously Larry, go find another place to play your moronic nuthugging games.

[MAXIMUS~RICO~13]

IMO Sugar Ray puts on a display against mayweather but, I am a big fan of Leonard !!!

[TEKGaming]

Leonards a bad fight for Floyd imo. You have a guy who is naturally bigger, more powerful, just as fast and as great an offensive fighter as Floyd is a defensive fighter. He would probably go the distance, but its hard to envision him being able to offensively make enough of a mark to get the decision. Leonard would be all over him constantly jabbing, coming from angles, flurrying, throwing power shots, Floyd would just get outworked and outfought.

Why is it so hard to envision? We saw glimpses of how he can lose in his fight vs Mayweather Sr., who's conditioning and skills as a boxer is nowhere near his son's. Lol....

[TEKGaming]

You won't another fighter of the last fifty years who fought a tougher level of competition - in succession - like Leonard did from 1978-1981, so the notion that he cherry-picked throughout his career is pure fallacy. The argument that he avoided Hagler carries about as much weight as the argument that Hagler avoided Michael Spinks.

Fallacy is an argument that uses poor reasoning. By calling my argument pure fallacy, you are claiming that there is substantial overwhelming evidence that SRL did not cherry pick, and that my reasoning contradicts either the available facts in a factual manner or it's own premise, in a purely subjective issue. And this is where your use of the word ends up being forceful, and it sounds more like you saw someone else use it and you decided to start using it yourself (lmao). It can be of your opinion that my reasoning wasn't sufficient, but as long as my reasoning is sound (meaning they are not contradictory to facts or within it's own system and premise), you can't call it "fallacy".

Smh, I have to educate these pseudo-intellectuals.

Also @ "even then" - as if Leonard was expected to even last more than a couple of rounds. The fact that it was so close and so competitive is of no credit to Hagler, believe me.

The fact that it was Hagler's last fight, regardless of who was expected to win by the majority of fans, is very telling of what stage Hagler was in in his career. Just like the majority of fans believed DLH had the advantage versus Pacquiao, but I was one of the few who quickly said DLH would lose or might even get knocked out the moment he took off his robe and his body looked like a zombie, yet people keep swinging that premise around to make the beat down more impressive than it was. I wasn't shocked, the fact most of everyone else was is just testament to how much lack of credibility most people actually have when it comes to analyzing matchups based on available data. If YOU were shocked, then you fall in the same category.

[MurkaMan]

Just click the X Jackazz, you're just stealing oxygen around here. Seriously Larry, go find another place to play your moronic nuthugging games.

I already told you if you think Im Larry then your entitled to your opinion! No beef my lil homie!

[BennyST]

Why is it so hard to envision? We saw glimpses of how he can lose in his fight vs Mayweather Sr., who's conditioning and skills as a boxer is nowhere near his son's. Lol....

How did we see this exactly? It was Leonard's 10th fight, he was still a brand new rookie, and yet he still dominated every single round, beat the absolute ****e out of him, hurt him nearly every round, then knocked him out.

If you want to play that game, let's look at Floyd having even more trouble with Ausgustus, Corley, Judah and that was in his prime as champion.

If Corley stunned him, Leonard knocks him clean out. If Ausgustus tagged him as much as he did and gave him his toughest fight, Leonard dominates.

Etc etc.

[dynomyte1444]

its weird that people say this person beats Floyd. No one has even come close to beating floyd soundly. Sugar would get beat