Hagler, Hearns and Leonard

I'll keep this short and ask a very simple question, did they arrive at the perfect time?

In the preceding 15 years to Leonard beating Benitez for the welterweight world title America had four world champions at middleweight and below none of whom had supremacy over their divisions. Did such a lack of talent in the lower divisions leave them screaming out for a new group of stars especially with the golden era of the heavyweights drawing to a close?

The champions in question were Cokes, Backus, Lopez and Chacon none of whom are considered to be greats by any stretch of the imagination with the latter two having strong ties to Mexico. Also to note that during that period each of Monzon, Napoles, Duran, Saldivar and Jofre had each dominated one of the divisions. Was there such a high level of interest in the heavyweight that the lower weights were largely forgotten or was is it just an anomalous era?

That's quite some stat Hammy. Certainly in the US heavy was always the glamour division. Also, the US has never dominated the lower weights, a matter of average size of population against the Mexicans for example, but even so it's a surprising stat.

As you state there are some obvious reasons. Some none american all time greats dominating their divisions, does restrict opportunities.

I'm inclined to think its one of those cyclical things, paucity of talent married to some unique talents from elsewhere.

We lament that mayweather never had a hearns or a Leonard to fight. It's just coincidence that some true greats came along at the same time... And at a time that coincided with the end of Ali, and a confused heavyweight picture. Easy to see why attention turned to the now talent laden welter/middle scene, especially with a media friendly face like Leonard at its core.

I wasn't too surprised by the lack of champions at bantamweight or flyweight but at the mid range weights featherweight to middleweight they have always seemed to have dominated.

You're more of a historian than me, but is some of that down to the US being the centre of pro boxing. Seems  like the Latins took over the lower weights primarily from around the 60's... Easier travel, better training facilities in those countries? I'm guessing, help me out here. Can't just be that the US stopped producing featherweights... They weren't all becoming US football players!

A part of it could be down to full integration of americans of jewish and italian descent, in the 30's and 40's in particular non natives of america had few options so turned to boxing. If we look at Saldivar, Duran and Monzon in particular they didn't defend against many americans so i'd say that they stopped producing talent of any sort. They had Bob Foster, the heavyweights and not a lot else.

For instance Marciano is the last heavyweight champion of italian descent and where there was once Ross, Leonard, Tendler, Baer, Attell, Rosenbloom amongst other fine jewish boxers even today there's none. There were always black champions but they seemed to be very isolated cases like an Armstrong, Robinson or Louis and again it wasn't until after Ali that colour no longer mattered.

So in short I think it could possibly just be social changes in America that contributed to it, Jews and Italians moving away from boxing with black boxers becoming frustrated with the past.