Originally Posted by MAG1965
yes I do. The variable was Ray in all 3 fights. Ray decides to fight Duran's fight he loses. Ray decided to box and fight his fight he wins. It is that simple to me. The ease with which Ray beat Duran in the 2nd and 3rd fights, coupled with Benitez easily being Duran and the Hearns fight showed speed of an elite were trouble for Duran. If you mention weight I will just say Duran fought at 154 as early as 1978, and as far as age. 29-32 years old is not old for a guy who won his last title at 38 and fought until he was 50. yet he did not fight the type of elites he fought in the 1980s.. Had he fought a guy like Roy Jones he would have lost again. Even the 30 year old Duran. Or had he fought Whitaker. I love Duran ,but speed of an elite was trouble for him. A warrior he was and he could be devastating and he fought everyone. But to give him credit in the Leonard fights and discard Benitez and Hearns just because it is favorable to him? That takes away from those greats.
What are we going to do with you, MAG? All this hyperbole I'm throwing out, and you just put it to shame. These are things you actually believe through and through. It would've been a disaster had Duran not gone hog mode and been in similar condition that he was that June. I don't excuse the loss for the simple belief that he was never going to regain that form no matter when the rematch took place. I don't see that style paying dividends if he'd fought the guy he faced in Montreal. Duran would be in supreme condition, track him down and cut him off -- Leonard hardly let his hands go at all. It was really a pretty terrible fight. You turning Duran's longevity against him has no basis in how long and when he was "prime". It's terribly obvious he was didn't wear the weight well whatsoever when he moved beyond 147 on a more permanent basis.