duran v leonard greatness comparison.

[Vanboxingfan]

Originally Posted by MAG1965

It is easy for me. Leonard easily greater. He beat great fighters, Duran only beat Ray who then beat him easily in the rematch. It isn't even a little greater, it is significant to me.

Like with was unexpected..lol

[lufcrazy]

Mag

[Gesta]

Originally Posted by MAG1965

Duran didn't jump 2 divisions. he fought at 154 as early as 1978 before Hearns,Leonard and Benitez fought there. Duran never knocked out a great fighter and only beat one great in Leonard, who then outclassed him the last two times they fought. Ray beat 4 great fighters in his career, I think that proves he is greater. Duran had the longer career and fought greats, but didn't beat them and that is significant. I think Duran is very overrated as far as wins over greats. Pernell and Floyd's style would have probably beaten him rather easily, yet I think Duran is greater. Stylewise he could not deal with the fast guys who didn't let him fight his fight. The faster counterpunchers beat him easily.

Duran was a carrer LW, Ray was a carrer WW, Hagler was a carrer MW. Pretty simple really.

Duran also fought at 154 before Roy Jones Jr too.

Ray had too fight Duran when he was out of shape to get the win in his own division & Hearns had too find a JR division to be a champ in.

Duran KO'd Buchanan , DeJesus , etc...

Floyd had to retire at WW , cause Margorito , Cotto , Williams etc.. were coming good , I think that is safe to say that if Duran was around he would of 'retired' then too.

[MAG1965]

Originally Posted by Gesta

Duran was a carrer LW, Ray was a carrer WW, Hagler was a carrer MW. Pretty simple really.

Duran also fought at 154 before Roy Jones Jr too.

Ray had too fight Duran when he was out of shape to get the win in his own division & Hearns had too find a JR division to be a champ in.

Duran KO'd Buchanan , DeJesus , etc...

Floyd had to retire at WW , cause Margorito , Cotto , Williams etc.. were coming good , I think that is safe to say that if Duran was around he would of 'retired' then too.

Ray's wins is why I think he was greater. Those 4 wins over all the others, something Hearns,Duran or Hagler did not do. Duran grew out of the lightweight division early enough. Ray was a natural 147,even 154 was a bit much for Ray, yet Duran fought better at 168 than Ray ever did.
Well the fact he fought at 154 before Roy Jones Jr. doesn't mean much. The significance of when he fought at 154 is with the greats he actually fought Benitez,Hearns,Leonard,Hagler. Two of those guys Benitez and Hearns fought him at 154, where people said he was too high in weight and old. Old at 30 for Wilfred and 32 for Thomas.

Ray fought his fight is the explanation I have, and since he won 2 fights easily, the variable had to be Ray. One can say Duran had to get Ray to fight his fight to win because like it or not Duran was one of Ray's easiest fights when Ray prepared and knew how to fight him. In 1989 he knew he would easily beat Duran in the rubber match. And won every round. People say Duran was old then, but so was Ray and still Ray beat him. Once Ray fought his fight Duran could not beat him.
Buchanan and Dejesus are good fighters. HOF, but not ATG fighters or close. The closest thing Duran got to knocking out an ATG is Cuevas, who is debatable as an ATG but a HOF fighter. A legend no doubt, but ATG? Borderline, and Pipino was at 154 in 1983 when they fought.
I admit, Duran fought them all, but he did not beat the greats. That I think should have been significant in rating his career, especially the question who is greater Ray or Duran. People say, well he was old and out of his best weight lightweight. But does his lightweight reign justify being ranked over Ray? I don't think so. So what does get him over the top? Having over 100 fights? He had a great career, but I don't see how it compares to Ray's wins.

[ETM]

Duran winning the Lightweight Title in dominating fashion against a respected champion and then defending it 12 times, 11 by Knockout over a 6 year period carries alot of weight.

Leonard didnt accomplish that. He lost his title early in his reign and got it back and had the eye injury. He had the ability to do it but I cant give him credit for what he mightve done.

He did have some high profile wins. The Hearns win was about as good as it gets in quality. Leonard didnt give Hearns the rematch the way Duran gave him one until 8 years later.

We dont know what wouldve happened had Tommy gotten a crack at Leonard in `82 when it shouldve happened. Hearns may have had some adjustments in the rematch the way Leonard adjusted to Duran in New Orleans.

My point is the consistant domination even in his prime wasnt there from Ray Leonard. He had less than 40 fights in his entire career. I think Duran had that many 2 or 3 years in.

[MAG1965]

Originally Posted by ETM

Duran winning the Lightweight Title in dominating fashion against a respected champion and then defending it 12 times, 11 by Knockout over a 6 year period carries alot of weight.

Leonard didnt accomplish that. He lost his title early in his reign and got it back and had the eye injury. He had the ability to do it but I cant give him credit for what he mightve done.

He did have some high profile wins. The Hearns win was about as good as it gets in quality. Leonard didnt give Hearns the rematch the way Duran gave him one until 8 years later.

We dont know what wouldve happened had Tommy gotten a crack at Leonard in `82 when it shouldve happened. Hearns may have had some adjustments in the rematch the way Leonard adjusted to Duran in New Orleans.

My point is the consistant domination even in his prime wasnt there from Ray Leonard. He had less than 40 fights in his entire career. I think Duran had that many 2 or 3 years in.

I see your point. 40 fights in a whole career is not that many, although Delahoya has about 40 himself doesn't he? Duran's lightweight competition was not that great, if it was defenses which matter Virgil Hill should be the greatest ever or Larry Holmes. Virgil had something like 25 title defenses on 4 title reigns. He didn't knock out everyone but he fought decent guys also, but not many greats, and the ones he fought (Hearns and Jones) he lost to.
Well I agree with you, Ray knew he slipped by Hearns when Tommy was a little green and the rematch might have been different. He tried to say he would give Tommy a rematch if Tommy admitted the fight was stopped at the right time, which Tommy said he could have continued.. But a fight with Hearns and Leonard in a rematch in 1982 could have been much better for Hearns, and I think Ray was burned out by the 2 Duran fights, Benitez and Hearns and other defenses. He had a bruising 2 and a half years. And they talked about him fighting Pryor, although Pryor did not get big until he beat Arguello in late 1982.
Maybe it is just me, but I rate greatness in how many greats you fought and beat. Fighting them does help a guys ranking and Duran fought them all, but beating them all is rare. Hearns or Duran or Hagler did not beat all 4 and Ray did, so he has to rank in my mind over all of them.. Leonard is 5-1-1 against Benitez,Hearns,Duran, Hagler, Hearns is 2-2-1 Hagler is 1-2 and Duran is 1-5. I cannot say a guy who lost to the best guys he ever fought is better than the guy who beat all those guys. Regardless of excuses or that Duran had 115 fights and fought for 35 years. Had Duran beaten Arguello that would have been a nice win, and also so he beat Arguello at lightweight and Cervantes and Pryor at 140.. He wouldn't need to beat Hearns,Benitez,Leonard,Hagler, but he didn;t beat those guys to beat the greats. Leonard did.

[MAG1965]

Originally Posted by ETM

Duran winning the Lightweight Title in dominating fashion against a respected champion and then defending it 12 times, 11 by Knockout over a 6 year period carries alot of weight.

Leonard didnt accomplish that. He lost his title early in his reign and got it back and had the eye injury. He had the ability to do it but I cant give him credit for what he mightve done.

He did have some high profile wins. The Hearns win was about as good as it gets in quality. Leonard didnt give Hearns the rematch the way Duran gave him one until 8 years later.

We dont know what wouldve happened had Tommy gotten a crack at Leonard in `82 when it shouldve happened. Hearns may have had some adjustments in the rematch the way Leonard adjusted to Duran in New Orleans.

My point is the consistant domination even in his prime wasnt there from Ray Leonard. He had less than 40 fights in his entire career. I think Duran had that many 2 or 3 years in.

Ray was smart. He knew when he won not to give a rematch where the guy can maybe turn it around. He beat Duran and Hearns and Hagler and didn't grant a rematch until he though Duran and Hearns were easier to beat. With Hagler I remember talk of a rematch, but neither guy wanted it, and I doubt Leonard would have done it.

[Body Head]

Leonard, no question.

[Bogotazo]

MAG, we know your position already. Just copy and paste quotes from now on and save yourself the trouble.

[Theron]

Personally i find Duran greater

[Addie]

It's difficult to fuck with Duran's career when you've only had 40 professional fights. He achieved something memorable in nearly every division he campaigned in. The title reign at Lightweight, beating Palomino and Leonard the way he did at 147lbs, returning from the grave to bludgeon Davey Moore at 154lbs, and then eventually chopping down 6'1 Barkley at 160lbs at the age of 37.

[anj]

They're in the same tier, yet Duran's greater. I rate Duran 6th All time and Leonard 11th All time.

Duran's wins:
Sugar Ray Leonard 1
ATG Ernesto Marcel
Ken Buchanan
Carlos Palomino
Davey Moore
Esteban De Jesus
Royal Kobayashi
Iran Barkley
Guts Ishimatsu
Saoul Mamby
I don't give Duran much props for beating Cuevas

The win against Sugar Ray Leonard confirmed that not only is Duran a regular ATG, but one of the best ATG's. If the second fight had taken place at 140lbs with Duran's earlier hunger, who knows what could have become. Either way, I acknowledge this is the worst that Leonard could have performed against Duran, hence why I have no issue in saying that Leonard is better than Duran at welterweight and is in fact #2 welterweight for me.

Duran beating the likes of Davey Moore, Iran Barkley when he was WAY past his prime added even more to his greatness.

For me, what cements him in the #6 position is losing by ONE point against Marvin Hagler - Duran being way past his prime.

[lufcrazy]

Duran lost to greats in their division when he bulked up.

But drain Benitez, hearns and Hagler down to lightweight and we'd see Duran bust them up as much as they did he.

[Hands of Iron]

Hard for Leonard to be considered greater divisionally considering he was beaten at his own weight by Duran himself... Sort of kills it, no? Then again, I'd very comfortably rate his wins over Hearns and Benitez above Buchanan and DeJesus. Duran's got an edge with his middle of the pack competition over his reign though era-contenders at that level arent all that distinguishable really. Leonard beat more rated welterweights from late 78-82 than Duran did lightweights from 72-78. Simply because he wasnt making them as title defenses doesnt hold too strong for me. Ray Robinson for instance had only five defenses of his title... Who cares? Ray cleaned out a lot of the division pre-title shot and that seems to go without much credit.

[lufcrazy]

I think there isn't daylight between them