duran v leonard greatness comparison.

[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 **** 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

[MAG1965]

Originally Posted by 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.

well then where are the greats Duran fought and beat on his resume at lightweight? That is what is lacking when comparing him to Leonard or any great who beat greats. Even Manny Pacman, who fought several greats and beat them. Duran is a great fighter. fighting all those years and division and fighting the likes of Dejesus,Hearns,Leonard,Benitez,Hagler,Barkley,Cuevas etc. No doubt. But his lack of wins against great fighters is what makes his resume a top 25 and not a top 10. A great fighter needs wins against fellow greats to get to that top level. More than just one where he won when a guy fought his fight and then comes back and wins easily. If people want to rate him as the greatest ever or close to it without great wins against great fighters, that is fine, but then the whole ranking system for great fighters will be inaccurate and called into question, and seemingly based on fan favorites and charisma and not actual accomplishments against greats in great circumstances. Ray proved when the pressure was on against different styles that he could outbox, outpunch ,outthink any fighter and style. Duran did not. Not to be rated over Ray or to be rated top 10. Top 25 yes. He is a great fighter, my points are that not Duran is not top 10 or over Ray because he lacks dominant wins against elites, regardless of excuses that he was small or didn't train. Eliminate the excuses and everything else. What win does Duran have which ranks over Ray's to wins?

[Unforgiven]

Duran is clearly greater.
He dominated lightweight, earned his shot at the champion, beat him quite convincingly, reigned for 7 years, making I think 12 consecutive defenses.
Then he moved up to welterweight, and earned his shot at the champion by beating ranked welters, and beat the champion Leonard quite convincingly I thought.

Leonard did less at welterweight than Duran did at lightweight, beat a good champ, lost the title to Duran in his 2nd defense and regained it, he did beat some great fighters but retired instead of establishing a comparable reign, and when he moved up to challenge Hagler he didn't earn that shot at all and didn't really win very convincingly at all, imo.

Post-1980, Duran did more than Leonard did post-1987.

[MAG1965]

Originally Posted by orriray59

He beat Sugar Ray Leonard, a "fellow great." Probably the most meaningful victory of the Fabulous 4, too. Sometimes lauded as the greatest single victory in the history of boxing.

What about his win over Buchanan? A top 10 British fighter all-time by many accounts, and Duran battered him.

Buchanan is not an ATG fighter. A very good HOF fighter and a nice guy. I met him once. There is no way a win over a green Leonard in June of 1980 when Ray fought his fight is the best win of the fab 4. Ray at the time was on the second defense of his first title reign. Just the fact he fought Duran's fight because of a comment Duran made to Ray shows Ray's immaturity. Ray was not yet in this prime when Duran bet him in June of 1980, and Duran did not dominate him and Ray actually fought Duran's fight. Ray later learned the whole game and how to fight his fight and style and to get considerations in fights for psychological advantage.

Best win of the fab 4? Honestly? It could be Hagler over Hearns just by how Marvin put his all mentally and physically and denied losing or being hurt. Best knockout is Hearns over Duran. Biggest upset is Leonard over Hagler. Actuallyt the Duran/Leonard fights turned out to be the most onesided fights of the fab 4 matchups.

[MAG1965]

Originally Posted by Unforgiven

Duran is clearly greater.
He dominated lightweight, earned his shot at the champion, beat him quite convincingly, reigned for 7 years, making I think 12 consecutive defenses.
Then he moved up to welterweight, and earned his shot at the champion by beating ranked welters, and beat the champion Leonard quite convincingly I thought.

Leonard did less at welterweight than Duran did at lightweight, beat a good champ, lost the title to Duran in his 2nd defense and regained it, he did beat some great fighters but retired instead of establishing a comparable reign, and when he moved up to challenge Hagler he didn't earn that shot at all and didn't really win very convincingly at all, imo.

Post-1980, Duran did more than Leonard did post-1987.

The only thing I can say about title defenses is who were they against. Duran did not fight elites in that reign. I wish he would have found a way to fight Arguello or Pryor or Cervantes at 140 to see how he would have done. I think Arguello is a much tougher fight than expected for Roberto. As for title defenses, Virgil Hill has 25 or so, so by that we can say he is greater than Hearns even if Hearns easily outboxed him.