Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-11-2008, 08:52 AM   #1
redrooster
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,524
vCash: 1000
Default Which challenger was better

Recently I notced a debate between two of our fine posters (I won't say who) arguing over which challenger was the more worthy.

The choices were Duran 1983 version and Leonard 1987 version. Although I have much more respect for what Duran did coming out with no middleweight experience, doing the full 15 and facing a peak Hagler, I must be honest in my assessment and say that Leonard was also the faster, quicker, more versatile challenger even though he really didnt win either.

Though Leonard had been off for 3 years, he was much better prepared than he was for his last fight with Howard and was better than the Leonard who had been completely outboxed by Hearns. In fact, this was Leonard's career best performance. It was a great performance.

Of course, Hagler was shot which helps him of course and I don't think Ray could have successfully defended his title 'gainst the likes of Micheal Nunn.

I also don't buy the fact that Leonard collapsed from exhaustion or wouldn't have made the last 3 rounds. There is no evidence of that.

So who was actually the better challenger?
redrooster is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 07-11-2008, 09:37 AM   #2
Addie
MAB.
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK, England
Posts: 21,045
vCash: 842
Default Re: Which challenger was better

Quote:
Originally Posted by redrooster
Recently I notced a debate between two of our fine posters (I won't say who) arguing over which challenger was the more worthy.

The choices were Duran 1983 version and Leonard 1987 version. Although I have much more respect for what Duran did coming out with no middleweight experience, doing the full 15 and facing a peak Hagler, I must be honest in my assessment and say that Leonard was also the faster, quicker, more versatile challenger even though he really didnt win either.

Though Leonard had been off for 3 years, he was much better prepared than he was for his last fight with Howard and was better than the Leonard who had been completely outboxed by Hearns. In fact, this was Leonard's career best performance. It was a great performance.

Of course, Hagler was shot which helps him of course and I don't think Ray could have successfully defended his title 'gainst the likes of Micheal Nunn.

I also don't buy the fact that Leonard collapsed from exhaustion or wouldn't have made the last 3 rounds. There is no evidence of that.

So who was actually the better challenger?
The 1987 version of Leonard could no longer go 15 rounds, and he knew it, which is specifically why he asked for a 12 round fight with Hagler.

On that basis alone, I would make Duran the more worthy challenger because he could always go 15 rounds and at a pretty frenetic pace.

Ray also only had one fight in 6 years, whereas Duran had remained active throughout the 1980s.
Addie is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2008, 09:45 AM   #3
fists of fury
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: March for Revenge
Posts: 6,199
vCash: 1887
Default Re: Which challenger was better

Hagler in some ways fought a stupid fight against Leonard in that he gave away too many early rounds far too easily. I think he was probably a bit too cautious against Duran, but his gameplan was sound enough.

I'll have to think about this...
fists of fury is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2008, 09:45 AM   #4
redrooster
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,524
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which challenger was better

Quote:
Originally Posted by selfkill
The 1987 version of Leonard could no longer go 15 rounds, and he knew it, which is specifically why he asked for a 12 round fight with Hagler.

On that basis alone, I would make Duran the more worthy challenger because he could always go 15 rounds and at a pretty frenetic pace.

Ray also only had one fight in 6 years, whereas Duran had remained active throughout the 1980s.
That doesn't mean he could not go 15. We ae talking only three more rounds. Leonard had done 15 twice before and 14 with no apparant problems. What's more, he did 12 rounds two years later and was not breathing hard. He did the 12 with Norris even though he was outclassed. So how could he not make 15 at age 30?
redrooster is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 07-11-2008, 11:03 AM   #5
Stonehands89
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,269
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Which challenger was better

I'm a little confused about the question here. I believe that Leonard was the more formidable opponent for Hagler in terms of size, style, and age. But that only adds to my belief that Duran's stand against Hagler was more impressive when you look at the context of the challenge as well as the performance.

In fact, Dundee and Leonard studied Duran's performance against Hagler and used it as a blueprint for their own strategy. Duran formed his strategy on getting Hagler to lead, drawing him out, because Hagler tended to step than punch, step then punch. This allowed Duran to counter, angle around, and break his rythym.
Stonehands89 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013