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 03-30-2012, 07:11 AM   #61
Flea Man
มวยสากล
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: @ferociousflea
Posts: 39,875
vCash: 75
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

Quote:
Originally Posted by lora View Post
Thinblack walks among us like an uncaring onmipotent god casting his pearls to us swine.

Who else could get people talking enthusiastically about such a tired worn out topic that barely got a page worth of replies 4 years ago.
He's certainly inoffensive, if a little mischievous.
Flea Man is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 03-30-2012, 11:56 AM   #62
KuRuPT
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,840
vCash: 500
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

The logic in this thread is astounding....

People know Duran wasn't at his prime weight ( SRL Was) people know Duran blew a lot in between fights, including the first fight (SRL knew and specifically referenced this and getting a rematch quickly) Duran was clearing not the same fighter at Montreal.... Yet all these factors don't count because... because... Duran just like to make excuses? Sorry these are facts in evidence that should be and are factored into SRL win.
KuRuPT is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 12:33 PM   #63
MagnaNasakki
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,829
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAG1965 View Post
they are 2-1.. Since I payed for a PPV fight between the middlweight champ at the time (Duran) and the supermiddlweight champ (Leonard) for it not to count. Had Duran won in 1989 people would be saying how he proved he was better than Leonard by beating him twice.
Ray wins and Duran is old. Ray wins the second fight and Duran didn't train. Benitez beats Duran and Duran didn't train. Hearns beats Duran and Duran didn't train. Duran beat Moore and Barkley and the greatest wins of all time. There is a pattern here, and the fact is these were his fights against the best and quickest fighters he ever fought.
They are 2 and 1, yes. Reason I rate three lowest, honestly, is because the fight itself was a non starter. Neither guy wanted to throw punches, the faster guy least further removed from his prime won rounds with no damage done. Meh.

The first two meant something. In Montreal, a lightweight moving up outdueled a fired up welterweight ATG trying desperately to knock him out. He demonstrates a beard of iron, underrated offensive and defensive skills, and a ferocity that was perhaps unrivaled in boxing history as he refused to bow to Leonards bombs in the trenches, and simply gave his own back. Not until Mosley vs De La Hoya has a lighweight not yet grown into a welterweights frame beaten a dynamic champion larger than himself at his own game, and even then, never has it been done with the same stunning vigor as Duran managed. In the second fight, rather than be rendered meek by his first loss, said welterweight trains like a champion, and preys on his arrogant conqueror by handing him one of the most embarassing losses in history. Leonard took advantage of Duran's flaws as a fighter and professional, showed some of the best movement seen in a boxing ring, blazing fast hands, and a rare, rare brilliance; Rarely is an opponent so thoroughly outfoxed as Duran was that night.

Two amazing wins. The third, while technically a win, has none of the narrative or the accomplishment the first two.
MagnaNasakki is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 12:35 PM   #64
MagnaNasakki
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,829
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

Quote:
Originally Posted by KuRuPT View Post
The logic in this thread is astounding....

People know Duran wasn't at his prime weight ( SRL Was) people know Duran blew a lot in between fights, including the first fight (SRL knew and specifically referenced this and getting a rematch quickly) Duran was clearing not the same fighter at Montreal.... Yet all these factors don't count because... because... Duran just like to make excuses? Sorry these are facts in evidence that should be and are factored into SRL win.
They are excuses, though. Whatever the hell it was, one guy trained like a champion then came to the ring and fought a strong, brave, brilliant fight. The other didn't act like a champion, and was thus summarily dismissed from his status as one by his challenger.

Excuses, reasons. I personally don't give fighters passes for not training and fighting like champions. All that matters is making it to the ring having trained for battle and executing. If Duran gets a pass for blowing New Orleans, Leonard deserves a pass for actually fighting like a mad man to retain his belt in Montreal, and showing up in amazing shape to make Duran earn his win.
MagnaNasakki is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 01:32 PM   #65
KuRuPT
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,840
vCash: 500
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

Ummmm okay, you still aren't making sense of it though. We know Duran had already been fighting for near 10 years when he met Leonard the first time. We know he moved up two divisions from his optimal fighting weight to do battle with the prime peak weight leonard. There is no arguing these points at all. The are known facts that can't be discounted like you seem to be implying. How much weight you give to said factors can be relative depending on your views. However, dismissing them as facts all together, is well, silly if you don't mind me saying.

You are also forgetting another factor... having accomplished what he did.. it's natural that you lose some of your motivation like you had trying to accomplish such a lofty goal. That is just how it is. Doesn't make it an excuse nor give Duran a pass.. but just something that is natural in a good many people.

In conclusion, I don't think anybody is saying should be penalized for the win or not given credit for it. Well at least I'm not. What I am saying is, the facts in evidence can't be discounted and eliminated as non factors. No way, no how. It's not leonard's fault Duran didn't train like he should and wasn't the same fighter as Montreal. However, facts are facts.. and SRL didn't beat that same version of Duran.. which was already past his best weight and already been fighting for 10 years.
KuRuPT is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 04:28 PM   #66
Legend X
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: London
Posts: 2,378
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

There is something of a paradox with these situations.


On the one hand, someone might say "full credit to Leonard, he made Duran quit" ....

But on the other hand, they might say "Duran disgraced himself that night, it's unacceptable for a great fighter to quit without at least taking a beating." ... "A warrior goes out on his shield" ...

But if Leonard is to be fully credited for making Duran quit, then how can Duran be blamed for quitting ?
It was either a natural and unavoidable reaction forced upon him by Leonard's prowess , or it was a bad decision - a choice - on Duran's part.

Of course, it is possible to hold a vague opinion on the whole thing that kind of falls in the middle of all that and avoids the paradox.
I would probably say Leonard deserves full credit for the win, but I wouldn't say he made Duran quit. It also feels a little strange to say he beat a great fighter than night, but I guess he did.
Legend X is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 04:54 PM   #67
MAG1965
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Dallas,Texas.
Posts: 17,399
vCash: 1010
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnaNasakki View Post
They are 2 and 1, yes. Reason I rate three lowest, honestly, is because the fight itself was a non starter. Neither guy wanted to throw punches, the faster guy least further removed from his prime won rounds with no damage done. Meh.

The first two meant something. In Montreal, a lightweight moving up outdueled a fired up welterweight ATG trying desperately to knock him out. He demonstrates a beard of iron, underrated offensive and defensive skills, and a ferocity that was perhaps unrivaled in boxing history as he refused to bow to Leonards bombs in the trenches, and simply gave his own back. Not until Mosley vs De La Hoya has a lighweight not yet grown into a welterweights frame beaten a dynamic champion larger than himself at his own game, and even then, never has it been done with the same stunning vigor as Duran managed. In the second fight, rather than be rendered meek by his first loss, said welterweight trains like a champion, and preys on his arrogant conqueror by handing him one of the most embarassing losses in history. Leonard took advantage of Duran's flaws as a fighter and professional, showed some of the best movement seen in a boxing ring, blazing fast hands, and a rare, rare brilliance; Rarely is an opponent so thoroughly outfoxed as Duran was that night.

Two amazing wins. The third, while technically a win, has none of the narrative or the accomplishment the first two.
Duran being this small little guy moving up in weight another excuse and it is not true. The fact is Duran fought at 154 before Hearns,Leonard or Benitez ever did. As early as 1978. So the excuse he was this little guy is there to excuse him again. I am not sure why he gets considerations and excuses other fighters do not. I think he is great, but I just do not think his wins against top fighters is as great or numerous at all as some think. Dominant at lightweight yes, which is why people seem to think he could not lose as easilly as he did later. But those guys Hearns,Leonard,Benitez were a top notch level Duran never fought at lightweight. No matter what.
Duran did well and beat some very good fighters and dominated. Moved up and couldn't translate that dominance the way someone like Hopkins or even Duran's friend Hearns did. Great he is, but overrated a bit also if you look at his wins over the real top greats. He fought the greats inbetween some great wins over guys who were not great like Barkley and Moore. Hearns on the other hand beat Virgil HIll who was champ for 10 defenses and was undefeated 11 years after his first title. When Duran fought the greats he somehow was out of shape. When he fought Barkley and Moore he was not out of shape. This kind of distorted thinking if applied to Duran should be applied to other fighters if we are to be fair. If Duran's lightweight career was great that is fine, but then why excuse him for losses against Hearns or Leonard. Leonard outboxed everyone and Hearns knocked out most guys. Excuses just do not really work too well.
MAG1965 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 04:56 PM   #68
MAG1965
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Dallas,Texas.
Posts: 17,399
vCash: 1010
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

Quote:
Originally Posted by KuRuPT View Post
Ummmm okay, you still aren't making sense of it though. We know Duran had already been fighting for near 10 years when he met Leonard the first time. We know he moved up two divisions from his optimal fighting weight to do battle with the prime peak weight leonard. There is no arguing these points at all. The are known facts that can't be discounted like you seem to be implying. How much weight you give to said factors can be relative depending on your views. However, dismissing them as facts all together, is well, silly if you don't mind me saying.

You are also forgetting another factor... having accomplished what he did.. it's natural that you lose some of your motivation like you had trying to accomplish such a lofty goal. That is just how it is. Doesn't make it an excuse nor give Duran a pass.. but just something that is natural in a good many people.

In conclusion, I don't think anybody is saying should be penalized for the win or not given credit for it. Well at least I'm not. What I am saying is, the facts in evidence can't be discounted and eliminated as non factors. No way, no how. It's not leonard's fault Duran didn't train like he should and wasn't the same fighter as Montreal. However, facts are facts.. and SRL didn't beat that same version of Duran.. which was already past his best weight and already been fighting for 10 years.
Duran was not washed up in 1980. The man finished boxing over 20 years later. He was fighting 17 years and 35 fights after he was stopped by Hearns, and he was not fighting badly either.
MAG1965 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 05:26 PM   #69
Vanboxingfan
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,244
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAG1965 View Post
Duran being this small little guy moving up in weight another excuse and it is not true. The fact is Duran fought at 154 before Hearns,Leonard or Benitez ever did. As early as 1978. So the excuse he was this little guy is there to excuse him again. I am not sure why he gets considerations and excuses other fighters do not. I think he is great, but I just do not think his wins against top fighters is as great or numerous at all as some think. Dominant at lightweight yes, which is why people seem to think he could not lose as easilly as he did later. But those guys Hearns,Leonard,Benitez were a top notch level Duran never fought at lightweight. No matter what.
Duran did well and beat some very good fighters and dominated. Moved up and couldn't translate that dominance the way someone like Hopkins or even Duran's friend Hearns did. Great he is, but overrated a bit also if you look at his wins over the real top greats. He fought the greats inbetween some great wins over guys who were not great like Barkley and Moore. Hearns on the other hand beat Virgil HIll who was champ for 10 defenses and was undefeated 11 years after his first title. When Duran fought the greats he somehow was out of shape. When he fought Barkley and Moore he was not out of shape. This kind of distorted thinking if applied to Duran should be applied to other fighters if we are to be fair. If Duran's lightweight career was great that is fine, but then why excuse him for losses against Hearns or Leonard. Leonard outboxed everyone and Hearns knocked out most guys. Excuses just do not really work too well.
whether he was little or not isn't the issue. The issue is he fought fighters who were naturally bigger than him and elite fighters in their divisions. Duran was an elite fighter in a much lower division. he aged, gained weight and then held his own and in some cases beat these elite fighters in weight classes he shouldn't have even been fighting in.

How many fighters could have gone past their prime, aged, and still held their own against someone like Hager, at top 5 ATG, who today would be 4 weight classes higher than Duran was in his peak. And he did in fact beat an ATG top 5 fighter who was 2 weight classes higher than him.

How can you not marvel at these accomplishments?

If nothing else it leaves zero doubt as to what Duran's capabilities were. I respect this much more than someone ducking to preserve their record and not taking the risk of losing.

Last edited by Vanboxingfan; 03-30-2012 at 07:03 PM.
Vanboxingfan is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 06:22 PM   #70
MAG1965
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Dallas,Texas.
Posts: 17,399
vCash: 1010
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vanboxingfan View Post
whether he was little or not isn't the issue. The issue is he fought fighters who were naturally bigger than him and elite fighters in their divisions. Duran was an elite fighter in a much lower division. he aged, gained weight and then held his own and in some cases beat these elite fighters in weight classes he shouldn't have even been fighting in.

How many fighters could have gone past their prime, aged, and still held their own against someone like Hager, at top 5 ATG, who today would be 4 weight classes higher than Duran was in his peak. And he did in fact beat an ATG top 5 fighter who was 2 weight classes higher than him.

How can you not marvel at these accomplishments?
That is my point Duran was a great. And he fought well in 1983 and 1984, just that regardless of age he could not and never did beat many greats. Ray is the only one, and in the rematch Ray would easily. As far as which fighter fought well 10 years after he won a title at a higher weight. Hearns was the age Duran was when he fought Virgil HIll in 1991 and Hearns actually beat Virgil Hill at 175 undefeated 10 title defenses.

Two weight classes are not a big deal anymore. We have seen numerous fighters move up and fight better at higher weights. Duran was having weight problems and fought at 154 before Hearns and Benitez and Ray ever did. Holding your own againt Hagler? Good but he didn't win. Going 15 is not a win. Otherwise Roldan knocking down Hagler should get more credit. That was not a war. It was a tentative counterpunching fight. And 2 years before that Duran got pretty much outclassed by Benitez. My poiint about Benitez. If Duran was great because he held his own with Hagler, that means people are saying he was still great. And around that time he lost to Benitez and Hearns in pretty convincing fashion. I have always said Duran was still fighting well in 1983 and 1984, but that he was fighting better guys. He did beat Minchillo easily in 1981 and he was good. But Benitez was just great. So was Hearns. The point is Duran had not diminished much and many guys had moved up and won titles and had great fights. Hearns,Spinks,Leonard,Hopkins,Jones, Chavez to name a few.. Holyfied How is Duran doing something the others did and actually had no excuses doing so much greater?? And still Duran fought his greatest opponents after lightweight.
MAG1965 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 06:25 PM   #71
MAG1965
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Dallas,Texas.
Posts: 17,399
vCash: 1010
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

And people say Duran was great because he could beat Barkley and win a title in 1989 5 years after Hearns beat him. yeah he is great. Yet if someone says he lost to Benitez 7 years before Barkley they say he was old and over his weight class. If I say he fought at 154 before Hearns,Benitez and Leonard no one responds to it. Fact is if Duran get credit for beating Barkley, people should credit for beating him even in 1989 the year he beat Barkley. Leonard beat him in the 3rd fight. Now in hindsight people say Duran was washed up. In Dec. of1989 Leonard had a hard fight with Hearns in June and people said Duran has a chance. Then Ray outclasses him and people say Duran is old. Had Ray lost people would have said this proves Duran is the greatest of all time, ignoring the Benitez,Hearns and Leonard fights of half a decade before.
MAG1965 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 07:15 PM   #72
Vanboxingfan
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,244
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAG1965 View Post
That is my point Duran was a great. And he fought well in 1983 and 1984, just that regardless of age he could not and never did beat many greats. Ray is the only one, and in the rematch Ray would easily. As far as which fighter fought well 10 years after he won a title at a higher weight. Hearns was the age Duran was when he fought Virgil HIll in 1991 and Hearns actually beat Virgil Hill at 175 undefeated 10 title defenses.

Two weight classes are not a big deal anymore. We have seen numerous fighters move up and fight better at higher weights. Duran was having weight problems and fought at 154 before Hearns and Benitez and Ray ever did. Holding your own againt Hagler? Good but he didn't win. Going 15 is not a win. Otherwise Roldan knocking down Hagler should get more credit. That was not a war. It was a tentative counterpunching fight. And 2 years before that Duran got pretty much outclassed by Benitez. My poiint about Benitez. If Duran was great because he held his own with Hagler, that means people are saying he was still great. And around that time he lost to Benitez and Hearns in pretty convincing fashion. I have always said Duran was still fighting well in 1983 and 1984, but that he was fighting better guys. He did beat Minchillo easily in 1981 and he was good. But Benitez was just great. So was Hearns. The point is Duran had not diminished much and many guys had moved up and won titles and had great fights. Hearns,Spinks,Leonard,Hopkins,Jones, Chavez to name a few.. Holyfied How is Duran doing something the others did and actually had no excuses doing so much greater?? And still Duran fought his greatest opponents after lightweight.

First of all, Ray beating Duran at any point in time was to be expected and certainly as Duran aged, one would think it would get easier and easier as a fighter is farther and farther from his peak. News flash, age does that to fighters.

As for two weight classes not meaning much, most of the time that's true, but not when you guy you're fighting is considered one of the top 3-5 of all time, and is younger than you. That's a hugely significant accomplishment no matter how you spin it.

As for other fights who duplicate this, that's great, that's how they too get elevated into the elite status of fighters. Nobody's calling Leonard, Hearns, Holyfield, Jones, or Spinks bums. These are all very elite fights and their accomplishment noteworthy. Nor am I a fan of excusses. My thoughts are that if you get in the ring, it counts period, end of story. To say otherwise diminishes the accomplishment of the victor. That said, SRL in particular, wasn't afraid to use his economic clout to get any condition he felt would favor him in a match, and the rematch was a perfect illustration of this.

Last edited by Vanboxingfan; 03-30-2012 at 07:28 PM.
Vanboxingfan is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 07:16 PM   #73
MagnaNasakki
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 3,829
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

Duran gets a lot of passes for being the greatest of all time. I think, honestly, he earned them.

But I'm not just going to utterly discount New Orleans for Montreal. Duran failed to act like a champion before the fight, and was made to look amateurish for the first time in his career. Its a good win.

While nobody made their third fight a mismatch, I can't remember anybody thinking anything other than a Leonard victory was imminent.
MagnaNasakki is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 07:21 PM   #74
KuRuPT
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,840
vCash: 500
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

That is the thing... Even in N.O. Leonard didn't make him look amateurish.. Even an out of shape Duran who wasn't nearly as motivated... still took rounds from SRL. Please don't tell me you viewed all that showboating with little substances as making somebody look amateurish.
KuRuPT is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2012, 07:22 PM   #75
Nightcrawler
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Canada!!!!
Posts: 2,215
vCash: 500
Default Re: Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

Quote:
Originally Posted by MagnaNasakki View Post
Duran gets a lot of passes for being the greatest of all time. I think, honestly, he earned them.

But I'm not just going to utterly discount New Orleans for Montreal. Duran failed to act like a champion before the fight, and was made to look amateurish for the first time in his career. Its a good win.

While nobody made their third fight a mismatch, I can't remember anybody thinking anything other than a Leonard victory was imminent.
agreed. the first two fights give us something to judge on their respective skills, qualities and how they match up. the third does not
Nightcrawler 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 04:11 AM.


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