Is Leonard Vs Duran I one of the best fights ever, or atleast your top 5?

:happy :good

 

My favorite.

 

Well that solves that debate. Mag got owned..

 

yeah, Mag got owned. This is what happens when you have one person doing his homework and can think for himself, and another who just regurgitates crap he's read here and there

anyways, not a bad fight. I thought it was a little closer than most here called. I had Duran slightly ahead, with two rounds even

 

It doesn't match Marciano-Charles I in my humble opinion...how's that for controversial?

 

From a historical accomplishment viewpoint I think it ranks extremely high, but from an action packed fight, I could think of about a dozen I'd prefer to watch over this fight.

The Ward-Gatti trilogy, Holyfield-Bowe, Foreman-Lyle, Hagler - Hearns, and on it goes. Hell I even enjoy watching Vitali - Lewis more.

 

Dundee was a great corner man and he was great with the press. When he made excuses for his fighter the press ate it up. At the end of the day most losing fighters have an excuse but with Dundee`s fighters Ali and Leonard especially they are taken as gospel.

It was a great event and a good fast fight. Not close enough in reality to be at the very top. Ray Leonard was never able to take control of the fight from Duran or even hurt Duran. It was Duran`s night. The ebb and flow wasn't there.

 

Finally somebody who could put it in a well written article.

Though I've said it before too, Leonard was/would have been getting outboxed and it was simply safer inside as Duran would have less leverage inside as he would have had outside.

Also it's almost impossible to imagine that such a world class ATG like Leonard with an ATG trainer wouldn't have been able to change their gameplan midfight.

 

Who doesn't want facts. If you are saying Ray underestimated Duran by thinking that he was bigger than Duran and thought he would fight his fight and win because of that size. I agree.
Now about Duran in the rematch-Saying someone is out of shape cannot be fact or proven since it is an excuse, and Duran always had many excuses. It would have been much more convincing had he won the rematch and third fight. But he didn't so we have his word on why he lost. And the same excuse came out why he lost to Hearns and Benitez-the two other best fighters he fought in his career besides Leonard.
His excuses? I remember the day or so after the fight hearing that Duran had 2 gallons of water and a steak. Why didn't he do these things in other times in his career. Yet the most important night of his fight and this excuse comes out.
Duran was not better than Ray. In their head to head matchup Ray outclassed him 2 times to one. And when Ray did fight Roberto's fight, Ray had it a close fight. When Ray beat Duran the final two times, Duran quit the first loss and in my mind it was further apart than the scorecards would have shown and lost every round the third fight. Ray is better head to head and when it counted. He beat greats and proved more against elite fighters, if that is how you rate great fighters. Would you not agree Ray beat greater fighters than Ray? And Ray beat Thomas Hearns, Wilfred Benitez and Marvin Hagler, guys Duran was knocked out against, easily outpointed.

Ok so you will say he was 30-32 when he fought them and too heavy.. 30-32 is not old. That is relatively young. He fought another 20 years after Benitez, and 17 more years after Hearns and 35 fights. Seriously. That is washed up? He was fighting at 168 by that time in 2001, And he fought at 154 earlier than Hearns,Benitez or Leonard did in 1978.
You talk about fable, well the fable is that Duran was out of shape when he fought Leonard, as was the same story or rumor when he fought Benitez in 1982 and Hearns in 1984, yet somehow for Moore and Barkley he comes in shape. Moore and Barkley stood in front of him. But to talk about this out of shape fable you say. The greats he fought he was out of shape. Why should I change my story or say different things since the facts are so compelling and complete-the same points I have been saying for almost 30 years is proof that Duran could not match up to Leonard.

Ray figured him out and could not beat him since the first fight. Sort of like Michael Carbajal beat Humberto Gonzales in the first fight. Knocked him out. The final two fights Humberto outboxed Michael. Figuring out a fighter is one of the marks of a great fighter.
Duran is better than Ray because he won the first fight where Ray fought his fight simply because Ray was upset with Duran for calling Juanita a name? Then a person has to ignore the last two fights and the Hearns,Benitez and Hagler fights.
The variable was Leonard and not Duran. Leonard moves he wins and he doesn't move he loses. And all Duran fans have is that Duran was out of shape or he drank two gallons of water, something he never did in 73 previous fights? And this is the facts you are putting out there? Or that Dundee said this yet ignoring what Leonard said or what Leonard did.
Put fight one from June of 1980 next to the rematch in Nov. of 1980 so you can see both and compare Ray's movement. That will clear it up. I urge any of you to do it and compare Duran to himself and Ray to himself in those 5 months. Duran is fighting the same but not Leonard. This isn't even a mystery. I mentioned Carbajal vs. Gonzales, Well let's compare two other top guys. Manny and JMM. Pacman better than JMM is probably fact, yet there is room for debate. This is closer, and you can give JMM a little bit of weight if you want just with the knockout and the closer fights, not just one win in the first fight..
Duran/Leonard it is clear Ray was the more versatile fighter. He won the last two fights, and he won in Nov. 1980 when Duran had the welterweight title. At a weight he was comfortable at since 1978.
When a fighter gave Duran angles and moved and was fast Duran looked like a plodder who tried to rock and feint his punches as he moved forward. When a fighter stood in front of Duran he looked great since if that fighter would lead and start to swallow up and opponent with his angles and speed. he had great inside speed and angles, but you gave him distance and speed, he was not as effective, and he it took moving up to welt. and a better level of fighter to show this flaw. The third fight confirms how Leonard would have never lost to Duran anytime after June of 1980.
What Dundee says before the first fight or about it really doesn't mean much when you read what he said after the fight to Ray privately. After the fight Dundee told Ray next fight we will frustrate this guy and you will drive him crazy. Ray said "I tried to beat this man at his own game. I tried my damdest and I almost won" The next time I was going to fight my fight" Even Ray's cornerman Dave Jacobs said after the fight " that was Sugar Ray Leonard" Duran got Sugar Ray Leonard in the rematch, and not Ray Leonard who he fought the first time. And he did.
Leonard being 100 percent and Duran 40 percent the previous 5 fights doesn't really mean much since Ray did prove more against Benitez than Duran did against Palomino for example. Who really thinks Carlos was greater than Wilfred?
Ray knocking out Benitez and Green are good wins, but when he fought Duran he still was not fully the superfighter he was when he fought Hearns. Ray easily dominated Duran after the first fight. They were not even tough fights. That is why Ray fought Duran in 1989. He knew it would be easy.
Leonard's strategy was sound? Fighting Duran and getting in his range for that left hook in round 2? If that strategy was sound he wouldn't have moved his feet immediately in the rematch in round one and drove Duran crazy and started to incorporate the bolo punch, which was sort of the psychological breakdown after pretty much showing Duran he couldn't win.
If it was sound why would he change his style and move, since you say Dundee said when you move away from Duran was more effective. Not true when you look at how he did vs. the greats. And even with Dejesus who was not great but HOF level, when Dejesus knocked down Duran with that left hook they were not fighting in close, they were standing far enough apart and Dejesus sort of jumped in with the punch. Duran then stepped inside in that fight and knew he had to get closer. So that whole nonsense of moving further was just Dundee's way to psychologically play games. Duran waited for guys to come inside and he was a master, but not many guys knew how to or were good enough to fight him with distance except Ray- or until Ray. Then came Benitez and Hearns. Too fast.

And the fact Ray said he had no alternative is at odds with Janks Morton's comments who said that he told Ray after the fight 'next time let's fight our fight and stay on the outside". And Ray just nodded and said. I knew what I had to do, but I wanted to fight this man. Well the rematch proves what Ray was thinking, and what Jacobs and Morton knew he could do. So you say Ray winning the second and third fights are fable, yet Duran being out of shape is fact?

Question is. How many greats did Duran beat? Regardless of the excuses for when he lost to greats, and if he was old by the time he fought Leonard and Hearns and Benitez at 29-32, who were the great fighters and what were the accomplishments at lightweight which puts him over Ray and proves he was a better fighter than Ray?

 

He wrote good response. I welcome any discussion. About what he said. He talks of myths and fable's, yet Duran coming out with excuses were meant to obscure Ray's win over Duran in November of 1980. And that worked for the most part, yet most people still think Ray had Duran's number after June of 1980.

 

Mag, the thread question was:

This content is protected

You stated that "Ray should have fought his fight."

My post was in response to that comment. In Leonard-Duran 1, Ray did fight his fight. He fought exactly the fight that he and his trainer planned to fight and stated they were going to fight.

And he came up short.

What happened in other fights is not what was under discussion here. We were discussing Montreal, and a long screed about excuses and such in subsequent fights is not germane, nor does it alter the fact that when both men were at their very best, each fighting the fight they chose to fight, Duran won.

 

Just in case you didn't notice, as I mentioned in my original post, I was quoting extensively from a very good article by Springs Toledo who posts here under the name of stonehands89. The link to the entire article is in my first post.

 

Read his entire topic, extremely good read.
Would be good to make it a mandatory read for everyone on esb.

 

Leonard had no choice but to brawl after his legs went. He hadn't the legs to change tactic mid fight.
Its that simple.

 

That's where this thing falls apart. There are moments Duran has Ray on the ropes, and looks aimless and desperate with his shots, allowing Leonard to escape. Montreal Duran would have kept him there with accuracy and effective inside clinchwork.

Leonard shifted tactics, yes, but Duran transformed in quality.