What do you personally make of the No Mas fight?

I know you didn't say it, I was just making the point that Duran claiming he broke the warriors code is kind of bull.

 

Why did Jacobs quit? Seems like everyone knew but him? Why weren't there more stories about this stuff right away? Would have been big time news and Duran's ex-people certainly had every motives to spill the beans. Just seems odd to me. Not saying that it's false-- Duran's lack of discipline and dedication between fights was well noted-- but it strikes me as a bit of folklore that's grown out of hand. And I just don't see how having to lose 25 lbs of recently acquired food and beer weight in 10/11 weeks, for a man who was probably used to losing such weight in even less time, is the excuse that his fans are making it out to be here. Sorry, I just don't get it.

 

I don't pretend to have all the answers but let's hope we learn something when the movie comes out.

 

here it is,

Duran had to take this fight on Leonard's timetable, too much money on the table in the days when you had to earn yours.

He knew he had gotten Fuked into a quick rematch....and just after one of the greatest victories in boxing Roberto was hailed as a hero throughout NY, latin America and the world, a hero wining, dining and ballooning up close to 200 lbs.

he got caught out there, with Leonard running and clowning and pulling his bull**** and Duran said fuk this and quit, its that simple.

 

because he thought ray's body needed more recovery time, it's an understandable opinion that is based on ray and has little to do with duran.

because he wasn't training properly, easy to lose in 10 weeks, not so easy in the last couple after not training properly for majority of the time.

i don't understand what's not to get? is there a more likely reason for someone who spent a decade at lightweight use diuretics to barely make 147 than not training properly and being overweight? i really can't see another reason for it.

why is it an excuse? why can't it just be what happened? there actually is a bull**** excuse people make using his almost certainley unnecessary hospital trip to imply he had something more serious wrong with him, that is the excuse that fanboys use and I have not mentioned it.

How about you post a timeline and a bunch of quotes to show duran actually did train well and was in good shape?

 

i can understand this but you are taking it too far imo, and saying he didn't train properly (at least when i am doing it) is as much of a criticism of him as a proffesional boxer as it is an excuse for losses.

 

Exactly.

 

This pretty much sums it up for me. I will add that Duran said after he made the stomach cramp excuse that he just figured he'd get in better shape for the rubber match, but never happened....at least not til years later.

 

That's fair. I don't doubt that he had a rough training camp, although like I've said, he's had to lose just as much weight in less time before. I guess what bothers me about the narrative here are two things:

1) I don't buy the story that they decided to make the fight as quickly as possible because they saw Duran looking fat and out-of-shape one day (don't remember it exactly). Seems at odds with the other version where Leonard decides that he wants a rematch while he's by himself and then tells his people to make it happen right away.

2) Given that Duran had long been a dominant fighter despite his weight issues, I don't like that people try to act as if this is the primary explanation for the difference in the two fights. In my experience, this is a line of reasoning that only makes sense for people who like to read about boxing but don't really know how to watch it and what to look for. Bottom line is that Leonard fought a very different strategy, one that would have been just as effective against the legendary "Montreal Duran" too.

 

he never had to lose that much then fight someone as good as leonard tho.

1- I don't know about the first story, ray was in hawaii and duran in panama/new york, them meeting seems unlikely based on the short timeframe and geography.
Another quote from ray was that people were telling him the fight was close and he could take duran, so while the actual decision to persue the rematch immediately was supposedly made alone on a beach, he hadn't been in isolation for weeks or anything.

2- why can't ray have fought a smarter fight and duran have been in worse shape?
there are many quotes that duran went way beyond his previous indulgences, he had just gone from a very well regarded fighter to a superstar millionaire, given what we know about the rest of his career and weight gain later on, him acting like that makes sense to me. all the parties involved, including his opponent, coming together to make up stuff about him not preparing well makes far less sense.

You can say the no mas tactics would have been more effective than what he did in montreal, but i don't see enough to say equally effective.

just because an argument gets oversold by some people doesn't mean there isn't a basic truth to it or that you should go wildly in the other direction when there is a lot of evidence to support the side that some are going over the top on(including the fight footage which imo shows duran looking puffier than in montreal)

you've been using this site long enough to know that the prime motivators for a fairly large % of posts are to pump up/denegrate a fighter, either because of emotional attachments or deliberate trolling, and when those posts are made there is no objectivity anyway so it doesn't matter what source they are working off.

I also doubt there are many people on the site who would read about a fight before they watch it.

p.s I own 4 boxing books, 3 were presents(including the duran one), the sole reason i started using this site was to put context to what i was watching on youtube. yet when i watch the fight it looks pretty clear to me both that duran is not in as good shape and ray is using different tactics with more success, so i could say just as easily that you don't know what to look for, but there is no constuctive purpose to that.

 

What do I make of it?

The fight is proof that Leonard had an extra dimension that Duran could not cope with. Now both at their peak saw Duran 100%, relentless and unstoppable. A Duran at about 90% didn't quite have the ferocity, could not match the foot speed and movement and was made to look stupid.

I think it means Leonard won the series.

But I also think peak for peak Duran had proved his point.

So yes, that night Leonard took his rightful place as the best boxer in the world, but he did so against a lesser version of the man who beat him in Montreal. That isn't an excuse, the better man won, but it is a fact.

 

It is hard to say watching fight 1 and 2 it is clear it wasn't the same Duran. There was no fire, he moved slow almost no reaction or timing and soft in comparison, Leonard looked good but definitely knew he could not stand and fight with Duran to win.

The reasons why he quit is something we can debate forever Duran is the only one who knows. He fought at the pace of a sparring session.

There are some good insight on the fight happening when it did, Duran letting himself go and tried to postpone the rematch so he be better prepared. The cramp thing I doubt but Duran gave all the indications of someone who wasn't prepared to fight mentally or physically.

My personal thoughts at the time was I was shocked he quit but looking back at his career pre and post the fight IMO doesn't hurt him in my view as far as his image as a ATG but it can hurt his standing in the pantheon of greats. There are so many old timers accused of quitting, throwing fights, cheating tactics and everything else, I don't view this situation as any different. He wasn't ready tried to postpone promoters wouldn't let him and he quit during the fight.

I am sure if Duran knew what it would do to his legacy with Panama he would rather of just took the loss on the promoters terms instead of his own terms.

 

You do realize that in movies they are allowed creative control in movies and the idea is to entertain. So I wouldn't look for a lot of factual basics in the movie. It is why I never likes shows about people I have read a lot about in books or experienced firsthand in life. It is why in movies about Marciano almost everything is different from what happened and sometimes downright made up for entertainment purposes. I've never seen a factual movie about him or almost anyone I knew a lot about and expect the Duran piece to be the same and paint Leonard in a good light. And I guarantee they will gloss over Duran the lightweight in about 7 minutes and go right to Leo-Duran. I really don't expect much.

 

Hard to say. Duran's still alive and the movie does say this question will be answered. It's not inconceivable that Duran will indirectly provide his version of events. Also l don't think it's a leap to expect this to an entertaining movie regardless of whether it's fictionalized or not. But then again you might end up being right. Time will tell.

 

I think he got frustrated and quit. He probably thought he'd get a third fight. The irony is that he wasn't even doing that poorly, down a little, but not a lot.