Sugar Ray never truly beat me & he knows it

l

He had Duran on his mind enough that he put together a cheesy documentry about their rivalry a couple of years ago. ESPN 30/30. Flew all the way to Panama to dig up old dirt. Ray needs that attention. I thought he might asked Duran for rent $ since he has been in Ray's head 40 years.
Duran had his shortcomings with discipline and what not but he has always been genuine. He's not phony. Ray Leonard is the opposite of genuine.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Wow! Why all the hate?

 

Not many guys can bend under Hearns punches.. Leonard and Benitez being the only ones. Hagler was hit with most of Hearns punches, he just took them. Hearns is a different fighter than Ray and the jab is a big factor. And Ray was hitting Duran with his jab always yet when he missed Duran it was more during exchanges in the middle of the ring rather than from range with his jab, and Hearns has a longer better jab...and Hearns was jabbing to the body and head and he caught Duran the first time leaning in with a left hook and he would hurt Duran with that at welterweight and then land the right. Hearns is a harder puncher than Leonard and that is a variable. Hearns in 1984 was more advanced than Ray in 1980 also. Hearns fights from a distance and then lands with his range. Totally different. I don't see how different weights affect that.

 

The plan was for Leonard to still control the distance and bomb Duran from range. They wanted him to sit on his punches, but still move and exploit his reach. That is obvious in the opening rounds...Duran just gets under him and cuts him off everytime.

Its always funny when you see people try to argue that Leonard getting mauled on the ropes was part of his strategy...fighting the wrong fight. That is not where he wanted to be.

 

Duran couldnt beat Laing at Super Welter. He was a 33 year old short armed swarmer who started his career at Bantam and was visibly slower in every aspect. Nobody is buying your argument he was prime, you just look like a a ridiculous hater.

 

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
Great post! Agree 100%

 

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
SRL is just used to getting his way. That First Duran fight still keeps him up at night. SRL checks under his bed and in the closet to see if Duran is there.

 

The problem for Hearns in regard to prime Duran would be the latter's amazing defense-while-still-moving-forward. Duran was terrific at slipping, ducking, parrying, moving outta the way...Hearns liked easy targets.

As far as punching power...SRL was at times a boxer-puncher in that he could bang REALLY hard. Not most of the time, because he was far too classy and adroit to rely on just that, but he had a great shot even into the light heavyweights, and he definitely landed some mean-ass shots against Duran in I. Duran could take a mighty shot, even at Welterweight.

Hearns was a great puncher; pound for pound without question one of the greats (and not just for that). However, the Duran who beat Leonard seemed tireless, and he took one hell of a good shot. I think Hearns would have been both pissed and frustrated after nine or ten rounds, and Duran would have worn him down within 12 and perhaps even scored a knockdown.

That said, I don't see Duran stopping Hearns. 15 round decision, with Hearns probably winning the fight up to around round nine. Duran's pressure and scattershot blows would have made Tommy gun shy after that.

At least, that's the way I envision it.

 

With all the above said, I think both Duran and Hearns more than deserve their rankings as top 10 greatest p2p fighters ever.

 

That's a very thorough analysis of Hearns' and Leonard's styles. Let's compare their performances against another common opponent, Benítez. Benítez also had a huge reach disadvantage against Hearns 70" vs 78" though not as bad as Durán. As the harder puncher, wouldn't you expect Hearns to be the one delivering the KO to Benítez and not Leonard? Maybe Hearns was too cautious when he saw how Benítez frustrated Durán previously. Or maybe Benítez just fought to avoid a KO, knowing that if he got too aggressive with Hearns he would leave himself wide open.

 

When was he 33? When he fought Laing? He was 32 when he fought Hearns and was 33 one day later. I think 29 when he fought Laing, or just turned 30 depending on the date. Prior to June 16 he was 29 in 1981. Have I said he was prime at 154? I don't think I ever said that. If you guys want to have credibility then quote me correctly and have the facts straight.

 

Anything could happen. That Hope knockout was also on people's minds and the looping right.. Hearns probably had that in the back of his mind. Also. Ray was fast on the inside. Hearns never fought him on the inside much in 1981. 1989 he did more, but not in 1981 effectively. Ray and Benitez fought a grueling fight within range and Ray was in Benitez range. Yes Ray stopped Benitez, but Ray was also more physically damaged than Hearns after he fought Benitez. Why? Tommy fought Benitez at range so it was not a grueling fight as much as a boxing match and finding the openings. Different styles. Tommy would not beat Benitez the way Ray did.

 

That is right. Benitez wanted to set the trap and he did hit Hearns enough at times, but not consistently.