Better win: Leonard-Hagler or Duran-Barkley?

Sounds like someone blowing a lot of hot air

 

Lets think which I'd prefer: beating arguably the no1 MW of all time or beating a decent MW journeymen who was possibly 6th or 7th best at MW at the time (at best)

 

I'm not sure Barkley was that lowly at that time but your general point is spot on for me.

 

Dito.

 

Roberto Duran fans are out in force on Eastside Boxing, and more often than not, they consider Duran's loss to Hagler even more impressive than Leonard's win over the same man. There is heavy favoritism for Roberto on the Classic Forum, RedRooster (the clown) aside.

We would be riding Duran's dick, indeed.

 

Very good summation, Dinamita. I voted Duran-Barkley, but it's really a pick'em choice.

 

This is a good review of relevant points. Put the way you put it, it seems odd to not arrive at the conclusion that Duran's win was the substantially superior accomplishment. The problem is that you put too much emphasis on the lay off thing. It isn't a nog deal in the way you are thinking about it. Ali was off for three years and in back-to-back fights stopped two top contenders. The lay off didn't dampen his effectiveness. Leonard benefited from not facing top middleweights before fighting Hagler. At that point, Hagler was ready to be taken and Leonard knew it. Why risk losing to a fresh young contender when you can play ringer against an worn-out middleweight. You would have to believe Leonard was a stupid man if he had learned nothing from the Howard Davis experience.

 

Both wins were shockers. Both were close (I had Hagler and Duran up by no more than 2 points). I give Duran's the edge because

* Sure, Hagler was the superior fighter, even at 32, but he had slowed down. Leonard had the lay-off, but Leonard was also taller and faster than Marvin so it wasn't a physical mismatch. Leonard had other advantages as well -bigger ring, bigger gloves...

* By contrast, Barkley dwarfed Duran in every way. Younger, faster, stronger, bigger... Iran was 28 and in his prime.

* Duran was in his in 22nd year as a pro

* Duran's win was unprecedented. There are no other natural LWs in history that have beaten a natural MW champion. What Duran did against Leonard, a WW, hadn't been done since 1906. What he did against Barkley has not happened before to the best of my knowledge.

* Barkley did everything right. He fought the smaller, older man, precisely as he should have --relentless and sustained pressure, body punching, forced him to work... and still lost.

.................
Overall, I see Leonard's as the cosmetic favorite, but Duran's was the purist's favorite.

 

this is basically who you like better

leonard or hagler-duran

 

I'm slightly exagerating but there were probably 6 better MWs than Barkley, lets see:

Linear Champ - Leonard (not at the weight but effectively was a MW) - shutout Duran in their respective next fight when Duran was supposedly past it but his win over Barkley 6months earlier was better than Leonard's over Hagler, yet Leonard gets no credit for beating Duran :rofl Make your mind up Duran fans

Mike Nunn - IBF Champ, clearly top2 MW

McCallum - WBA titlist, clearly top2 MW

Kalambay - wins over McCallum, Barkley, Graham at the weight

Graham - disputed SDs against McCallum and Kalambay

Then there was prospects like Eubanks, Benn, Watson