A Case for Ray Leonard being rated over Duran - An Analysis

And what the hell do you think you're doing?

Sorry, but Duran's longevity is rather padded if anyone asks me. Beating Iran Barkley was about the only thing of note that he did after 1980, and that win is drastically inflated beyond belief. His reign at light weight was a dominant one, but outside of Buchanan and Dejesus, the list of quality wins in that division were slim. You also ignore his losses to fighters like Simms and Laing, not to mention getting blasted in two by hearns, who Leonard defeated... Ray has 5 wins over some very substantial all time greats, including 2 over Duran himself, and never lost a fight to anyone who was shy of being world class.. Two of those losses came when he was well beyond past it....

That's just ridiculous. That's like comparing Joe Louis and Muhammad Ali, and saying that one rates DRASTICALLY higher than the other. You'd be hard pressed to find anyone who agrees with you on that...

 

Other than you, I take their whole careers into account.

Yeah, ignore him beating Cuevas, Moore, and Castro or his losing effort to Hagler. And no I don't ignore those losses. I just take into account Duran's size, the wear and tear he had and age - like I do for everyone of his fights. Duran was a natural lightweight ffs who did these things after he already had a full career at lw.

Depends what you mean by that. I rate Duran in my lower Top10 while Leonard is around 15.

 

How about the fact Leonard beat him twice, or doesn't that count?

:hey:yep:goodatschatsch

 

Dream on.

Duran's better and more accomplished.

 

.

Then you obviously have a very short memory.. About 24 hours ago, you read a comment that I made, and this is what I said:

You give him credit for a competitive losing effort to Hagler, but seem to nonshalantly brush over the fact that Leonard BEAT Hagler. Sure, i heard you mention it, but that fight carries a lot more weight than you're giving credit for. Davey Moore had 12 pro fights when Duran beat him, and would soon retire with a final record of 18-5. Pipino Cuevas was coming off of a loss, hadn't beaten anyone in two years and was standing on the edge of a very steep downward spiral. I'll give you Castro as being a good win, considering Duran's age.. But, if you're going to mention fights like these, then you might as well mention Leonard's wins over Kalule and Lalonde.

You can't rate one fighter over another on the shear basis of making concessions for disadvantages... He either won a fight or he didn't. he either accomplished more than another man or he didn't.

To conclude, I don't rate either man drastically higher than the other, and in fact I have even suggested that they be rated as equals or very close at least. You're position is that Duran is LEAGUES above Leonard and that is not a reasonable position.

 

How many defenses did Leonard make?

 

That's the thing. I give Leonard props for beeing competative with Hagler but I don't think either fighter won it. Everytime I watch it I have another one of them winning.
Add to that that Duran was naturally smaller than Leonard, older and fought a prime Hagler and Duran's performance is just more impressive for me.

You have some points but just ignore Duran's size and age. I factor these in. Leonard, despite himself beeing also smaller and not that young himself, just had much less wear and tear against Kalule and Lalonde than Duran had against Cuevas, Moore and Barkley. I just can't ignore it.

Look a bit higher to read why I rank Duran above Leonard. I factor in Duran's disadvantages because overcoming them is part of his accomplishmens in my eyes.

I never said I rank Duran leagues above Leonard. Everyone who does so is crazy. Read what I wrote. I think Duran is clearly above Leonard and it is not close. AND that I have Duran inside my lower Top10 and Leonard around 15. 5-8 places difference is no close but also not leagues apart. :bart

 

Hagler was shot at this point as evidenced by his performance against Mugabi.AND Leonard knew this because he spent years talking up a possible Hagler fight only challenging him when it was clear how shot Marvin was.

 

Of course that counts,but in the 3rd fight,Duran was basically a past it fighter that was capable of decent performances against non-top echelon fighters,that's about it.Norris hammered past it Leonard bigtime and Camacho blasted him out.Do you count that also?

 

While this may be true, its only addressing half of the equation. Ray Leonard hadn't fought in a full 3 years prior to this match, and only 1 time in 5 years overall.. That one match came against Kevin Howard in 1984, a fight in which Leonard announced that he was through because of how lack luster he felt his performance was. Upon returning, he was a heavy underdog against Hagler and incidentally was the first fighter to ever launch a comeback beginning at a higher weight class. This would be his first appearance as a middle weight and against one of the very best members in that division's history.

 

In all fairness, Leonard and Duran were BOTH past it when they met for the third time.. Duran was a few years older of course, but Ray's career had been broken up by vast periods of inactivity whereas Duran's hadn't. Furthermore, Duran had just beaten Iran Barkley in the same calendar year, in what many of his fans considered as a stellar win against a very formidable opponent. Leonard on the otherhand, had more or less been bested by Thomas Hearns. There were plenty who thought that Duran was going to win.

I think you know as well as I do that Leonard's losses to Terry Norris and Hector Camacho can hardly be compared to Duran's defeat to Leonard. Once again, Duran was fighting actively and coming off a top flight performance when he met Ray for the third time. Leonard was off for over a year prior to the Norris fight, had to drop weight to get down to the same division and was facing a PRIME opponent, whereas Duran was not.. The Camacho fight has no bearing on this discussion.. Leonard was over 40 years of age and had been retired for 6 full years..

 

What you wrote was absolutely true,also.But Hagler was way more shopworn than Leonard-2 years older and how many more fights over how many years-which Leonard was completely aware of.Hagler's whole career was how to do things the hard way.And Hagler even looked ragged against slowpoke Roldan.Hagler HAD to infight and rough up Hearns,because if Tommy were able to keep Marvin on the outside with his superior closer to prime reflexes and hand and footspeed(obviously he wasn't durable enough because it looked like Tommy's legs were ready to go even at the end of rounds 1 and 2),he would have been able to outbox Marvin from the outside.

 

I am not maintaining that Hagler wasn't slipping. He was definitely coming to the end of a long career. But, again it seems like you are making concessions for him being "past it" and not doing the same for Leonard. One fight in five years, plus a full three year layoff, and making a debut at a higher class, places a man at a greater disadvantage than just being a mere two years older and looking a bit sloppy in his last fight. Hagler was heavily favored to win that fight and rightfully so.