Duran of Montreal vs Leonard of the rematch

I honestly think Ray himself says it best. Watch his Beyond the Glory feature.

He lost the psychological warfare in that fight. He got caught up in Duran's games, and his performance suffered for it.

 

You think I'm going to spend an entire afternoon searching through hoards of posts? Smarten up, P. I've been a member here for 5 years, there is literally no reason for me to make any of this up. I don't have an agenda against Duran, I'm actually a fairly big fan of his...but...he does get held up on a pedal stool on the Classic. Perhaps if you spent less time sparring with your countless aliases then you'd notice half of the stuff said around here in regards to Duran is silly talk.

 

So you have no examples at all? None you can even remember? I don't think it's being out of order to ask for some actual examples of the comments that seem to inflame you and Pachilles and co so relentlessly - is it?

 

Do you think it would serve a purpose? Examples have already been given, and you've shrugged all of them off. Your mind is already made up. If you're that curious and interested, there's nothing stopping you doing some detective work. Why would I make this up? I don't have a problem with Duran. This is hardly comparable to RedRooster and Duranimal, who both clearly have huge issues when it comes to Ray Leonard. Huge issues. I'm the first one to big up Duran and say how good he was against Palomino. The Barkley fight is one of my all time favourites, and I had Duran winning CLEARLY.

There must be a reason for why I'd make all of this up. Any theories?

 

Addie, I am not on here as often as you these days, but I'm still on quite a lot. Where are all these crazy Duran comments that still make Pachilles mount these wild campaigns about him, with you cheering him on from the sidelines? I'm just not seeing them, and I'm on the Classic a few times a week.

Other than the one ludicrous example of he grant which I do not for a second believe was said sincerely and apparently was said a long time ago, can you provide even one solitary recent example of a comment that pissed you off because it was so extreme/radical about Duran?

 

Duran's loss against Hagler being better than Leonard's win against the same man. atsch I've heard this quite a few times.

Leonard only winning rounds towards the end in Montrael because Duran already knew he won and took the foot off the gas. Had **** ALL to do with Leonard's qualities...Duran just allowed him to have success. atsch:nut

Montreal is referred to as a "whooping" or dominant victory daily! It's like people fail to acknowledge it was actually a close fight. atsch Duran-fever.

Also, his losses against Kirkland Laing and Wilfred Benitez never happened. Duran was unfocused, untrained, and past his best days, and therefore none of these defeats effect his legacy...even though he'd go on to big wins long after.

 

That first one is indeed proper insane. Anyone saying that deserves ridicule!

The second one I disagree with, but I wouldn't carry a chip around on my shoulder about it. SRL did start to fight with a bit more urgency in the later rounds, as Duran did start to coast, compared to his earlier efforts. Both factors contributed. It was just the natural ebb and flow of the fight, neither man was far enough ahead of the other to properly dominate.

And the last point I disagree with as well, but again I don't think it's particularly heinous or rage-worthy. Duran was a clear winner. It wasn't a dominant win, it certainly wasn't a "whooping", but it was a clear win, and people just have different ideas of the difference between "clear" and "dominant".


I must admit, if I'd seen anyone saying the first thing, I'd be inclined to get annoyed as well, that's just ****ing stupid. It definitely does have the appearance of a quote from someone you wouldn't take seriously though.

Anyway, I would never fall out with you over something like this, I hope you don't think I'm trying to have a go at you, just find all this Duran-ridicule a bit boring and dated and puerile. There must surely be things that inspire greater vehemence than some fanatics over-valuing someone who is after all a bona fide ATG?

Well, I've said my piece, I'll happily move on to other things now.

 

No problem, brother.

Just as if I think someone is undervaluing Duran, like MAG in regards to the Barkley victory, I will speak up and defend him. But if I'm hearing people actually say Duran's loss to Hagler is better than Ray's win, then I'm also going to say something. These aren't comments made by clowns half of the time either. Well respected, knowledgeable posters are known to say these things.

You haven't seen people around here score Duran/Hagler in favour of the Panamanian?

 

I honestly don't recall seeing that. I'll keep my eye out for such comments in future though. I thought it was a pretty clear win for the Marvelous One myself. Was very impressed by Duran's performance mind you, he was superb all things considered, but he did not win the fight.

 

How do you think I'd be received if I started defending all of Barrera's losses?

Barrera's niece was threatened to be kidnapped prior to Jones I, an opponent he didn't really take seriously and that's why he got knocked out. The rematch was a close affair, could have gone either way, but he was too cautious having came off the first knockout loss of his career. Almost makes sense, doesn't it?

Forrest fires during the build-up for Pacquiao I? Barrera was very close with the Maldanado's, his managers, and they were going through a break up around that time in 2003. Stressful? Could effect his performance? The metal plate deal? Nobody buys into any of these excuses because that's what they are, excuses, but Duran's aren't as easily waved off. Why not? :huh

Which is the better win for you P. Leonard beating Duran in New Orleans or Manny Pacquiao beating Erik Morales in the second fight?

 

I think the scenario is exactly the same tbh.

We are aware of the Barrera reasons the same way we are aware of the Duran reasons, but we don't really buy them.

When does anyone ever blame external factors for Duran fairly losing to Hearns, Benitez, deJesus, etc?

It doesn't happen. Not really.

Leonard beating Duran in New Orleans, because that version of Duran was better than that version of Morales. Duran was always in a different league to Morales actually. Even the version of Duran from the Moore/Cuevas fights was still better than the best Morales ever was, IMO. Different classes of fighter entirely.

Why did you ask that Q in particular?

 

Haven't seen the fight in a while, but I remember he got caught with a hard left hook that came after a missing 1-2. It buckled his knees momentarily and I would assume that's the moment that was being referred to.

 

Exactly. That is indeed the "moment" that is being referred to, not the "half of a 15-round fight" which is being referred to. SRL was momentarily hurt by a punch, did not go down, and thereafter proceeded to fight like a demon, with a clear mind and strong legs. The evidence of video is very clear.

 

I agree, with the fight like a demon part. Clear emphasis on fight like a demon. To me, thats a key moment. Once his legs return, he spends round after round trying to do the same thing to Duran. His head movement doesn't really return till the 7th, and as I recall, its about the 9th or 10th round before he actually takes angles again.

Either way, these two are obviously a terrific match for eachother.