Of course it is significant. Saying LOL and what a great point does not take away from a point. Ray never had another win and Duran won much more and fought another 12 years and Ray still won every round. He had Duran's number. This is not clear? You guys are not scientists I can tell you that. You don't follow facts you follow whatever rules you want.
There is no way Duran (who was champion at the same time and had just beaten Moore a year before) could beat Hearns with his speed either. Fact is Duran does not have wins over Benitez and Hearns and Hagler, something Ray has. This is a fact. A solid one.
Leonard was in his range. Roldan was not as fast and Hearns, but when Hearns exchanged punches they are in range. It is about being in range more than faster or slower. Duran looked fast enough when he fought guys in his range. If a guy was in his range, he could do well. But the elites were a different story.
I have seen enough of excuses to explain a loss. Had he beaten Hearns and Benitez I would have said ok well he beat them, but he didn't. There was a ceiling to Duran's wins. Regardless of the hero worship.. He had a great personality and charisma. But that should not affect the truth.
Duran was far faster at welter compared to Roldan at middle, Roldan would not have been able to slip shots like that v Ray.
The fact remains, that Duran beat Leonard at his best. Duran fought Hagler at his best and nearly won, Leanoard fought Hagler when he was shot and barely won. ( I gave that fight to Hagler) Duran vs Hearns, did you see the size difference? Leonard Vs Hearns Legit great fight, but then he would not rematch, and he LOST it when he did. Ray beat Hearns and Benitez at their best, and that cements him as an ATG. Hagler and Duran 2 were the fights Leonard won because of strategy, and not skill. ( Many of his fights were like this but these are well known) Leonard was not as good as Duran in their primes, or pound for pound.
That was not Leonard's best. His second title defense. The fact that he fought Duran's fight is proof that it was not Leonard's best. Leonard beat Hagler. It is a win. You were not a judge that night, the judges who scored it were. I saw a height difference, but they were comparable their whole careers and Duran fought at 154 before Hearns did and they had many common opponents. Leonard,Benitez,Hagler, Minchillo, Barkley, Cuevas. What does it matter how Ray beat them, he beat them. Duran did not beat the elites. Ray did. If Duran is going to say Ray knows Duran is better, he should have the wins over the guys Ray beat to prove this. And he does not. To say Ray was not as good as Duran in his prime are just words. The guys Ray beat in his prime and the guys Duran beat are a different level. The evidence is that Ray was better in his career. Better wins over great fighters. Duran had a longer career and had popularity and charisma. It matters what you like.
My point was speed does not land the punches being in range does. A slow fighter can land on a quicker fight if he throws enough punches and takes a guy out of his rhythm.
Nah Pretty sure literally turning your back and quitting to avoid a loss is far more cowardly than taking advantage of an opponent whose gassing.
Duran was a career best lightweight. Still a great fighter at welterweight with superb wins over Palomino and of course Leonard. Anything after that is a bonus. At middleweight he gave arguably the best 160lbs fighter ever a very tough fight. Was ill prepared when losing to one of the most dangerous fighters of all time in Hearns at light middle as well as getting beat by a superb Benitez. Duran is a genuine boxing legend, had a career like no other with many highs and lows.
Palomino is not a great fighter. Giving a guy a decent fight is not winning. This is what you guys have?? Giving a guy a great fight and beating Palomino, but losing to Hearns,Benitez and Leonard easily? That is what I mean. You guys are not scientists. You don't use facts to come up with conclusions, you use emotions. If you used the facts it would be very different. You are believing everything Duran says about he was better and he had excuses and he ate two steaks and 2 gallons of water etc etc etc. The facts show different. If he was better he would have had a win against them. There is no other way to prove he was better than Ray than to beat the guys Ray beat. The great he beat, and Duran didn't. That is that. Ill prepared for every important fight he had. Do you guys see the nonsense? Duran is playing you guys for fools a bit. You have to see whom he beat and how great they were and if he did not beat them, that is not a win. How does he have greater wins than Ray? He does not. That is a fact.
I'm glad you remember one of the few punches Leonard landed in 8 rounds. Otherwise did you see him do whole alot other than move? Duran was listless but it still took her into the 7th to screw up the courage to taunt
