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

I go with this train of thought. Leonard had more spectacular wins over more famous fighters,but Duran dominated his prime division for much longer.

 

Disagree.

The first fight was the defining one.

Both men were ready, hungry and prime.

Talk of Leonard not fighting the right fight doesn't hold up. He fought the kind of fight Duran MADE him fight. And Duran was just a tad better.

In the second fight, which Duran wanted later, Duran was weight-drained and taking diuretics and laxtives the week of the fight. He was suffering from stomach cramps and had an ice-pack applied to his stomach after the fifth and sixth rounds.

The second fight was close at the point of stoppage.

An in-shape and prepared Duran, as in Montreal, would have the edge.


All that said, the Montreal fight was close enough that Leonard migh have won under similar circumstances, maybe two or three times out of ten.

 

Nothing in the video shows me that Leonard was a better fighter in the 2nd fight then he was in the first fight. Not impressed with Leonard of the 2nd fight at all. He was fighting a much weaker Duran ( Leonard himself has said he knew in the first round Duran had nothing ) and he was winning a close slap fight. No way does any Leonard beat the Duran of Montreal.

 

100% True.

 

Two quality posts. A rare outbreak of sanity on ESB. :happy

 

When was Leonards prime years?

In 1980 he was young, immature and in 1987 (Hagler) he was past prime and coming from 3 in active years?

 

Leonard would need a win over Pryor and Nunn. At least Norris. That would have been somewhat impressive at age 34

But all we see are a bunch of broken down pugs that cant fight back.

You want to test yourself then do it against someone that can fight back, like Nunn. Leonard would run towards you full speed if your name was Lalonde or if you were as pudgy as Duran was at 38 but if you are lean and mean and fast and agile like Mike, Ray got better things to do

I think the Norris fight really exposed him because the very weakness I long suspected turned out to be true.

Duran had no such weakness as Leonard and was a real fighter. Leonard was just a runner

 

Still better than Leonard at mw, especially when you take into account that Leonard, Benitez and Hearns were beter han the version of Hagler Leonard fought. And Duran-Leonard are 1-1 at welterweight. So, he is actually 3-3.

 

:good

 

Benitez,cuevas and hearns were at 154,duran leonard 3 was at 160. Duran has a solitary loss at 147,the rematch to leonard...

 

:rofl:rofl:rofl

Fact is he didn't lose to Hearns and Benitez at welterweight and neither the third fight with Leonard. Twist it around as you like. This won't change the fact.