Did Duran just have Leonards # that night, Or did Sugar just fight the wrong fight?

Yup

 

Excellent excerpt. This is rather in line with I believe. I think Leonard and Dundee have done the boxing public - and Duran - a great disservice by spinning this false narrative that Leonard lost because he fought Duran's fight. It was no doubt done to subtly suggest that Leonard at his best, doing his thing, never loses to Duran. On the contrary, I am not so sure if Leonard beats Duran even if he got on his bike in Montreal from the get-go. He may have arguably gotten beat - and beat up - worse by not smothering Duran with his incessant holding (which Padilla let go; and yes, I think another false narrative of this affair is the claim that Duran manhandled Leonard inside when it was Leonard who was doing most of the holding). Regardless of what would have happened had Leonard fought more like Pep that night, it was certainly reasonable and likely pre-planned that he approach Duran with an aggressive game-plan. He was incontestably the larger guy, and he probably thought he hit harder and had a better chin. So why would he dance?

I also agree with your own assessment of the fight itself. Duran to me clearly showed he was the superior fighter, especially considering he was older and much smaller. He won his rounds far more clearly; Leonard's rounds were close and mostly marred by flurries out of clinches rather than clean punching.

 

Agree.

 

Excellent post!!

Too many people view this fight in the rearview mirror.

SRL & Dundee both indicated the strategy they were going to use before the fight even started and the bottom line was Duran imposed his will an on the fight.

 

Exactly. The Leonard fan boys can try to rewrite whatever they like, but straight from the horses mouth SRL admitted Duran made him fight his fight, because they thought they could win it that way.

 

The bottom line is that SRL & Dundee went in with the wrong fight strategy. This is obvious from the opening bell and from certain pre-fight comments. Leonard made a conscious decision to not effectively use his legs-- one of his greatest weapons and his biggest comparative advantage against Duran -- before the bell began. He worked to stand his ground and to use less lateral movement and retreating. As a result he ended up going life and death with a guy he could have beaten easier with a better strategy.

And the post that you're applauding is incorrect--Leonard used plenty of lateral movement in his pre-Duran fights. I've demonstrated that with clips from several fights on several different occasions (especially the Green fight), but you guys continue to ignore it so that you can continue to credit Duran with taking away Leonard's movement... atsch
The idea that Leonard usually fought aggressive fighters the way he fought Duran is false and revisionist. Listen to how stunned people were when he unveiled his flat-footed strategy in the opening round against Duran!

https://streamable.com/k0a0

If you ever develop any interest in the truth of the matter, here are some pre-Duran clips of Leonard using plenty of lateral movement--and even retreating--against other opponents:

https://streamable.com/2vbr (Geraldo)
https://streamable.com/araq (Mando Muniz)
https://streamable.com/spn4 (Gonzalez)
https://streamable.com/dcor (Green)

 

It was in Leonards DNA to fight, Though he had all the ability in the world to fight safety 1ST (Mayweather jr.) If you look at most of his fights especially the fights before the 1st retirement you see many times him taking shots he really didn't have to. When he wanted to he was almost impossible to hit cleanly. But because of his competitiveness and aggressiveness and the fact his goal was to knock the other man out, not just win the fight, he opened himself up to getting hit. ( And the irony is he doesn't beat Hearns fighting safety 1st.) He got pulled into fighting Duran. He wanted to hurt Duran, not just beat him and it cost him. And the fact that Duran probably beat any welter in history other than Robinson or Hearns that night lead to his defeat in Montreal.He got caught up in the moment.

 

You can make that claim in hightsight but prior to the fight, they clearly felt that Leonard was the faster fighter, the harder puncher, and the guy with the better chin. It was Angelo Dundee, who said, people think Duran is the puncher in this fight, they are wrong, my guy is. Over the last 5 fights my guy has a KO record of 100% and Duran has a KO record of only 40%.

Now this is isn't made up opinion, this is directly what Dundee said. So in highsight, you can say they went with the wrong strategy because they lost, but prior to the fight, THEY THOUGHT THEY WOULD WIN WITH THE STRATEGY THEY WENT WITH.

But you apparently have a hard time either understanding this, or you don't believe what Dundee himself said prior to the fight.

This is what the truth is, not some videos and some interpretation of what the strategy should have been some 35+ years later.

 

I think Duran had Leonard best before he entered the ring. Duran would have died that night before he lost. I don't think Leonard intended to go toe to toe. He had no choice. Duran was simply unbeatable that night. No way Leonard was gonna out box him. Leonard did prove his grit and proved he was a fighter. But he was not winning that night. He's even said in recent interviews he knew it wasn't going to be his night

Sent from my XT1563 using Tapatalk

 

As far as I can tell, your post is utterly unresponsive to any thing that I mention in mine. What is it you are trying to rebut? Other than me not giving enough praise and glory to Duran for your liking, I honestly don't know what you take issue with. I explained that Dundee and Leonard intentionally went with a strategy that involved far less movement than he used in past and future fights against aggressive opponents. It turned out to be a dumb strategy. We recognize just how poor of a strategy it was in hindsight (obviously) but the risks and counterintuitive nature of the strategy were apparent at the time.

 

This is part of the Myth of Montreal Duran that I find unconvincing. No way to know how Duran would have performed had Leonard worked to control the distance. The fact that he beat an immobile Leonard in a very close decision doesn't necessarily shed much light on how Montreal Duran would have fared in other matchups, in my opinion.

 

You're living a bit in fantasy land my friend, SRL moved in several of those rounds. You're making it seem like his feet were set in concrete. The close rounds he did win or even lost often involved him moving. It certainly wasn't a toe to toe fight for 15 rounds, that's for damn sure. But make no mistake, Duran did his best to pressure the hell out of him, and had he not rocked SRL in the second round, which essentially had SRL on ***** street for a couple of rounds afterwards, SRL likely would have moved more than he did, at least in those first few rounds. The only myth is you're insistence on trying to rewrite history and your refusal to give Duran any credit for the outcome of the fight. You make it seem like it was SRL's fight to lose, which simply wasn't the case.

 

This has been dispelled already, and numerous times.

LOOK AT THE DAMN VIDEO!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuGZVkYuHM4

Look at the very first round, I noticed SRL retreat NUMEROUS times. I saw him use lateral movement NUMEROUS time. Fighting EXACTLY how he fought his previous fight. In fact, the first round looks exactly like how he fought he best fighter he had ever fought till then Wilfred. Look at the damn video, it totally disproves your stance, and conclusively at that. You said he wasn't retreating and using movement. He unquestionably did and it's right there for all to see. Then what happens, round 2, he gets hurt, and the rest is history.

He said his mind was in a cloud for 3 to 4 rounds. Hard to change things up when you start to lose and your mind is clouded. Further, sometimes when you're hurt, you don't run, you stand your ground and answer back. You man up. Likely both aspects played into how he acted. THEN when you include the massive punishment he took to the body when he was hurt for 3 rounds. That would also slow down any subsequent movement later in the fight. Stop trying to peddle nonsense when it's already been shown false. Look at this highlight against almost everybody... You see him in the pocket, using some lateral movement, and then explosions. THAT IS HOW HE FOUGHT. Exactly how he fought. He was the boxer puncher. He goes for KO's he doesn't dance around all night. He doesn't go for decisions, he tried to take people out.

Both of these highlights who the same thing. Is in the pocket, using subtle lateral movement to go for the KO. That is what he did, he was running around the ring like you claim.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tobeGwAOTZw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r8INHy35zWg

 

As I said, the truth of the brawl in Montreal has suffered from the revisionist propaganda from Leonard and Dundee.

 

Now you're arguing against a strawman. Of course Leonard didn't stand completely flat-footed the entire fight. But he certainly didn't use the type of lateral movement and mobility that I showed him using in numerous other fights. If you disagree, tell me some of the rounds and minutes where Leonard gets on his bike and uses his legs to control distance, reset the action and set up attacks from the outside. Take your time.

Your point that Leonard did better when he moved-- as any rational observer would have predicted before the fight--further underscores that it was idiotic for SRL not to move a whole lot more in the fight.

PS - The idea that Leonard stood stationary for three rounds (after he had already started off the fight fighting stationary) because Duran rocked him in the second is just goofy. But hey, if SRL said it in an interview, it must be true...