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

Clearly ray fought Duran's fight. He could never adapt mid fight and change; that's why he lost to tommy hearns.

 

I just don't buy this. Leonard was the bigger guy, and he had reason to believe he hit harder and had a better chin (which I think turned out to be the case). Also, he had the incontestably faster hands. So, in this context, it was not so crazy for Leonard to try to slug with Duran and think he'd land more often and do more damage when either guy lands.

Now, this "may" have been a bad strategy in RETROSPECT. I am not sure I would even go this far. But given what Leonard and Dundee knew at the time, it was neither stupid nor crazy AT THE TIME.

 

I assume that this post was supposed to be in reply to mine? Can't remember-- did you ever bother watching the clips that I posted of Leonard's movement in other earlier fights? I vaguely remember you conceding that Leonard used far more movement in those clips than he did against Duran. Your suggestions that Leonard fought his ordinary fight style in the opening rounds of Duran I remain revisionist and inaccurate. The way you tell it, nobody should have been surprised that Leonard came out and fought with his chosen flat-footed style.

 

I agree with much of this. Leonard had every right to be confident in his ability to fight Duran at close quarters. He knew though, from the Palomino fight if nothing else, that Duran had grown into a strong, full-grown welterweight who could hang and bang with natural welterweights. He knew that Duran was rough on the inside, tough, tricky, and therefore dangerous at close range. What possible argument is there that Leonard would be better off not using his legs to control the distance and avoid unnecessary damage? Lesser, smaller, less explosive fighters like Vilomar Fernandez and Virulet had already shown that Duran could be frustrated and kept somewhat at bay with lateral movement. Leonard's decision not to do so was like a form of unilateral disarmament.

 

Kevin, you are essentially put words in my mouth, Leonard was hurt in the 2rd round that much is clear, and during the fight he discovered that his strategy to trade with Duran wasn't working wasn't working and he made an effort to change strategies, but Duran simply wouldn't give him the time and space to do what you seem to think SRL was capable of doing whenever he wanted to, which was to control distance, the fight was fought at the distance Duran wanted it to be, not what SRL wanted it to be. That was imposed on him.



As for Duran not being able to deal with movers, that is a far bigger myth than anything coming out of Montreal, just watch the Buchanan fight if you want to see how he dealt with movers and as far as Ferdandez went, Duran knocked him out in the 13th. Viruet's performance was described by one sports writer as something similar to a fly buzzing around a lion's mouth. That's not to say they didn't give him more problems than fighters who came straight at him, because it required him to track these guys down and cut the ring off, which is certainly more work than not having to do these things.

And if you watch the first round of that fight, SRL did pretty much exactly what he wanted to. He moved when Duran was coming at him, he sat down on his punches when he wanted to be aggressive and he certainly held his own in the first round. It was the second round that changed the complexion of the fight. And as for being flat footed, he was at times simply because he wanted to get Duran's respect and to hurt him. It's awful hard to hurt a guy when your moving around, as you need to have your feet planted to generate power from your legs. Even in the videos you showed, when SRL went on the offense he stopped moving around and planted his feet.

 

I actually thought Padilla not breaking clinches Helped Leonard, as he was bigger and could lean on Duran and sap his strength. True, Duran did more flagrantly illegal things, but Leonard's constant holding was just as impactful in the fight.

As for your question, he may have wanted to break Duran's will by beating him at his game. This would be a more complete and satisfactory win. Or just land a few concussive shots or early exchanges to show he can compete this way, too. Had he succeeded, it would have been very demoralizing and allow Leonard more options later in the fight, too.

I also do not completely buy that Leonard would've won if he got on his bike from the opening bell. Your Viruet and Fernandez points are valid, but on the flip-side, Duran was also expert at cutting off the ring and did beat many technicians, too - albeit not pure runners (but that wasn't Leonard either, even in the 2nd fight). I also think Viruet and Fernandez fights had to do with lack of preparation; Duran, like many party animals who also kept a busy schedule, did not always get up for every fight (e.g. the first De Jesus fight).

 

Well what your saying also is hypothetical, but your absolutely right in saying that, however these are the facts we can take from that fight and the fighters themselves. Not one person honest with themselves can deny Leonards greatness. The fact Duran came into that fight and won, especially considering Leonard was the bigger and faster man. The fact that Leonard is considered the 2nd best welter in history. And anyone list him below 5, are still ****ed because they lost a ton of money on Hagler. Duran would go on to fight successfully and win championships in other weight classes almost for 20yrs. Leonard would go on to beat the 3rd best welter in history, retire come back almost 5 yrs later and defeat what most consider the best Middle in history.And a man of no lower then top 3 in middle history if they are honest with self. So you may call Montreal Duran a myth, that's your right and your opnion. But me I see a fighter again proving his greatness, as he did before at lightweight, and as he would do again many times after Montreal, all the way up to middle, against fighters much younger, bigger, and stronger. Duran was proven, before Montreal, he proved it in Montreal, and he would prove it many times afte that he is one of the greatest to ever lace em up. And that ain't no myth.So please stop selling that myth nonsense.

 

Again, the idea that Leonard wanted to move like he usually moves but Duran prevented him from doing so is silly. I'm honestly, genuinely surprised that people find this to be a credible story (well not you-- I get that you like anything that glorifies Duran). If Leonard chooses to get on his bike and use the type of lateral movement that he is capable of, Duran can't stop him by "imposing his will" on him. That's not how legs work.

Never said Duran "couldn't deal" with movers-- you are railing against a strawman again. And I stand by the Vilomar Fernandez and Viruet examples of fighters taking some of the steam out of his offense by using effective movement. The difference is that Leonard is bigger, far more explosive, powerful, and an all around better fighter than those two. My point remains--by using his legs more effectively, as he had in other fights, Leonard could have had a much easier night.

 

Koolkev's an idiot with an anti-Duran agenda.

 

Thought I was just a pro-black racist?

PS-Duran is one of the greatest fighters of all time.

 

You're more anti-Montreal Duran tbh.

 

He's certainly making every effort to come across as such.

My thoughts on the two fighters is that I think Duran should be ranked higher on a p4p list, only because of the number of fights he had.

If SRL had another 15-20 fights and they were along the same lines as we've seen, I would have no problem ranking him higher than Duran.

But on that night, I don't think there was anything SRL could have done to have changed the outcome of the fight, unless he really hurt Duran. He wasn't going to out box him and really that's the bottom line.

Even the "no mas" rematch people forget how close the fight was prior to the stoppage. And I'm sure there's probably 100% agreement that had Duran knew the repercussions of that decision he would have gone down fighting rather than endure the fall out that came his way.

It's strange, but understandable, in a way, but the bottom line of that fight, was that Duran feared ridicule far more than he feared getting beat or even knocked out.

 

Excellent lost

 

I tend to agree with literally everything you said. I mean literally.

I will also add that Leonard should've given an immediate re-match to Duran - just as he should've to Hearns, Hagler, and possibly Benitez. I don't think a 2nd fight with Benitez would've ended differently, but the other 3 may have. And if they did, then we would rank this era's top fighters very differently. And if Leonard won all the re-matches - and he could have done that, too - then he sits alongside Ray Robinson perhaps.

 

An addendum to what Vanboxingfan wrote:

I rank Duran higher than Leonard - in addition to his greater longevity - because I think Duran beats Leonard in a hypothetical pound-per-pound match-ups at their respective primes. (This for me is a very important quality in distinguishing fighters.)