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

I can agree with that. :good


But on the other hand, I think there were fighters SRL could beat that Duran would either lose to or struggle harder to win, such as Hearns and Benitez. So it's a close call at 147 but p4p I'd give the edge to Duran, as most people do.

 

Yeah, I think no version of Duran would beat Hearns in actual life. He'd have greater chance in pound-per-pound scenarios, but even there I am not so sure. I think Duran at his best beats Benitez, however, though it wouldn't be easy.

 

We're definitely on the same page my friend. :good

 

At least on Duran and Leonard; I don't frequent here enough to know your views on other great boxers of past

 

Fair enough.

 

Leonard screwed that one up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Think you got my comments mixed up with someone else.

 

Indeed.

 

Leonard was more static than usual. He showed a bit lateral movement in the first round, but less than in for example his previous fight, and really nothing after that.

But why that was and if it had any bearing on the outcome is a different question. It's not like it should have been suicidal for Ray to fight in the middle of the ring, even though that was probably not his best option. He was the equal to Roberto in both chin and power. But Duran managed to feint him to the ropes and keep the fight there.

In the end, what we know for sure is that Duran triumphed that night and Leonard did so in the rematch not long after. That's what we have. The rest is speculation.

 

Let's not forget that Duran got fat and out of shape after Montreal.

Post Montreal Duran is simply not the same fighter as he was before. So if we're going to play the hypothetical what if game. Then it should be questioned whether Leonard could ever beat a prime and focused Roberto Duran.

 

You are wasting your time with the fool. His level of arrogance is astronomical. Not only is he loathe to give Duran credit for the win, and stick with his moronic claim of Leonard fighting the wrong fight. Faced with overwhelming evidence to the contrary, the idiot now claims to have more knowledge, and / or experience of fight strategy than both Leonard and Dundee had on the 20th of June 1980. Never mind that they both CHOSE, and indeed PLANNED and TRAINED, to try to outgun Duran thinking that they could, even bragging about Leonards recent KO percentage, blah, blah, blah, half witted kevin knows far more than those two did both then and now.:roll::roll:

It really doesn't get much more stupid than that.

 

Never.

 

Why should be not be tho? The rematch was just 5 months later and his determination not to hand back the title to someone he despised should have been great. He had never taken much punishment at all in the ring and was only 28yrs old.

This is why he was able to put on sterling performances 3 and 9 years later. His only thrashing was at the hands of Hearns and he wore it well per his brilliant defeat of Barkley.

Note however that the two huge wins later were both against stand and deliver fighters. Incidently right after the Barkley fight he was close to shutout by a very mobile (critics would say ridiculously so) SRL. Nobody can tell me he didn't have the hunger up for that one.

In between SRL and Cuevas/Moore he was massively outclassed by the uber slick Wilfred Benitez.

Prior to Hearns he was coming off 3 great performances in a row.

To sum up i sometimes wonder if Roberto is given a bit too much latitude in his losses.

The weight got high between Leonard fights, was out of shape, he needed a tom tit in the ring, he'd climbed the mountain, etc etc etc.

Against Benitez he was thought to be suddenly past it, wasn't his usual fired up self, had no hunger etc etc etc.

Against Hearns he was out of shape, had no fire etc.

Was it simply a case of these three being far too fast for him once he'd gone into the higher weights? Results at and around the time might indicate so. Ironically Laing also had speed to burn, even if Duran looked a bit puffy.

These guys were also a class above Barkley and Moore (Barkleys wins over Hearns don't affect this) but these two were there right in front of Duran and he still had the skills to thwart them. He'd obviously lost a bit by the time of Iran and SRL III but was still firing quite well around the Moore/Hagler/Hearns time.

Obviously what Duran did at higher weights was icing on the cake of an already brilliant lightweight career but i'm not really sure that i ca give him the free passes many others do for the losses.

So i reckon Duran's achilles heel at the higher weight was always going to be speed. Stand in front of him or be slowish of hand and foot and lookout.

I rate him above the rest P4P (easy top 10) and consider him the greatest lightweight in history so i've no axe to grind. I do think he'd track down movers at 135, but they'd be more likely to cause him a few problems than most others.

I also don't doubt at all he was in lesser shape in the SRL rematch but i don't think he'd have won anyway.

 

He was still prime in the rematch, but perhaps not with the same focus. But Leonard says that his head wasn't in the right place for the first one. In the end it's very hard for us to know what's what.

What we do know is that they won one each with only five months in between.

 

True. Even though Duran put on his best post Lightweight performance. If Leonard had fought his own fight,as in the second bout,he would have narrowly outpointed Roberto,imo.