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

Quite incredible by today's standards. Can you imagine two of today's fighters rematching a mere five months after a bout like the Montreal one ?

 

And within the next 10 months SRL had moved up, won a 154lb title and also beaten Hearns in a unification. So we've got Duran x 2, Kalule and Hearns in a 15 month period.

I must say tho i am in awe of the era (and any around it similar) where Ezzard Charles and co were fighting so often and frequently against top opposition. It was insane. I'm surprised there wasn't more ring deaths.

 

Few things are more grating than sarcastic dumb people. Your post makes no sense (your hatred for Leonard is clouding your judgment again). "overwhelming evidence to the contrary" of what?? My argument that going toe-to-toe with Duran was a poorer strategy than using the usual movement he used against aggressive opponents? What are you even arguing?

By the way, you're probably too dense and emotional to realize that you've done a complete 180 on this topic since your prior idiotic posts on this fight. Good to see that smarter, more knowledgeable posters have finally convinced you at least that Leonard chose to fight this style of fight intentionally. Remember when you used to pretend the opposite-- that Duran "forced" him to fight that way by "taking away Leonard's lateral movement"? atsch

 

I agree with all of this.

 

Great news, I may be back from a Jazz festival in Thai land that might have been real.

My possible thoughts on this match that is refered to as a classic.

Duran did not out box Leonard, he just used superior boxing tactics.

 

Duran didn't cut off the ring, Leonard just ran out of places to go.

 

Duran didn't force a brawl, it was Leonard's game plan to be backed into the ropes and beat like a heavy bag.

 

Leonard wasn't biting on feints, he just froze up when Duran faked punches because he wasn't fighting his fight, which normally involved his opponent not feinting so well.

 

Duran didn't win because he was landing punches, Leonard lost because he didn't evade them.

 

Duran wasn't standing in front of Leonard and slipping his punches, Leonard's accuracy was just off.

 

Duran didn't impose his fight, it was Leonard's strategy to lose exchanges on the inside over and over again.

 

I think Leonard was also surprised how hard he was to hit. At times he mocked Leonard.

Sent from my XT1563 using Tapatalk

 

Leonard was a brilliant fighter known for great tatical adjustments over the course of a 15 round fight , he just wanted to try something different against Duran, and stick with something that didn't work.

 

Duran was just better on that night, excellent movement, counter punching and slipping of punches. Just like Leonard was better in the rematch.

 

Obviously that has to be a two way street. If people are going to crow about how great Leonard, Hearns, Hagler or any other naturally bigger, heavier fighter was on the strength of beating Duran. Yes?