Duran of Montreal vs Leonard of the rematch

i can understand if this distinction isn't important to some, but for me it is part of what defines a champion.

 

I do buy Duran was weight-drained and weak against Leonard in New Orleans and Hearns in Vegas... Still, Duran was also physically smaller and his physical attributes do not match well against "Leonard & Hearns."

Point is, in-shape or not, Duran is too small and naturally slower in hand and foot speed compared to the bigger, younger dude's like "Leonard & Hearns."

Duran was finely tuned and tanned looking for Benitez in 1982, but Benitez sucked-up his last supreme effort to outbox Duran over 15 rds... Again, Duran looked small in ring center against Benitez...

All in all, Duran's physical attributes are that of a man of 130 to 140 pounds... Anything above 140 pounds and Duran was forced to deal with taller fighters who also owned a reach advantage as well...

Duran officially fought the last 22 years (1979-2001) of his career at weights of 147 to 168 pounds... However, Duran fought a fight in 1999 at 176 pounds and looked a pig...

MR.BILLbbb

 

It eternally boggles my mind that so many people cannot grasp the very simple truth of your post.

:happy:happy:happy

 

To come back after a 5-year lay-off and challenge a great MW champion surely fits this definition.

Let's not try and make it like Leonard did anything remotely as pathetic as Duran's quit job in New Orleans. Duran was the greater fighter of the two, but strikes me as the lesser man.

 

leonard didn't have any point as low as no mas. i'm just not overly enamored with how he conducted his career. a champion's heart no doubt, but when it suited him. at the end of the day he has four title defences and a forty fight career. as far as leonard and duran's personalities are concerned in isolation from their boxing careers, i'm indifferent to them.

leonard's win over hagler was a good win. you could dwell on the five year lay off, or you could dwell on the contract stipulations. i prefer to balance them out and say, it was just a good win.

 

Fair enough.

Try great win. You know why Leonard got those stipulations? Because Hagler, just like about everyone else, was so sure that he would stop Leonard. What Hagler said about his fists "these are the only two judges I need" was what the vast majority felt. But now in hindsight a lot of keyboard warriors with a mancrush on Hagler go to absurd lengths to devalue Leonard's perfomance and achievement. That bugs me a bit.

But, yeah, Leonard wheeled and dealed openly more than most and some things were both ludicrous and laughable (the "LHW" and SMW title fight against LaLonde for example), but in the end he gave us some great fights against great fighters. Good enough for me.

 

During 1979-81 Leonard was great and fought in some great battles. Anything after Hagler in '87,I feel was merely a footnote or pointless.

 

I rate the win over LaLonde, despite all the BS surrounding it. It is something special seeing a bigger man get starched like that by a smaller man.

It was a bad joke that Hearns didn't win the decision in their rematch, though.

 

it was a sterling performance, and i agree that appreciation for the win has diminished too much with hindsight.

yeah that's all i was getting at. leonard was a true great though. he's ridiculous if you think about it - a lock for the top twenty of all time based on a forty fight career! there will never be someone with a career like that again.

 

You're better than me, anything Ray Leonard after '82 was ridiculous, the exception of course being Hagler.

 

Definitely. Ray handled his business in the rematch though.

 

:good

I believe a man shows his true colors in defeat (Leonard vs Duran I, Ali vs Frazier I, etc).

 

Holy ****, B. This is going to send reverberations through the Classic. The backlash is going to be fierce. Duran has so many followers in the first place because he's seen as a real man's man. To suggest chicken Leonard is more of a man...well...among the most controversial things I've ever seen said in the Classic. You're a braver man than me.

 

so what were ali's true colours? claiming that he had ended up on the wrong end of the 'white man's decision'? seems a bit harsh to me.

 

http://www.corbisimages.com/Enlargement/U2009615.html

This content is protected