Duran vs Leonard 1

I thought Duran showed a lot of skills in the 2nd De Jesus fight. I actually liked that performance more than the 3rd fight, which I feel gets universally overrated. I think he had quite a few better performances. I also think he was a lot more skilled early on in his career than he's given credit for, mainly because he was just so vicious.

 

Something to consider when looking at Ray's flatfooted performance in Montreal is the lethal firepower he demonstrated by coldcocking Green in his previous outing. The idea that the smaller and older Duran would be able to stagger Leonard without being stunned in return wasn't likely to have occurred to many observers before Roberto rang his bell early. As sharp as he was in New Orleans, SRL was never able to dent Duran's chin like that.

In a first time matchup between Montreal Duran and Big Easy Ray, Leonard would have probably been caught and wobbled in the opening rounds, just as he was in their initial go around, establishing the complexion of the remaining bout before SRL had a chance to get on track. Ray would have always had the advantage in a rematch, but getting the better of Montreal Duran in an introductory contest is another matter.

 

Most articles I read that were published by boxing scribes after Duran-DeJesus III, and before Montreal, expressed the opinion that Palomino and DeJesus II were Duran's most skilled displays. The rubber match with DeJesus was a huge event from the build-up to the competition itself. After the fact though, Roberto's counterpunching in DeJesus II seemed to take prominence in the opinions of most experts.

Duran-DeJesus III is highly rated largely on the basis of speculation. Just how good was that version of Duran? DeJesus wasn't able to test his abilities in Las Vegas the way SRL did in Montreal. A lesser competitor than Ray would not have permitted Duran to exhibit his greatness as he did that chilly night.

 

Duodenum. How highly do you personally rate Duran's showing in the third De Jesus fight?

 

Duran certainly fought his usual style in the second fight more than the third. We was wilder and fought at quicker pace throughout the rematch. He was actually careless and got dropped by a hook in the first round of the rematch, as he had done during the first round of their non-title bout two years previously when he lost via a 10 round decision.

I thought he was better defensively throughout the third fight. He set-up his attacks with more thought and precision. He just looked a far more polished fighter across the board. Everything was just punch perfect, including the ruthless finish.

 

Nope.

 

****in-ell Robbi, over the last 2 weeks you've done more flips on the subject ov Duran than a ****in acrobat

You are indeed one ov nature's born survivor's:yep SHAMELESS:smoke

Duran said 2 Leonard that this would be his 1st professional fight, I would say that the way Duran fought this fight was a compilation ov his whole carear 2 date, it had 2 be 100%+ 2 overcome someone ov Leonards ability & size & all the posts so far really have covered every aspect ov his ability/style leading up 2 Montreal, an abolute masterclass in every aspect ov what was needed & delivered 2 defeat a bigger/stronger & faster opponant.

I wish there was a tape ov this fight without Al Berstien or Reg Gutterige yapping as they both were so pro-Leonard, especially Reg as it seeped through like poison.

I think it was Colin hart ov the "Sun" that said: That this fight should be mandatory veiwing 4 every aspiring young boxer in what it takes 2 overcome an opponant when you've been labelled "The Underdog" :good

 

One of, if not the best fights ever.

Duran was simply to good for Leonard, to quick, to good at feinting, to much hunger for Leonard to overcome. Leonard fought a good fight, but as always someone has to lose for the other to win.

These are the fights I want to watch, I don't care who loses as long as its a good match.