And some think Frazier >Bugner was a gift and Trinidad>De la Hoya was a gift and Quarry>Patterson was a gift. You could do that with any boxer. So much is made of Ray Leonard in this thread. He has become Superman. A lot of people think his draw with Hearns was a gift and his victory over Hagler was a gift. I don't. However if you take those victories away from him he looks a lot more like a very good fighter but not a great one and Duran's defeat of him looks much less impressive. That's the problem with counterfactuals. You change one fact. You change them all. Even Ken Norton didn't think he won all three fights.
This it it. A 215 pound Duran is a notably different fighter than the one at 135. Heavyweights are up against it genetically when compared to lighter fighters.
Who would have thought a simple greeter thread would churn out so much debate. Red's on fire. I want to park this here - 16 sportswriters polled out of 30 picked Roberto Duran by knockout and another picked him by decision. So for many Duran beating Duran was expected and also fell short of their expectations in that Ray lasted the distance.
I took it as who fought more greeters or was more likely to fight one. Definitely Duran he used to get pretty hyped up.
A lot is made of Ray Leonard generally, not just in this thread. Most people have him in their top 5 welters, all-time. Yes, and the version that Duran beat was right at his peak. Talking about his later fights with Hagler or Hearns in the rematch is irrelevant here. The fighter Duran fought and beat was prime. That version of Leonard was hell for anyone. Also what not should be forgotten is that Duran was pretty much a veteran already. How many fights did he have by this point? 70? Something like that? Cleaned out his own division already. Just watch the fight, that's all. If you're not hugely impressed by both men, then frankly I'd have to call you biased. But regardless, too much is made of just one fight... and that goes for Ali too. Rumble is an important fight in history and has gone down in history as one of Ali's greatest fights. (Personally I rarely ever watch it. For me it's not a great fight. It's dramatic to a point, but not a fight with great skill on display.)
Great post. I would only argue one point, that Montreal Leonard was prime. I still think he had some development left and he learnt a lot in Montreal. Okay. Two points. I would also argue that some of Ali's straight punching was brilliant, especially off the ropes, in the Rumble. That fight, more than any other of Ali's, impressed me with the speed, accuracy and sharpness of his punches. But you make several great points about the wear and tear that Duran had on him, that taking the Leonard of 87 onwards is irrelevant - Duran faced the outstanding talent SRL was in 1980 who, while I still think improved, was a great fighter and, finally, that you just have to be so impressed by both men in Montreal. Finally, finally, Ray gets a lot of bad press on this forum and it's not warranted imo. Never mind what the ring size was against Hagler or whether Marvin had slipped (that ridiculous argument that suggests MMH was physically slipping more by regularly fighting than Ray was by being inactive and sticking half of Columbia up his nose in the same timeframe). Who cares what Lalonde was made to weigh? The Leonard Duran beat was a near perfect fighting machine. Either side of Duran, Ray outslicked Benitez and outslugged Hearns. That's a great, great fighter. And thus a great, great win for Duran who should be lb for lb top ten or thereabouts even without it. But I still think Ali was greater, despite the strength of your points. That's because I think Ali is the greatest. It's one of the few things I would have agreed with him about.
The ring in Zaire was only sixteen feet. The Ali camp wanted a 20 foot ring but agreed to a 19 foot ring. Somehow they ended up with a 16 foot ring. Zach Clayton the refereee couldn't believe Ali agreed to fight Foreman "in a ring the size of a telephone booth."