Is Montreal's Duran The Best Fighter Ever

SRR is the best WW and P4P the best ever, so again, saying that he would beat a fighter who is normally a lightweight is in no way a slight.

As for your comments, they're wrong because they contradict what Leonard himself said. He said after he was hit in the second round he didn't even know where he was for 3-4 rounds. So how you can take his comment and deny that he was forced to fight Duran's fight during that period of time is a mystery to me.

And as far as the fight goes, I took the comments of the fight from Leonard's own Wikipedia site, which presumably Leonard doesn't dispute. So essentially you're contradicting Leonard's own version of the event, not mine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sugar_Ray_Leonard

As to whether or not I watched the fight, I actually watched it when it occurred, can you say the same?

 

In the post fight interview after, he said he fought in a way he thought he could win (Slugging) (Post fight press conference), and it didn't happen.

He was definitely hurt bad in the second round, but I don't see how that contradicts with my statements.

He fought the way he thought he could win (Slugging), he got nailed horribly and was hurt bad, he lost a lot of the early-middle rounds, he boxed him in the late rounds to great success, the momentum was shifting to his side by the 14th/15th round, the crowd knew it and cheered him on bad. He ended up losing on the scorecards.

Duran won, and it was an amazing victory. Probably one of the best wins because of how big the fight was, Duran's prime already behind him, him being a natural lw. I get all of that.

(MD at the start, but the judge who scored it the draw actually had Duran winning so it became a UD)

But winning a fight like this and claiming that this version of Duran is the best fighter ever?

No way.

How could you even argue that if beyond me. He would be beaten by SRR and most likely Hearns would knock him spark out again, so that already solves this argument.

And no, I can't say the same. But I've watched it several times, it was quite the fight.

 

I'm not arguing that Duran's performance in Montreal is the best ever, what I am doing is accurately telling you what occurred.

And Green Man made a very good point, which is that Leonard was pretty much a flat foot fighter up until the Duran rematch so how you can argue that Leonard fought a style of a fight that he normally never fought to begin with is a real mystery. Leonard was used to using his hand speed, defense and power to win fights and he had a lot of all three, enough that he was sure he could beat Duran using the style that got him to where he was.

 

But you voted that Montreal Duran is the best fighter ever?

I just don't see it, not even close.

Because that Duran would not have beaten SRR, for one.

But for the SRL debate, want to just end it. Agree to disagree? We could go on but what's the point.

I won't convince you and you won't convince me.

I don't believe that this will go anywhere. Just a difference in opinion.

 

I wrote that I picked Duran's performance as the best ever just to **** off you Mayweather fanatics. I'm not sure why you keep bring up SRR, he was a welterweight who also fought a middle and even a lightheavy, he should be beating the likes of Duran and Mayweather and he would.

But I disagree that it's not close. Anyone who is over 35 pretty much as Duran in their top 10 all time. That's pretty elite status no matter what.

And the OP's question wasn't whether or not Duran was the best fighter ever, his question was whether or not that version of Duran was the best fighter ever, and that's a damn close call.

At Duran's absolute best he was probably in the top 4-5 all time. Obviously things like the no mas etc. brings his rankings downward and you can't simply ignore that fight and his other losses when consider his ranking.

But I don't really know which fighter fought the best fight ever, that's a pretty hard question to answer, but I do know it's not any of Mayweather's fights, that's for damn sure.

 

I know what the OP's question was, and I already said, it's a resounding no.

He was certainly brilliant and certainly has his place in the top 10 atg, probably the highest along with Ali from the 70's onward.

But I certainly CAN bring up SRR as it pertains to this question. Because Montreal Duran was at WW and SRR's prime was at WW.

So it's very relevant.

If we're talking about PRIME VS PRIME. Obviously I'm not going to bring up SRR when matched up with Duran because Duran's prime was at 35. It'd be more suitable for me to bring up Pernell Whitaker because Whitaker's best years were also at LW.

 

It's marginally relevant because SRR fought many fights at middle and he was 5'11' and Duran's 5'7" at best. Duran's prime was pretty much a lightweight, and SRR at welterweight so they're pretty much in a different category. But if you're asking whether or not the Duran of Montreal would haven't beaten SRR I don't know the answer to that question, my guess would be no, but SRR wasn't fantastically better than SRL, he just fought 150+ more fights, so it's not completely out of the question, but it is doubtful.

Whitaker is a better pick as far as a match up goes.

 

Yes Duran's prime was at LW, SRR's WW. I said that.

But since we're discussing whether or not Montreal Duran is (TBE), we CAN match SRR against him. Because SRR's prime was at WW and Montreal Duran was at WW.

Anyways, you're probably right. SRR probably was not that much better than Leonard. But I think he was still a notch above.

The man was so complete

The footwork, the power, the ability to punch well with both hands, the boxing ability, the chin, the persistence. He had it all. Everything at that weight class.

 

We finally agree on something. :good

 

I don't think we've disagreed on anything? If so, I forgot about it.

Maybe something on Mayweather?

Cheers.

 

In your dreams. When Hearns actually put Duran to sleep. Duran was on the eve of his 33th birdthday. Hearns was 25. The fight was at Light Middle which is 20 lbs over the stocky 5'7" Duran's prime weight of 134. Duran had already had two poor showings at the weight against Bentiez and Laing where he looked lethargic and slow. Meanwhile The taller broader Hearns was quite accomplished above 150 lbs with a 4 year win streak over top competition.

Put the WW Hearns who got stoppped by Leonard in there with the razor sharp Duran of 1980, and a case can be made you would see a different outcome.

Career wise, Duran tops Hearns. Notching wins in his later years and above his best weight against Hearns conquerors Leonard and Barkely, and taking Hagler to the limit.

 

Exactly. Leonard was a boxer puncher than, not a mover. He was the one doing the stalking agianst Hearns and Bentiez.

Leonard looked so good boxing Duran in teh rematch, because Duran himself looked so poor.

They only had one match where both men were near their best and the older Duran moving up in weight, edged it.

 

Leonard "stalked" Hearns only after he had hurt Hearns. Before that, Leonard was giving Hearns all kinds of movement.

 

No more movement than he showed against Duran in the early rounds. Leonard was actually looking to control the distance and keep off the ropes agianst the smaller Duran. Against Hearns, he has moments of retreat where he's looking to set up traps but is also looking to close the distance and pressure far more often, educated pressure with lots of upper body movement but pressue none the less.


In the first round, Leonard certianly doesn't look like a guy wanting to stand toe to toe at range but Duran is forcing the issue and getting inside with feints and footwork. We've seen fights where Leonard wanted to pressure and get inside, this is not one of them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuGZVkYuHM4