Is Sugar Ray Leonard overrated?

Another great post.

 

What doublechin fails to mention is the number of even rounds scored was highly criticized at the time. Also the closeness of the bout was not backed up by those who scored the bout from ringside. Most felt Duran had won the bout. I only found one reference where Leonard was thought to be the winner.

 

Good post here.

I've never bought the 'Duran was rushed into a rematch' excuse either.
Duran has gone on record as saying that he knew there was going to be a rematch after their first fight.

Whether it was 5 months or 5 years, Duran was always going to blow up between fights. He just didn't have that discipline not to. He was always going to try and take the weight off at the last minute.

Had the rematch been in three months, folk would have said the rematch was too soon.
In three years...too late. Folk would have said that Leonard waited for him to get old.
It seems like when it comes to this rematch, historically it's a 'lose-lose' scenario for Leonard.
When WOULD have been the right time to graciously invite Mr. Duran to a rematch?

 

So there is a consenus that SRL is an ATG, one of the best 147lbers ever below SRR and fought in an insanely competitive era. What exactly are we arguing in this thread, it doesnt make any sense? He didnt look as dominant as he moved up in weight - so what? That happens to all the greats.

 

Leonard is perhaps the most classic case of "quality over quantity" when it comes to his number of fights (Michael Spinks is also another classic case).

Leonard did a lot in a short period of time. In a two year period, he beat undefeated versions of Wilfred Benitez, Thomas Hearns, and a 72-1 Roberto Duran. Also throw in the fact that he defeated the #1 154 lb. fighter in the world in Ayub Kalule as a tune-up for Hearns.

I don't really hold it against him that he lost the first fight to Duran, I just credit Duran for fighting a brilliant fight. And for all of Leonard's talk about how Duran used his mouth to bait Leonard into a brawl...Leonard wasn't traditionally such a mover like he was in the 2nd and 3rd Duran fights, and the Hagler one. He generally boxed rather flat-footed, circled his opponent, was a pretty hard hitter (especially with the left hook). He was, IMO, better in this style than when he changed his style for the Duran rematch, not for the first Duran fight. Sugar Ray Robinson, for example, was better as a "dancer" than Leonard IMO.

Montreal was simply a great performance/achievement for Duran, and Leonard did a good job of changing his style for the rematch and frustrating Duran with his game plan and mental tactics.

Leonard was losing after 13 against Hearns, but again, I think this was really more of a credit to both fighters, Hearns for recovering from the 6th and 7th rounds to take that lead, and Leonard for pulling off the win.

I scored the Hagler bout even. Both guys had seen better days. Hagler peaked against Sibson in 83' IMO. In the Roldan fight a year later, his defensive reflexes seemed noticeably slower and he was getting hit fairly often. Maybe just a bit of an off-night, but Hagler clearly was past his prime against Leonard, and Leonard himself was 5-7 years past his peak and 2 divisions above his best weight. Leonard's stamina also had suffered. I still thought it was an impressive performance all things considered, I'm just not sure exactly how to rate it and how much it should boost Leonard's all-time rankings.

Leonard from 79-82 was one of the best fighters ever on film. His inactivity hurts his all-time ranking, as does his cherry-picking in the late 80s, but he's still an ATG.

Joe Calzaghe? LOL. He's really out of place among these guys.

 

Good post.

 

good post :good

 

Leonard tried to fight Duran at his own game in the first fight Flat footed
instead of boxing him..His fight for me that does it was first Hearns fight

I like Tommy way more then Ray but Ray showed his greatness in that
Tommy's the man in my opinion but Ray beat him that night

 

Duran quit.

Yes Duran quit no one was more shocked then Arcel who said that
Before that fight if you would have told him Duran would quit.
If he had a gun he would have pulled it out and shot you for saying what he thought was impossible..
But the impossible happened
DURAN OUIT

 

AP had the Duran winning the first bout by all of two points, 8-6-1 in terms of rounds. That card is in line with most of the cards provided by members of the press watching at ring side.

It was a closely contested fight, and that was reflected in the scorecards.

 

As mentioned very few had Leonard the winner. I only found the NY Times favoring Leonard by 2 points. At the end of the fight no one had any doubts of the winner.

 

Think RING had it a draw, no?

 

I bet you also believe Leonard fought the wrong fight against Duran and that is why he lost huh?

 

I can understand why Duran quit, honestly. People keep talking as though its embarrassing. SRL was doing a Mayweather...better than Mayweather can. That is excruciating.
SRL didn't come to fight, he came to outpoint. SRL came for Tour De France, just...on his bike. There's no catching SRL, a GOAT fighter, when he does the very thing that made him a great fighter in the amateurs (that translates fantastically well in the pros).

But, respect SRL for coming to fight in the first match - he did it the traditional fighters way at the start, he came up short, nothing wrong per say in wanting to outpoint.

 

To a decent extent I believe so. I remember watching an exceptional video that tried to explain that Duran didn't allow Leonard to do certain things that Leonard wanted to, but yet the difference between the first and second fight is too noticeable.