Is Sugar Ray Leonard overrated?

Not so sure about Duran. It's his fault, but still.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Who would have thought

 

Yeah, the rematch feels a bit more like Duran's loss than Leonard's win.

 

That's true but it should still count.

 

I rewatched the fight for the first time - and it was ages since it saw it the first time.

I think Leonard puts on a great performance, a fact that's overshadowed by Duran's disgraceful quit. But the fact is that he did quit - without being badly beat up in any way or close to being stopped or hopelessly behind on points. That does take away from the victory, no doubt about that. Even though it's hard to see a way back in for Duran, since Leonard is a step ahead of him in the exchanges. And I think Duran was well aware of that and quit rather than being outboxed to a decision.

But since Duran wasn't in an dire straits in any way (unlike Liston who seemed to be gassing and on the way to being stopped as predicted by Clay) it isn't a conclusive victory.

A bad, bad mark on Duran, but short of a real triumph for Leonard.

 

Personally, I don't see how Duran's quitting is supposed to be Leonard's problem.. But yes, a decisive stoppage or decision would have looked better.

 

Victory was more conclusive than Duran's in the fist fight...

 

you don't make sense Foxy, again :blood

you say all that glitters is not gold in SRL case, WRONG,,, think about it Foxy??? Are you stupid? If you want to say he wasn't nearly as good as Americans and SRL fan boys claim he was, well please do, as that would be a fair position you knucklehead. I would even agree with you to a DEGREE. See how you just go off the rails without consideration when trying to make your points?

I don't claim him as the best ever at WW (etc) but he is certainly rated very highly as a ATG not just by Americans but internationally. Even if he is rated in the top 20 of all time that is obviously "golden" comparatively.

Its like me trying to claim all that glitters is not gold in Duran's case just because he lost a few fights. Its a stupid thing to say and makes no sense which is your specialty.

Its like you trying to claim you aren't a RACIST even after sending me 60 or so PMs the last few months constantly referring to my blackness, my thick lips, my broad nose, calling me Kunta Kinta, as well as constantly putting down Africans as sub-human for selling their tribes people into slavery, etc, etc, etc. Its hateful stupid stuff Foxy, you are lucky I am a gentle fella or I would track you down and smack your face for freely spewing such certified hatred from the safety that your laptop affords you :rasta

 

Well, you can always argue a close decision of course. But not much to say about a quit job like that... So, yeah, that's one way of looking at it.

 

Mostly it's Duran's problem. It a huge black mark and probably is prohibitive from a top 10 ranking p4p imo. Funny, how Leonard is seen as the phony and Duran as the true warrior when their behavior in these two fights shows the absolute opposite picture.

Duran came off the worse in those two fights, by a wide margin. Leonard fought his heart out in a losing battle against the better man on the night. Duran just quit and walked away against the better man on the night.

 

I don't think their reputations are based on just these two fights, but rather over the course of their careers.

 

Of course there are much more than that to both. But when we're talking fighters in the top 10 bracket p4p (and in terms of skill and ability, I think both are in that picture) quitting like Duran did in New Orleans is quite damaging.

I know nothing like it in boxing history really. Well, Oliver McCall, but that was a full mental breakdown. And, yes, Liston if you discount the possibility of an injury (and if you compare it to cases like Cerdan-LaMotta and Vitaly-Byrd, it's hard to believe injury had much to do with it). So, yes, Liston's quitting in the first and possibly the second as well is probably in the same range.

But you perhaps mean that the "phoney" and "true warrior" stuff is based on their careers as a whole? Well, Leonard engaged in some silliness when it comes to winning titles in two divisions on one night against one opponent and also some catch weight stuff. But I don't think you can fault him much for anything he did in the ring. He showed great courage and determination against both LaLonde and Hearns whatever you might think of the other stuff with multiple titles and catch weights etc. And when he lost he did so because the other guy simply was better on the night. Perhaps he let Duran get into his head in Montreal, I don't know, but watching that fight I can't say he embarrassed himself in any way. And Norris and Camacho were just better fighters at that time.

Duran behaved like a true warrior many times, perhaps never more so than against Barkley. But New Orleans was one time when he didn't.

 

How dare you bring common sense into the equation? Particularly when the Leonard fan boys are spewing their usual garbage. They would have anyone stupid enough to believe them thinking Montreal was a hiccup on Leonards otherwise perfect career, and the New Orleans pantomime as the fight of the decade.

As for their respective careers, of course a guy of Duran's physical stature should ALWAYS rank higher than Leonard in any ATG list for his achievements. Especially when you take into account he NEVER demanded a catch weight for any fight he fought no matter how much bigger the other guy was.

 

I consider that an important, and often under considered, point.

 

Fighter X = 2-0 and retired. 2 wins against two of the best ever.
Fighter Y = 10-0 and retired. All are against good fighters but no way near the best ever.
Who's greater?
Clearly Fighter X.
Fighter X represents what SRL's greatness is about.