Leonard deserves more credit for the Duran 2nd fight than he gets

I think it counts for just as much. Always did. Duran had one loss before Leonard. He knew what he was doing. Had that been Luigi Minchillo in front of him he would have beaten him. Leonard fought the fight which would always beat Duran. The excuses Duran gets are not allowed with other fighters. And some will say he earned it with his lightweight reign. No one in his lightweight reign was the caliber fighter of Leonard, or Benitez or Hearns or Hagler. And he lost to them all. I give him credit as a great, but the excuses are just excuses. And he had them everytime he lost to a great. He beat the Minchillos but not the Hearns level. And for the Hearns and Benitez level he didn't train. What doesn't seem right. He trains for Minchillo and Moore but not for Heans and Benitez. Well he won the first two and lost againt Hearns and Benitez. he had a great career, but not great enough wins before those guys to says he lost to them because he didn't train. He never really beat that level before. No matter what. Dejesus and Buchanan were not Hearns and Leonard. And Ray beat them all. Ray proved with great fighters more than Duran did, so you have to say he fought the wrong fight, which he did. Ray would not fight Duran on the inside. He said he was trying to prove something. Compare the 1st round in the 1st and second fights.

 

That's because I have no argument for you to understand.

I'm asking how long duran had to prepare for the rematch. A question, not an argument.

 

it was an account by Rin correspondent Randy Gordon who was on assignment. WHat's he supposed to do, cover up details that you dont approve of? That's what's goin on in the Trayvon Martin case

but eventually the truth gets out

 

for full details check out Randy Gordon's account of Leonard Duran

 

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1HynS7Q5MYE[/ame] go to 18:50 of this video and watch for the next minute or two. What did he say? He said he locked in and fought him at his own game. Look at 20:17 "I knew if I fought him my way I would beat him" He proved it. Out of Ray's own mouth.

 

SRL deserves full credit for the No Mas fight. he made Duran look like a fool...a complete fool. I think he would have won the Montreal fight as well if he had elected to forsake the trench warfare for the same tactics he used in New Orleans. Leonard was brilliant in the No Mas fight.

 

How long between fight being signed and first bell ringing?

 

It takes more character to train ones ass off and return to avenge a loss confidently and immediately then anything else in boxing, period.

If it doesn't get due credit as a great win, it should be noted as the moment Leonard proved he had just as much heart as a fighter like Duran did.

If Duran undertrained, or whatever, he was a disgrace to his belts that night and deserved to lose, simple as.

They are 1-1, as far as I've always been concerned. Each fighter put it together one night for a win against an opponent who simply didn't execute.

They deserve to have their names mentioned together.

 

Thinblack walks among us like an uncaring onmipotent god casting his pearls to us swine.

Who else could get people talking enthusiastically about such a tired worn out topic that barely got a page worth of replies 4 years ago.

 

they are 2-1.. Since I payed for a PPV fight between the middlweight champ at the time (Duran) and the supermiddlweight champ (Leonard) for it not to count. Had Duran won in 1989 people would be saying how he proved he was better than Leonard by beating him twice.
Ray wins and Duran is old. Ray wins the second fight and Duran didn't train. Benitez beats Duran and Duran didn't train. Hearns beats Duran and Duran didn't train. Duran beat Moore and Barkley and the greatest wins of all time. There is a pattern here, and the fact is these were his fights against the best and quickest fighters he ever fought.

 

Ray Leonard generally gets far more credit for a few big wins than any fighter in history. His best wins are disproportionately weighted in his favour in "all-time ratings" as it is.

 

When you beat great fighters Benitez,Duran,Hearns in 4 fights within 2 years that is pretty impressive. And he beat Kalule. Most people would beat Kalule for the 154 pound title would have that as a big footnote, but it is never mentioned with Ray. He won that title in June of 1981.

 

I'm not saying his achievements are not impressive.
I'm saying that his most impressive wins are stated and re-stated ad naseum, to the point where they are disproportionately rated.

To say he doesn't get enough credit for beating Duran is absurd, because everywhere we look we see "beat Benitez, Duran, Hearns and Hagler".


I'm not sure the Kalule win or the 154 pound title (esp. at that time) are underrated. The division just didn't attract the best fighters until the early 80s. Most world-class fighters ignored light-middle until the 80s.

 

good point. It would seem like wins over those guys are not as great as it seems including Hagler when we know Ray only fought 40 times in his career compared to 67 times for both Hagler and Hearns and Duran fought 115 times or so,. But his wins regardless were better than any of the others put together.

 

:deal