"Montreal" Roberto Duran vs. "New Orleans" Sugar Ray Leonard

You sure did. That part of the discussion was about "Uno Mas" in 1989. Duran cut him wide open over the eye in round 11 with one of the very few shots he actually landed in the fight.

They stuffed it like a turkey with a big wad of gauze for round 12 but had it been another 3 rounds, Duran may have smelled blood and gone in to land a few more. He was known to aim well at the injury (like he did against Hagler for the last 4 or so rounds once he saw the swelling). A TKO for Duran inside of 15 would not be out of the question.

 

Thanks dude! :good

 

This is an excellent match-up...the Montreal Duran against the New Orleans Leonard. My guess is that Leonard would have won a very close and hard fought decision.

Certainly Duran was not at his best in New Orleans in November 1980. Not even close. He was mentally unprepared and he had to lose a lot of weight in the sauna in the days before the fight.

But it's also true that Sugar may not have been at his best in Montreal in June 1980. Sugar was in great shape that night, but he made terrible tactical mistakes in trying to hold his own with Duran on inside.

All in all, I'd rate a peak Leonard as being just a little better than a peak Duran. Both were definitely all time greats.

 

An awesome fight. Duran has jumped up from lightweight to welterweight, actually, Duran had been as low a bantam.

 

He was a growing boy at that point!

 

True Duran was well past it, as was Ray. My thing is Duran had performed superbly against Barkley the fight before and had no more meaningful or important battle on earth than SRL. I think you yourself touched base with his fighting so long being relevant to erasing the stigma of SRL II. We know he was in great shape and could still fight - Barkley proved it.

Maybe we are nearly on the same page on this one - i simply think that SRL at this stage was far too slick for Duran as shown by Duran looking slow and listless vs Ray's movement. I think Duran was in excellent condition and it was Leonard's movement (As well as Duran's age of course, both well past their best) more than his speed and power combo that had Duran looking uninspired.

For the record this bout obviously contains only the skeletons of the great pair. Leonard was shown to have lost his snap badly next fight against an excellent young fighter blessed with speed to burn - which also tells us just how far past it Duran was IMO to be outsped like he was.

If Duran didn't known Leonard would box him after what happened in their third encounter i'd be rather disappointed. Steward and many others said we'd see a return to his old boxing form from SRL due to Duran being a lot shorter and slower than Hearns. History openly shows us Leonard had to fight Hearns like a man as he simply could not match Hearns from the outside. He had to take risks and get inside or simply cop a shellacking.

This is where we differ - a bit. I just think at this stage he couldn't catch him and was too slow to move forward. He had struggled with fast movers for years up in the weights.

I could also say that when Leonard was "ready and able" he won. He was outmanouvered in the mind games for the first fight, came in with the wrong mindset and was also ambushed by just how good and strong Duran was at the weight - he learnt some very valuable lessons. He came in perfect for the rematch but Duran did not it seems.

Duran was definitely ready for the third fight, just not able i will agree.

I still wonder if speed would be the best chance against him at 135, tho he would still certainly come in fave against most anyone i can think of.

Totally agree, i am just saying he wasn't totally inept as he really did have uncanny anticipation.

This is the thing - either Leonards performance vs Norris showed just how badly past it vs speed Duran really was or he aged significantly between the two bouts. Leonard looked quite slick vs Duran, outslicked him easily, yet looked in turn at least as bad as Duran had looked (vs SRL III) vs Norris. No doubt Norris would have his moments against most any boxer, but peak SRL was never going to look so foolish and slow against him.

Yeah, good comments there for sure.

Yeah we'll have to agree to disagree. Hagler had Duran in FAR more trouble than Leonard ever did and i do doubt he was more wary of a blown up Leonard than Hagler especially.

Duran also showed plenty of speed and sharpness against Moore. It's not like he was never any good again post Montreal or suddenly lost all speed, snap and reflex. This again is my point - Moore stood right in front of him whilst Benitez was chock full of speed, unbelievable defensive reflex and countering ability. Duran also showed great guile and skill to bring out the worst in Hagler. I just don't see him as the dead man walking vs Benitez. The man had never copped a hiding.

Well i for one (and am not lone) think Benitez found his niche at 154 and was as strong there as he had ever been. Trouble was he had been fighting ages, wasn't that hard a trainer and was soon to get old overnight. I think Montreal Duran would be favoured over Benitez but i do think Benitez would cause severe drama and i cannot write him off. I highly doubt Benitez would trade with Duran as SRL did and i also don't think he would get bullied and caught quite as easily.

That i do. A great night of boxing and high drama.

Duran is old school for quantity and one reason he could go on so long was because excepting Hearns he never ever copped a hiding, and took a lot less fullforce blows than many might realise. The thing is we know Duran could still performa at an extreme level even so late into his career, so consistency and ability vs all styles at these higher weights has to come into question.

You yourself say Duran can not string together many top performances back to back but you were also quite vocal that he didn't win the ESB 135 tournament where competitors fought one top fighter after another. By your own admissions Duran would have surely came in uninspired at some point and lost to someone he may have been better than.

Yes, but as i maintain Duran had very little wear and tear punch damage wise, which is why one very significant figure still believed in him and was instrumental in his Davy Moore resurgence. He knew he was anything but fully damaged goods.

You will find that Arcel did indeed come back to the Duran corner for the Benitez bout, a bout he lost heavily.

Incredible efforts, no argument there. I find Armstrongs efforts at 147 to be comparative in esteem. Hank actually kicked arse there for quite a few fights, an incredible effort. Of course he comes in anywhere in the top 5 of alltime.

 

I do mark him harder than many here, and ask a lot more questions - for sure. I readily accept people offering him as the number 1 Lightweight of all time. I readily accept his first fight vs SRL as one of the greatest efforts ever in a boxing ring irregardless of percieved circumstance. I also readily accept him anywhere in the ATG Top 10 from 3 or 4 to about 8. I'd be surprised if anyone could beat him at 135 and i think he'd demolish Pryor at 140. I also think the Montreal Duran would be anywhere from 3 to say 7 head to head ever (in one off's tho, we both know consistemcy is a worry) in the division despite his size and the factors against him.

 

What I have never understood is the premise of the lazy journalists who analysed the first 2 fights.

In the 1st fight Leonard (bigger, faster, stronger, more powerful) is said to have not moved and that this caused his downfall...

1st of all why wouldn't a naturally bigger man with excellent power in both fists choose to stand and trade with a smaller man whose best days were at 135?

2nd-ly watch the fight... the first round is mostly a stand off. then in the second round Leonard nearly goes down and holds for dear life. Leonard himself admits that he didn't toally come round for a few rounds after that by which point Duran had been all over him. So whatever Leonard's gameplan was or wasn't we'll never know because he had to improvise after getting caught by a punch whilst he was on the move. Duran was quicker than he anticipated at range and so it was safer for Leonard to give up the body and stand in close. This way he could land his best shots and he felt safer there than he did on the outside. When they do encounter one another at range Duran makes a mug of him. Leonard's best work is in the toe-to-toe action.

Then in the second fight Duran is ill prepared. Leonard does move more but that doesn't have any bearing on the first fight.

After the first fight Duran lost a beat physically. he could no longer beat the sharp defensive masters. he could still beat top aggressive fighters like Cuevas, Moore, Barkley etc... but the gifts he needed to overcome the odds and beat the likes of leonard had faded.

 

That's silly, and incorrect.

That's like saying T.O. catches a touchdown showboats on Deion Sanders and he QUITS...........Maybe you've NEVER paid your hard earned dough for an event and been disappointed that someone didn't give their all.

 

John Thomas was nice enough to mention in one of his posts Duran flipping off Juanita Leonard and calling her a ***** before their first fight. This was incredibly rude and uncouth on Duran's part. Leonard seethed at this and elected to slug with Duran in the first fight. Even though many of the rounds were close and leonard seemed to be coming on strong at the end - Duran was rightly awarded the decision. So my point is that being reminded of Duran's barbaric behavior before the first fight now I understand why Leonard wanted to humiliate him in the rematch. I detest showboating but can condone it because how royally pissed Leonard was at Duran. I was a Duran fan before and after 'no mas.' My logic is you are wth someone when they are on top you have to stick with them when they have a low period. I was, of course, elated when Duran redeemed himself on his 32nd birthday at the garden in June 1983. Even Leonard came into the ring and gave him a hug!

 

Fine post.

 

Nearly as close as the first fight then.

 

Duran was in great shape and he was past it against Barkley. He was able to make one last great stand in his career and that was it. In Leonard III, Duran was 38 and didn't even wake up from his nap until the 11th round when Leonard finally got in range and Duran was able to land a shot that opened him up.

But I don't excuse Leonard -he fought like a coward that night.

I appreciate great defense more than most, but that is different than staying out of range 80% of the time and running around the ring. That is not effective aggression and against slo-mo Duran, it was patently unnecessary. Leonard is more versatile offensively than Barkley who was hanging around waiting for the receipt.

If it were the 1910s or 20s, this fight would likely have been stopped for lack of action. As it was, that fight lost more fans for boxing than I can say. I was pissed.

Granted. Duran was a headcase though -particularly around Leonard, even before Montreal. Duran hated him with a hate laced with envy.

Do you remember Hagler's commentary during the fight? He was responding to the plain fact that Duran was frozen and Ray was running. He growled "Duran wants to kill him, but he can't do nothing." He felt Duran's frustration in his toes. We all know why!

No, we agree here... the heavier Duran was too slow to move forward quickly like he did in Montreal, his hands were slower, and his reflexes were as well. Whether it is age or being out of shape, my argument stands up -Duran had reason to fear the speed and therefore the power of Leonard. And I think he did. In Montreal, he slipped the majority off them, rolled with some of them, and shook off the rest because he was not only ready to cope with the speed, he was quick as hell himself. He wasn't so ready in II and III. II because he was out of condition, and III because he was old, though not out of condition.

Ezzard made the same point above I made earlier, only with more details that strengthen the original argument. I don't buy into the "Ray Leonard PR machine's talking points". Duran wasn't allowing Leonard to do anything but keep Duran off of him. He forced the fight, which was exactly what he was trained to do.

Leonard was not going to be able to stay away from Duran in Montreal unless they fought on one of your Australian grazing fields.

I can't disagree with that...

No, I don't believe that. Hagler never hurt Duran. That shot mid-fight where Duran's leg did a dance was a glancing blow and Duran was off balance -which is why he shook his head vigorously at Hagler.

Duran got tired trying to maneuver off of a leaden MW in Hagler. Hagler was strong and solid and Duran a few times spun off of him and Hagler didn't move. Point being, Duran got tired as hell in there with a full-blown MW, but I would argue that Leonard's shots stung him more.

Duran was 5 years past his prime against Moore and 27 pounds heavier than his natural weight. He performed wonderfully against a comparative amateur, but he was not nearly as formidable as he was in Montreal. He wasn't a dead man walking, I wouldn't say that ---but he was not as sharp as he would need to be and wasn't in a weight class closer to his best to cope with the genious that was Wilfred. Duran may never have beaten Wilfred at 154, just like he wouldn't beat Hearns at 154. But I hold that he'd beat both at WW.

Okay... but the fact that Duran, an overstuffefd and aging lightweight had lost or was rapidly losing speed, timing, reflexes, output, balance, power, and yet was defeating respectable guys or contenders half his age many of whom had every physical advantage also must be factored in. Duran was winning on memory alone.

Let me streamline that line... After the point where Duran's physical powers began to deteriorate, he was fighting larger, younger, more dangerous fighters... at times on not much more than memory alone. At the juncture of his career where he would have most needed his full array of powers, he no longer commanded them. Beowulf would have had a helluva harder time with Grendel when his hair was graying.

That is why I rank him so high. That is yet another reason why... Duran is greater than Ali.

You're mistaken.

This content is protected

<----that guy, the prime Duran was consistently great. Duran got inconsistent after about 70 fights. Only after he hit 30 and fought larger and more dangerous men did he have the consistently problem.

That someone was Bob Arum. And this point is another reason to consider... a fighter who comes out of a 120 fight career against so many dangerous punchers naturally larger than he, unscathed, tells you something else. It wasn't luck.

Arcel was invited back, yes, as an advisor. His role was not what it once was. There were also strange circumstances surrounding the training camp as well. I won't go into it becuase it really doesn't excuse the loss.

um. yeah. so doesn't Duran............................................................................................................................... But not Ali.

 

Why thank you

 

That is more than fair. Don't let my griping get in the way -I appreciate the way you force review and reconsideration.