Ray Leonard didn't really fight that much out of character in the first Duran fight

Wtf? Virgil Hill ain't no great.

 

LOL @ this banned Mofo.

 

thats my friend N you're talking about.

 

Sugar Ray was a complete fighter, he fought however he had to, to get the win. He was definatley slick tho and he liked to dance. He was dancin in his amateur days.

 

I think he is . Why isn't he a great? Let me ask you that? 25 or so title defenses. Best light heavy for a while. Beat some good guys. Duran's lightweight competition was not great, and he only has the win against Ray to boost him to great. So why isn't Virgil great? Title defenses, longevity etc. He did not have the charisma or machismo of Duran, but he was consistent. He might have the record for total rounds in title fights. Some of his stats broke records, but he is not great? And then some say Tito or Cotto are great, well if Virgil is not those guys never will be. One of the most underrated fighters ever I think. Because he did not have a signature punch except his counter left, which was not as effective as he got older.

 

Duran was just better than Leonard, who was also among the very best fighters I've ever seen on film. Duran on his A-game was just that good.

 

True comment, but that's a comment Mag never will agree with dispite the evidence. Funny thing is that it's not like we can't actually watch these guys and see for ourselves.

And as far as the rematch goes, many seem to think it was a one sided affair with SRL winning every round and showing what a fluke the first fight was, when in fact the scores were 68-66, 68-66, 67-66, for Leonard at the time of the stoppage...hardly a blow out. In fact it was the closeness of the fight that caused so many people to wonder why Duran chose not to continue.

 

how can I agree with a comment which doesn't have facts to back it up. Duran was just better than Leonard? How? If that were the case he would have won the rematch and the third fight against Ray, not to mention stop Ray when Ray fought his fight in the first fight. He would have beaten Benitez whom Leoanrd beat and he would have beaten Hearns like Leonard did. Where is the evidence for Duran beating better? Leonard was greater against great fighters than Duran. Much much much better. Duran is 1-5 against ATG fighters and Ray is 5-1-1. What evidence am I not looking at?

 

well for starters you're not looking at the fact Leonard was a natural welterweight at 147 and Duran was a lightweight at 135. Many things spring from this..like the fact Benitez was never a lightweight, neither was SRL. Both Benitez and SRL were about 5' 10" and naturally bigger, Hearns was over 6' and both Benitez and SRL were several years younger than Duran. But you also have to realize Duran's record in the books is largely based on his accomplishment at lightweight, his title defenses and who he fought. The going up in weight and fighting ATG's at higher divisions is largely a bonus. And just think of it, he wasn't that far off from beating Hagler..who many consider the best middleweight of all time, and certainly in the top 5. What you don't really understand is this type of fighter aren't even suppose to be competitive. What other lightweight would have almost beat a prime Hagler? and did in fact beat the second best Welterweight ever. How is this not a great accomplishment?

The one flaw Duran had was consistancy, because he liked to party very hard after he won, sort of in the mold of Tyson, and that hurt his legacy because he wasn't at his beat when he fought Leonard the second time or Hearns, but that doesn't give him a pass on the outcome, those fights count against him just like his accomplishments count for him, and that's the way it should be. He fought over 100 fights, he certainly wasn't going to win them all, especially if he kept fighting bigger guys until he lost. Not many fighters put themselves in a position to truly test themselves in that situation. Hagler never moved from middle to see how he'd do at lightheavy, and Jones never stayed at heavy to see how he'd do after beating Ruiz. With Duran, he fought the best fighters he could fight, win or loss.


But let me ask you this quesiton how would you honest expect thing to unfold when two greats meet and one is both significantly bigger and younger? Think of Michael Spinks, fighting Mike Tyson for example and you get the idea of what normally happens. Do you think Pac would beat SRL or have any chance whatsoever against someone like Hagler, of course not. Now in fairness to Pac he's even naturally smaller than Duran, but not by much. They're basically the same height, Duran was just a big thicker. But what about Floyd against Hagler, I believe they're about the same height, think Floyd could last 12 rounds with Hagler?

 

Like you are making excuses for Leonard in this post.

 

This is an absolutely great post:good.How so very true!

 

What would you say were Leonard's 5 best performances?

 

It's just an excuse

 

What hurt Ray was getting caught with that terrific punch in the 2nd round. That probably cost him the fight, and with Duran scaring the s**t out of him, it was a wrap.