Think he was more referring to the fact that Leonard got the rub in fights which where both guys had a genuine claim (Hagler) or in fights where the overwhelming consensus is that he was lucky (Hearns II). Duran-Leonard I ain’t really in either category because it wasn’t as close as Leonard-Hagler, and the right guy clearly got the nod. Montreal was very competitive and a great fight, but I don’t think it was super-close. It was a solid, clear win for Duran. Anyway, back on topic. Leonard was better at 147, and 154 was Mike’s peak weight. He looked a lot more secure and dominant there than he did at 160 – but was that because he was genuinely the perfect Light-Middleweight fighter, or because the fighters he was facing there were generally a rung lower in quality and a bit more suited to his style than the guys he fought at the higher weight? Probably a bit of both, I guess. I think McCallum’s slow starts probably give him too much of a mountain to climb here. Don’t see how he gets close enough consistently to work Leonard’s body and though Leonard might not hurt him, I think he blinds McCallum and keeps him off-balance enough with his flurries to bank the lion’s share of rounds. A younger Leonard at 154 isn’t going to be as rangy and no-risk as he was against Hagler at Middleweight. Leonard by about three rounds.
Mike's chance here really is to keep Leonard off balance with the jab. He had the longer reach, and a stiff, accurate and very active jab, so this is not out of the question. His jab lacked in speed, though.