How much does "adaptability" play into this, either before or during the fight? Taking into consideration things like: reach, lateral movement, adapting to the strong/weak sides of an opponent; for example, how many times have you seen an inexperienced fighter sit right on the last inch of an opponent's longer reach, or circle to his right against a good left hook puncher? And then there are the plans we make and the ones vaporized once exposed to the light. Changing a strategy mid-fight is a skillset all its own. Is a domineering will, whether in outright aggression or in elusive movement often the result of knowing yourself and your opponent?
The Leonards', Moore, and Gene Tunney stride high in this category. Ray may get the nod from me because of his dismantling of Duran and defeat of Hagler (although I will argue to the death that his tactics to gain advantages do NOT add to his glory, they do add to the level of his strategic mind) and particularly his defeat of Hearns I. That's 3 ATGs that he whipped primarily due to strategy. Moore's longevity and ability to win when he was gray against far younger fighters is nothing to sneeze at. He was very clever in there and studied his opponents like he was writing a thesis. Although his strategy failed him at times (Ezzard, Burley, Marciano -particularly), the sheer weight of his conquests count for much. He had an excellent strategy for Rock. But it failed. No shame, Rocky's style was designed to make cerebral fighters look like horizontal bookworms. Durelle: "I have fought smart men before, but never anyone as smart as that fellow." Tunney studied Greb and Dempsey and with a little help from a friend (Benny), was able to defeat Greb enough to win the 'tournament' in the eyes of many historians, and then go on beat a faded Dempsey. Beating Loughren, Carpentier, and Gibbons isn't easy and those wins with an injured hand against Risko and Delaney help his case. Leonard, in terms of sheer intelligence is probably THE top dog for me. But that's theoretical... his conquests just aren't quite as deep. ...and let's not forget Gans and Lanford -and Fitz' who learned priceless strategies for effective punching from Jem Mace...
Ray was a great strategist, but part of his strategy was to attain what I see as unfair advantages... enticing a partying Duran into the rematch too soon, insisting on 12 rounds instead of 15 against Hagler, etc... It is a lesser form of implementing the manly art. Moore was looking at devising a master plan to maneuver Marciano into the range his right. That's good stuff. Requiring a large gymnasium sized ring against Hagler just isn't. Leoanard was an opportunist par excellence. Is that what the Roman's would call virtue? I think not. And let's remember that boxing is one of the few undeniable tests of manhood left in civilized societies of the Christian west. The Leonard Legions have no way of denying these arguments. Instead of acknowledging that they do in fact take some of the luster off of two major Leonard victories, they play the blame game or say "so what" and go into contortions.
I don't think he was just a great strategist in general. For example, his boxing against Duran in their rematch, then later his display against Hagler. But it was exactly how he's regarded and seen as a great strategist. IMO it was because he just knew when to strike and when to sit back assess things; going defensive. He played the percentage game very well, maybe thats a good way to sum it up. Mind games were part of the reason he beat Hagler. As Clancy said during commentary "Looks like Ray's done a phyce job on him". Paying Hagler compliments wasn't what he wanted to hear. Hagler would much have prefered it if Leonard said "I'm going to knock your head off".
Oh, I dig, ok. Can't say i hadn't heard of some of these tactics being used by other fighters though. Don't alot of "boxers" for example, who have the clout insist on a larger ring? Don't get me wrong. It's a thin line maybe between a strategy and a ploy, and I do get what you mean about retaining the honor of what is the last survinving test of true manhood, but another truth is that at that level of competition, it is a game of inches. For myself, I always dug the boxers, more accurately the boxer/punchers, because a guy that can't hit that's in with a swarmer/puncher is going to be in trouble sooner or later if he doesn't have enough startch at the end of his shots to keep him out. I guess it's a question of where one would draw the line, what one sees as unfair play. Tell ya the truth, that thing about Leonard pushing a partying Duran into an early fight I don't find so attractive. Now, if it were actually Ray who'd sent the hookers and champagne and the powder over to Duran gratis and with no note attached, that would at least be funny.
I know he's a modern day fighter, but B-Hop is one of the greatest in terms of being a 'clever; fighter.
Alright champion. You relatively new to the forum? I see you haven't posted in the thousands. Maybe you just drop by now and again.
Thats because Leonard could negotiate and show his hand extremely well. Don't forget that Leonard was boxings 'golden boy' during the 80's. The promoters and opponents people, managers etc, knew that if they never went along with Leonard's demands, maybe no fight would have taken place. The fights with Hagler and Lalonde are the classic examples. Leonard sold and marketed himself superbly. He knew he was a diamond in the eyes of the public.
Yeah, relatively. I check in about everyday over the past couple months to read and see if I have anything to add. Often I don't, but I learn alot.
Well it is always about bread, isn't it? Meaning, we get to look at these guys from the outside in, and on ESB Classic even in retrospect. We get the chance to see what they became after the sum total of their careers were tallied. But for the fighter at the time, I have a hunch it's always something like, "How in the hell do I get past this friggin' monolith, to break through to the next rung so I can make those heavenly pay days?
Ray was more obnoxious than most... There is indeed a fine line between strategy and opportunism... but there is a line. Ha. Mike Trainer may indeed have sent over a couple of pork roasts to Duran. You never know!