The Unthinkable: Duran vs Leonard 2

I think a decade or two of retrospect has been to Leonard’s detriment, in regards to the way this fight is viewed. Duran, on the other hand, managed to recover from what was a massive blow to him; his team and his fans, at the time. I base this not only on what Duran achieved, after this (win or lose) but also on encountering far more Leonard detractors, these days, than I do people who think of ’No mas’ as Duran’s defining moment.

Few, if any, hang their perspectives on Duran’s career on this one event. Leonard, on the other hand, proved to be unsportsmanlike and manipulative in subsequent years; seemingly more concerned about image than substance and this, I think, is viewed more negatively. Leonard has become a divisive figure in Boxing history. Still regarded in awe and, quite rightly, as brilliant - but also, altogether brattish. And, he perhaps presents a dilemma, in this sense.

Boxing fans have, in the main, learned to forgive Duran and I think he earned that forgiveness. Leonard has somewhat rubbed his hands together with glee, when recounting his out-of-ring maneuvering. Some people side with that cleverness of Leonard. Others might see it as taking away from what are generally considered as marked successes.

I like the idea that Duran, by reacting naturally to an untenable situation (in his minds eye), had somehow inadvertently stolen Leonard’s need for a more complete victory. That ‘No mas’ bothers Leonard more than it does Duran today is an amusing suggestion but is actually quite plausible.

 

Both are all time greats, the difference in the two men was a description used by Apollo Creed,,,,,, Sugar Ray fought great,,,,but Duran is a great fighter

 

Don't forget that Rocky wrote those lines for Creed to speak.

 

Sublime post! Cheers!

 

I think the animosity towards Leonard today is mainly based on him being a "media liberal darling" as opposed to a "true fans fighter". Part of it is the classic hipster mentality and part of it might also have to do with a cultural war-thing. Quite similar to the animosity against Ali.

Because there just aren't unbiased rational causes to be that critical of Leonard. The LaLonde fight was partly silly, but for the most part Leonard took the fights that we in normal cases can only dream of top fighters taking. Within a ten fight run he faced Benitez, Duran x 2, Hearns and Hagler. Every other fight he had during that run was against an ATG!

Still the main reasoning is of the extreme glass half empty-variety. Instead of being lauded for coming out from a long inactivity and going up two weight classes to face a dominant champion, and the nr 1 p4p to boot, he's being called a cheat. Just because he insisted on a 12 round distance, which was already being used in the HW division.

Had it been the other way around - SRL the one of who insulted Duran's wife before the first fight and then quit like spoiled brat when things didn't go his way in the rematch - the contempt against him would be unreal. But instead Duran fans once again make Leonard into the villain, for "luring" Duran into an early rematch when Robert held all the cards and no one held a gun to his head. If indeed the fight came to soon, Duran has only himself to blame.

But, as I said, logic and reason usually take a backseat in this discussion.

 

I agree with some of what you have laid out above. However, whilst Leonard's media image and gloss, as the then cross-appeal golden boy of the times, was fairly obvious, I do not think this is the core of the antipathy towards him. I also think one can recognize Leonard's achievements and, at the same time, be rational in criticizing the way he went about certain things.

An interesting idea, which has been floated by @ETM and expanded on by @populistpugilist , is that Leonard, ultimately, didn't 'beat' the best Duran. Yes, he got the 'W' but this could be interpreted as having been on Duran's terms and being something that might well grate on Leonard. In turn, the strategy Leonard employed could be seen as counterproductive. How meaningful was this victory for him, really?

As I implied previously, time has not been especially kind to Leonard. Hindsight is 20/20 and one needn't be critical of Leonard's entire body of work to reconsider certain aspects of the man behind the image. And, let's not forget that the long-running murmurs of disquiet surrounding Leonard/Hagler bout resulted in a book being written specifically about that fight - so it really wasn't just a simple case of insisting on 12 rounds.

There are other instances of what could be deemed as bad form, from a guy who had, at one time, been painted as the Heir Apparent Of Ali. No, these aspects of the Leonard story should not cast a complete shadow over his career but, it isn't unreasonable to consider them when taking a position on the man and certain of his fights.

I think there will always be irrationally biased views about major stars and certainly Leonard is not immune to being unjustly assessed. These extreme cases are easily spotted and twice as easily dismissed. But, Leonard is not beyond reproach and I do think he deserves some of the criticism leveled against him.

All of that said - Leonard's brilliance and status as an All Time Great, in my opinion, is undeniable and should be acknowledged, regardless of what one thinks of his shenanigans. I would just urge the flag wavers to perhaps realize that an extreme glass half-full type is no more attractive than those running on half-empty.

 

I think the boxing public has different expectations of fighters than do the casual/crossover fans. The best example I can think of, probably even moreso than SRL, is Oscar De La Hoya. He not only didn't fit the mold of the gritty, surly, semi-sociopathic hunger fighter, but his style was completely at odds with what was expected of a Mexican boxer. The more crossover appeal he won, the more he was reviled by the hardcore boxing fans -- especially Mexican fans. Where Oscar would probably have fit right in as a golfer or baseball player, much of the boxing world wanted to see him beaten, and beaten badly.

Although he is one of my three favorite fighters (Duran, Tyson and Dempsey change ranks depending on what time you ask me), Roberto Duran is an unrepentant a$$h0le, only marginally fit for civilization. I don't mean that he has had no redeeming moments (see, e.g., his largesse to the Panamanian people and his show of empathy for DeJesus on his deathbed), but there is nothing remotely pleasant or ingratiating about the guy. I tried to harbor as many doubts as I could muster about the extent of his a$$h0lery, but then I read his recent autobiography. If age has mellowed the monster who spewed the most shameful trash about SRL and his wife, it hasn't been by much. By the standards of basic human decency, we should wince at Duran and shrug at the careerist machinations of SRL, but, as you point out, that's not how it works in boxing. To the boxing public, Duran is "real" and guys like SRL and ODLH are "fake."

Maybe times are changing. Anthony Joshua seems to be popular across the board both for the crushing effectiveness of his boxing and for the effervescence of his smile. I don't know, but I do know that you are right that boxing fans have too often seemed to have their values backwards when forming their opinions of fighters as people rather than just as fighters. Maybe we can't expect much else given boxing's essential nature and the ugliness of its history, but I think you are certainly right to call it out as a problem.

 

The critizism you speak of is still very vague.

Things can be held against any fighter. Duran never rematching Buchanan, for example. Hell, you can justifiably say that he ducked McCallum, if you want to be technical and avoid the bigger picture.

I don't know who's extremely glass half full when it comes to Leonard, or how that would even look like. He took on four ATGs who were in their prime or at the very least very relevant still. In challenging Hagler, he actually challenged himself as much as any fighter ever has. The concensus at the time was that he was nuts and would get smashed.

As for how time has treated him... He is still one of the most famous non HWs, regarded as a true ATG, has his health intact and is rich as hell. I'd say time has treated him quite well.

 

Gents, what a great thread, the quality on this thread, if I may say so, is outstanding. It's what I originally joined ESB for...educational, thought-provoking.

Populistpugilist - I've not read your work before this thread...enjoyable stuff!

 

If the criticism I mention seems vague, it's because I am generalizing on purpose. Do we need to get into specifics? I don't think so. But, to clarify an earlier point, no boxer is beyond reproach and that includes Leonard.

Yes, we know about his record. We know who he faced; when, where and how. Boxrec gives us the dates, locations and numbers; YouTube gives us the films. But, I think others, including myself, are intrigued by the circumstances and motivations behind certain of the fights themselves. This, in my opinion, involves a balanced consideration, which neither needs to be driven by animosity nor reflect a glass is half-empty attitude - certainly not an extreme one.

This leads me back your idea that Leonard's harshest critics (those carrying "animosity") are opinionated so, because of his image as a "media liberal darling". Whilst I'd agree that the red carpet treatment Leonard received from the media does play a part here, I would not agree that this image alone is the main cause of animosity. I would also suggest that Leonard was nowhere near to being seen as what one might refer to as a 'hate figure', in his own time (first career). And, any perception of him not being a "true fans fighter", if it ever existed in any significant amount, at all, really lost any meaningful subscription, by the end of his loss in Montreal, 1980.

At the time, I do not recall Leonard's image being tarred with any kind of genuine negativity. It is only since his time, as information has come to light and allowed a reevaluation, that a more considered opinion of him has come about. This process of time passing and retrospect, happens to all people of public interest. So, when I suggest time has not been especially kind to Leonard, I am not referring to his fame and physical well-being. As my entry into this debate announced: "I think a decade or two of retrospect has been to Leonard’s detriment, in regards to the way this fight is viewed."

The gleaming glory that covered him back then, has lost some of its sheen, in my opinion. But, that's just a personal view, based on some of the details I have considered over time. It is also why some of the ideas proposed in this thread are interesting to me.


The contrast between Leonard and Duran could not be greater, as far as their respective, public images were concerned. Duran was a vocally uncouth bully type; brazen and unashamed. Leonard was the flash, made-for-television symbol of sporting perfection. It would have been easy to cast Duran as the villain, I mean he looked and sounded the part, to a tee. However, it's conceivable that people could empathize with Duran more than they could with Leonard.

It could be said that, with Duran, you at least knew where you stood, from the very beginning. The guy wore his heart - the jovial, the mischievous and the savage, on his sleeve.

With Leonard? Well - in hindsight, some distance down the road, from his once faultless image, Leonard's approach brings to my mind that narrated line, by the real-life character Henry Hill in the film 'Goodfellas':

This content is protected

As has been maintained throughout, Leonard's boxing career has him held in high esteem, from a purely sporting perspective - no argument. But, with more knowledge of the background and goings on behind the scenes of a career (of Leonard or any boxer), fresh perspectives on the man, the fighter and some of the fights are inevitable and perfectly acceptable, as this thread has shown in abundance.

 

But nothing new has really surfaced, just a lot of conspiracy nonsense from already known facts.

And I don't think his star has fallen really, apart for in the eyes of some posters on forums like these.