Trinidad vs. Duran of Montreal vintage

I think the body work of Duran would make the difference and wearTrinidad out. Trinidad showed that he can be vulnerable to the body.

I pick Duran by KO in great fight. It would be a great fight, with Trindidad landing bombs also.

 

I'll make it easy for you, since you seem to be too lazy to do it yourself. When you click these links, just watch Leonard's feet and legs. Watch how much time he spends flat-footed and relatively stationary vs. bouncing around on the ***** of his feet. Watch how much distance he covers in the ring. Watch how far he moves back when he's attempting to reset the action. Watch the directions that he moves relative to his opponents. Just watch the first round or two of each, and you will see all that you need to see.

If anyone else reading watches these, I would love to hear your take too. Does Leonard look like he's trying to fight the same fight in all three of these fights? Does he look like he's trying to move and use his legs as much against Duran? :think

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tku9I-duCQE (Green fight, Starting at 12:15 in)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nuWHtWToXw (Hearns, starting around 2:10 in)

vs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuGZVkYuHM4 (Duran, starting around 15:35 in)

 

Trinidad knocks out duran by the 10th round. Montreal Duran barely beat leonard in that fight. Personally I think it could've went either way. But all in all, Trinidad beats duran.

 

Not at all. Leonard was hurt badly by Duran in the 2nd. He almost went down from a lefthook right on the chin. Duran shook him 4 or 5 times in that fight. Leonard had a big heart and he needed all of it to get through that fight.
Its a simple fact. Leonard has acknowledged his was in trouble in many times over the years.

Check the fight out if you didn`t watch it.

 

Ya Kevin check the fight out.

BTW ETM, Kevin's position seems to be that Leonard is a compulsive lier who for reasons known only to himself, constantly lies by flattering Duran.

 

I don't need to watch any of your fanboy clips, after your childish attempt at rewriting history in the Leonard / Hearns 1 fight.

You were shown to be either a liar, or an idiot with the clip totally refuting your insistence that Leonard did nothing but circle, back up, and run away for the first 5 rounds in that fight, and in fact the official scorecards prove Leonard won the 3rd round by doing the opposite.

You have a simple problem, you think what you want to see is what actually happened, despite the opinions of many other people, including the men who judged the fight.

It's called having an agenda. In your case you have even admitted as such, by claiming that in your scabby opinion Duran gets too much credit on ESB so you are out to discredit him.

Fact is Duran is a fighting legend, and you are just a two bob self appointed expert on a computer.

 

Ha! You're just a ridiculous fan boy who spouts off nonsense about your hero Duran until you get called out by smarter observers. You were talking out your ass about Leonard and I posted video evidence that you didn't know what you were talking about, as you requested for fights you named. Now youre reduced to spewing nonsense about how the judges scored round 3 of Hearns-Leonard. You, like Van, have exposed yourself as comic book hero worshippers who read and write about fights but don't know how to watch them. If you knew anything about boxing, you would have long since apologized for some of the idiotic and contradictory things you've written about Duran and Leonard in these posts. Still don't know what's worse: you saying that Leonard didn't use his legs in Montreal because Duran stopped him from running or you saying that Leonard fought in Montreal the same way he did in those other fights. Both reveal the mind of a man who DKSAB and the fact that you made both arguments together shows that you have absolutely no integrity.


You're infinitely worse than the Tyson fanboys you like to mock

 

Forgot about this Foxy gem! "Rematches mean nothing." What a shameless fanboy.

 

The only fanboy on this thread is you because you can't seem to accept the obvious which is that Duran stunned and hurt Leonard at least 2-3 times during that fight.

 

Ummm in this very thread I had to correct you multiple times, and it became clear you'd never seen the fights you were talking about. I asked you to show me fights where SRL fought like he did in Duran 2 as YOU claimed. Do you know what you came back with? You're examples were of Hearns and Hagler... NEITHER of which did he fight like he did against Duran in No. 2. Especially and without any ambiguity he didn't fight that way against Hearns. In fact, the only way he won that fight was by walking Hearns down... Hardly a fight to use as an example of somebody using their legs to essentially run for portions of the fight. He won by doing the exact opposite of that. This tells me you didn't have the slightest clue what you were talking about.

Further, I then had to correct you on what was SRL normal fighting style. You seemed to think it was how he fought against Duran in fight no. 2... when in fact, it was much close to how he fought Duran no. 1. You were unable to grasp this simple concept because you clearly haven't watched much SRL. I cited his fight against W.B. as a perfect example of him "standing flat footed" and circling just as he did against Duran. Do you know what your response was? Oh well he wasn't worried about W.B. so he could fight that way... WTF??? What does that have to do with anything? he fought that same way numerous times. At some point it becomes how he fights, as opposed to, oh he just fought that way cause he wasn't worried about A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I etc etc. That makes no logical sense to with that train of thought when the more obvious one is the more logical one.

Point is, SRL tried to fight Duran the best way he knew how to fight. The way that won him championships and gold medals. He wanted to employ more movement than he did i.e. more circling at the center of the ring (which by the way he did a various points, contrary to your claim (wrong claim). However, it was Duran who wouldn't allow that to happen when and where SRL wanted. He forced the fight more than anybody prior to SRL. THAT is what took away SRL normal movement. By normal I mean, how he normally fought. He didn't normally fight like he did in Duran no. 2, so how could Duran take something away he never tried. Once I illustrated this negative you wanted me to try and prove.. you were gone and never replied again. Make no mistake though, you were shown to be incorrect on a great number of things.

BTW, I'm still waiting for your scorecard and how you could come away with SRL as the victor. You never posted it, and I know way, cause you can't even justify it. If you could, it should be very easy to post. You know what else would be easy? Us laughing at the rounds you gave SRL and breaking them down to show how they weren't his rounds. hence you never posting it... don't think I forgot about that though.

 

You're as delusional as those other guys. Hate to sound like a broken record but one final time, for the sake of clarity, since you guys keep trying to ignore or mischaracterize them, my points are:

1) Leonard chose to fight the first Duran fight in a flat-footed style. This is uncharacteristic of how he fought other dangerous, physical & aggressive opponents before and after the fight (see the Hearns, Green, Muniz, and Hagler fights for starters). Not sure whether it's because he underestimated Duran, Duran got under his skin, or out of a misguided last-minute strategy but it doesn't matter-- the only position that is flat out ridiculous is the silly notion that Duran somehow prevented him from using his lateral movement and/or hitting & running. Nobody who understands boxing can possibly think such a thing. That Leonard fought flat-footed against non-aggressive opponents is completely irrelevant. You trying to characterize him as a flat-footed, stationary fighter is nuts!

2) Leonard would have been better off using his legs in Montreal. Leonard was known as a mover and shocked all observers by not moving. This was akin to throwing away his biggest competitive advantage over Duran. It was a dumb decision and a poor strategy. Leonard and his people admitted as much before the fight (that moving would be in his best interest) and many times after the fight. Disagreeing with this is just illogical and the sign of an unhealthy mind.

3) Posting a reasonable scorecard of this fight would be an exercise in futility with so many foaming-at-the-mouth Duran fanboys lurking. We'd just end up with dozens of comments pretending that each Duran punch was murderous and each Leonard punch ineffective. No thank you. But you do realize that many, many people (including the judges) thought that it was a very close fight right? I'm sure that you can find scorecards online that give Leonard the edge, if you really find this mystifying.

 

This post should be required reading. Because this is my take on the fight as well. BTW, Kevin, SRL never fought a bad fight, he showed tons of heart the ability to dig deeper than he ever thought possible, threw his share of combinations, and made it a relatively close fight, it was a great performance by two ATG's and it should be appreciated for that. It was only after the loss that Leonard changed his strategy, and whether or not that would have worked, had he been fighting Montreal Duran, is hard to say. But that version of Duran was absolutely possessed as he brought a level of intensity and sheer ferocity that very few fighters display.

The only disagreement I have is I think Leonard could have fought either way, he could have used more movement, especially in the first round, and chose not to. The commentator's (Ferdie Pacheco mostly) were quite surprised, but this strategy of staying and fighting Duran was telegraphed prior to the fight, later on, in parts of the fight when SRL would have likely to change tactics, Duran clearly prevented him from doing so, then later in the fight, SRL did in fact find the room necessary to use lateral movement.

 

I'm fine with the bolded part; completely disagree with you cosigning his false description of Leonard as a flat-footed fighter though. His description grossly understates the differences in Leonard's movement and strategy in those fights. As I've said numerous times, anyone who watches the first couple rounds of these fights can see a very big difference in how Leonard reacts to their aggression. He walks toward Duran to engage; he moves away from the others-- it's really as simple as that.

I think that the problem is that some posters here view Duran as some superhuman devil who can stop movers from moving. Anyone familiar with his other fights should know this to be false. You guys may not have seen them but his earlier fights against the lesser Edwin Viruet and much smaller Vilomar Fernandez show that fighters can use lateral movement against Duran just fine. The idea that SRL wanted to move like usual but couldn't would be laughable if the supposedly knowledgable fans here weren't so serious about it.

 

I saw both those fights, and while they did use movement, they both lost. Other movers who didn't do quite so well, include Buchanan, and Bizzarro. In the case of Bizzarro Duran stated that guy wasn't on a bike, he was on a motorcycle.

 

I expanded my answer, because SRL was one of the few fighters, who could do both. He could sit down on his punches and fight if he needed to, or he could box. Against Duran, it was felt that the best strategy was to fight him, after the 2 round, he wanted to change tactics and Duran wouldn't let him, battering him pretty much from pillar to post in round 3 and I think it was in the 4th round when Pacheco said that Duran's going to bust his ribs if he doesn't start moving. somewhere in the mid rounds, it was also said that Duran was imposing himself on Leonard and forcing him to fight his type of fight. None of this is particularly a secret as the commentators said as much during the fight, and Leonard confirmed it afterwards.