Trinidad vs. Duran of Montreal vintage

I think your last sentence is a key point that a lot of Leonard supporters seem to ignore. From the way some posters here write, you'd think Leonard v. Duran II was a shutout or near it a la Roy Jones v. John Ruiz - where the loser was literally hitting air the entire fight. But that wasn't so. I had Leonard only winning one more round; and I think plenty of other folks (including one of the judges, I believe) had the same scorecard. So how in the world can we extrapolate from this that a more in-shape, a bit younger Duran of Montreal would be thoroughly out-boxed by Leonard? It almost seems illogical to me. If anything, New Orleans proved that Duran at his best likely would be able to handle even a sprinter version of Leonard.

Duran's "no mas" remains as baffling as it was when I was watching it live some three decades ago. Duran clearly was not hurt. And - contrary to the chants of Leonard supporters - he was not getting thoroughly out-boxed to the point where he would've thought he could not win a decision. It is simply the strangest "quit" job I've seen in any sport, and any talk about how Leonard "broke" Duran's will is not too credible to me.

And for the record, I am not a Leonard hater. I have him as a top 5 all-time "pound-per-pound" guy (as I have said elsewhere, I stress "peak" and quality of opposition in my criteria, less so than longevity); and I think he's the 2nd best fighter of my life-time (after Duran). Still, Duran was simply better; and I think the sum of the their two fights indicates to me that Duran would beat Leonard if both were at their best - regardless of what tactic Leonard chose to employ.

 

The problem you have here is you are posting both factual, and offers of visual evidence to prove your point. That will cut no ice with Foolkevin who is only interested in what he would like to have happened. Official scorecards for instance are irrelevant as far as he is concerned. He is on a mission to disparage Duran at any cost ,and convince like minded fools that Leonard / Duran 2 was a complete shut out with Leonard hitting Duran at will, and the Panamanian being totally unable to do anything about it, other than quit in case Leonard beat him to death in the ring.

The thing I find funniest is he gets all sanctimonious when he receives the abuse he so richly deserves for his revisionist nonsense.

And yes, there is ample reason to believe if Duran hadn't been dragged from a continuous 3 month p!ss up and thrown in the gym for the rematch, he could well have beaten Leonard in New Orleans too. However the more rabid Leonard supporters would never even consider that possibility.

Their mission is to make the rematch an iconic fight, with the loss in Montreal a mere blip on their hero's record.

 

I understand your position but I disagree. I only gave Duran two rounds in the rematch (if I recall correctly) and I thought that the first fight was far closer, though Duran won his rounds far more convincingly. Because I don't buy the "Duran stopped Leonard from using lateral movement" claims, I don't believe that even "Montreal" Duran fares much better against Leonard on his bike, sticking & moving, and holding.

 

I guess a lot depends on how one interprets those two fights. In particular, if one believes that Duran was basically shut-out in New Orleans, then I guess I can see how that person would think even an in-shape Duran could not win. So it comes down to largely how we interpret the New Orleans fight - and a little bit also to how we view Duran's condition in New Orleans. The first issue is obviously subjective, and the second issue is speculative.

 

I just finished watching the fight. I thought the score was 5-2 not counting the 3rd round, which I though could have went either way. I'm guessing the judges gave it to Duran, to make is a 5-3 fight on most of the cards.

Haven't seen the fight in probably two decades, but it was a better fight than I recalled, and certainly SRL was hitting Duran with some serious power shots, repeatedly. But Duran also got his shots in and certainly dominated the 5th convincingly.

I still cringe watching the 7th round, when Leonard basically taunted Duran, because I think that demeans the sport and is completely unnecessary, but in all fairness Duran started it in the first fight so I guess it was payback.

Hard to say who I would pick between Montreal Duran and New Orlean's SRL. tough call. Ring size would certainly be an issue, that much is for sure. That fight was an example of SRL moving up a level and Duran moving down, which is why it's a hard call.

 

I had it 4-3. I am kind of confused by your account. Didn't the fight end at round 8 - so there were only 7 scored rounds?

Or am I already senile and can't remember anything?

 

No it's my bad, I wasn't thinking and scored round 8 as well. take that away and I had the same score you did. But I will say the rounds Leonard won, were more decisively won than was the case with Duran. Duran was definitely losing that fight.

 

Yeah, I agree with all of that; Duran's rounds were close, and Leonard's were not. But this is a lot like their first fight.

So we have two close fights where the winners looked a lot better in the rounds they won. The excuse in one fight is bad strategy; the other is bad shape. I have a hard time believing the second fight is indisputably more indicative of what would usually happen when these two meet in a ring at their best.

 

Me too. I tend to think that Montreal Duran would have won.

 

If you ignore the silly Leonard fan boys, and look at things logically, you will see the obvious.

With Duran what you saw was what you got. The fact that Leonard HAD to change tactics, and showboat for impressionable slow witted judges, should tell you what would happen should the pair of them square off at their absolute peaks.

I say once again IGNORE the pathetic Leonard fan boys who want to instil the qualifier that their boy has to get on his toes, otherwise it doesn't count.

Oh sh!t, my bad. I forgot, that's what happened in Montreal when the arrogant Leonard thought he could batter Duran like he battered all those other muppets he had faced. :rofl:rofl:rofl

 

How big was Tito in the ring at WW? Around 160 lbs? Perhaps more. He looked huge against Whitaker.

But a clearly more faded Duran beat an even bigger man in Barkley, so the money must be on prime Duran against Tito. Fighters with top class skill like DLH and Hopkins seemed to find Tito a bit predictable, and Duran was even more slick. This should be his night.

 

Whitaker wasn't exactly a big welterweight though. It's contextual.