Trinidad vs. Duran of Montreal vintage

Perhaps, but I think they're roughly in the same ball park. I don't see one having a clear cut edge over the other. Although I think SRL was much faster and a better all around fighter.

 

Duran by decision. Trinidad has all the physical advantages, but Duran is so well schooled, in shape, and motivated, that he gets inside Trinidad's reach, punishes the body never lets Trinidad breathe.

 

Fine, you can shift the burden. If you've watched much prime Trinidad, you can tell in part by the way that opponents reacted to his punches. Just look at the Joppy fight. He went up to middleweight and dropped a man who had only been down once in his career in the very first round. (BTW, if you want to see an actual example of someone who was lucky to make it out of a round, you should check that fight out). Some guys went into conservative survival mode strategies after Tito hit them; can't remember any but the most completely outmatched opponents behaving like that against Ray.

And I could be wrong but I think that Tito probably has a far greater number of early knockdowns & knockouts of contender-level fighters than Leonard.

 

How are they in the same ballpark? Can you explain your reasoning now that I've shared some of mine?

 

Foreman has told at least as many self-effacing stories as Leonard...

 

First of all, regarding the Montreal fight and whether or not SRL was bullied, this is on SRL's Wikipedia site.

Durán forced the issue and took the fight to Leonard, cutting off the ring and denying Leonard space to fight his fight. Durán attacked at almost every turn. Leonard battled back again and again, but he had to work just to find room to breathe and swing, at times simply to survive. In the second, Durán rocked Leonard with a left hook, sending him into the ropes. Leonard started to do better by the fifth round, finding some punching room and throwing numerous multi-punch combinations. The two fought with great intensity throughout the fight. According to Bill Nack:
It was, from almost the opening salvo, a fight that belonged to Durán. The Panamanian seized the evening and gave it what shape and momentum it had. He took control, attacking and driving Leonard against the ropes, bulling him back, hitting him with lefts and rights to the body as he maneuvered the champion against the ropes from corner to corner. Always moving forward, he mauled and wrestled Leonard, scoring inside with hooks and rights. For three rounds Durán drove at Sugar Ray with a fury, and there were moments when it seemed the fight could not last five. Unable to get away, unable to counter and unable to slide away to open up the ring, Leonard seemed almost helpless under the assault. Now and then he got loose and countered—left-right-left to Durán's bobbing head—but he missed punches and could not work inside, could not jab, could not mount an offense to keep Durán at bay


Well Leonard fought 40 fights won 36 and had 25 KO's so that's a KO rate of 63%

Tito on the other had had an 78% KO rate of you go through the same exercise, but SRL comp was far better than Tito's so that's why I don't think there's a huge discrepancy between the two.

 

See this is where it gets interesting. I think SRL fought more contender level fighters and won many of his most important fights (Hearns, Benitez, Donny Lalonde) by TKO. And I think you're right Tito probably had more early KO's but Leonard seemed to be able to keep his power into the late rounds better than most.

 

Of course Leonard was bullied in Montreal. Never meant to suggest otherwise. But he was only bullied because he tried to be a tough guy and fight Duran's fight. A Leonard committed to moving and running probably outpoints Duran every time, imo (unless Duran breaks down and quits first).

 

I don't think you fully read what was written. It was pretty clear that Duran dictated where the fight was fought, whether SRL was a party to that or not.

 

So you're basing your assessment of their punching power on their ko rates? With all due respect, that's a terrible way to evaluate punching power, for any number of reasons.

 

That's funny coming from a guy who said this:

 

Couldn't disagree your reasoning here. 14/15th round knockouts are terrible indicators of punching power (they reflect so many other things more).

Won't even dwell on the fact that the Benitez stoppage was controversial and that Hearns has a weak chin.

 

In terms of measuring punching power, you really don't see the difference between early knockdowns/knockouts against quality opponents on the one hand and career ko percentages on the other? Can't tell whether you're: (a) being insincere; (b) you just aren't very thoughtful about this stuff; or (c) your emotions for Duran are clouding your senses here.

 

And more to the point, my initial response was that you can see the very obvious difference in their punching power by watching their actual fights and the effect of their power on their opponents.

 

If anything your ANTI Duran emotions or your man love for both Trinidad, and Leonard are clouding your judgement.

Above is a clear objective account of the fight written by someone who was present, yet you CHOOSE to totally ignore this report because it doesn't suit your agenda, which is to try to down play Duran's achievement in Montreal.

You persist in repeating that futile, moronic garbage that Leonard fought a stupid fight, rather than accept what the world saw at the time. Leonard had no choice, Duran forced him to fight that fight against his will, because he was the better fighter. Rematches mean nothing, Duran was the better man than Leonard, and he was far better than the one dimensional Trinidad as well.

He would beat Trinidad easier than he beat the HUGE but equally limited Barkley, and more than likely stop the guy in the process.