Trinidad vs. Duran of Montreal vintage

This guy regularly makes excuses for the shortcomings of his favorite fighters and then sarcastically dismisses any explanations for the losses of other fighters! Even typed some gibberish about rematches meaning nothing knowing full well that he doesn't believe that. The audacity! You're actually pretty hilarious, but not in the way you think.

 

I don't think you're understanding the main issue. You seem to feel like SRL usually fought like he did in the second fight. Which by the way, was FAR more than just lateral movement. He was literally almost running and various stages. That isn't how he normally fought... that isn't what won him a gold medal, the championship belt, title defenses etc etc. Not even close to how he fought normally. What I'm referring to when I say Duran stopped his lateral movement... I'm referring to his NORMAL lateral movement. This typical fighting stance and movement was disrupted by Duran and how he was fighting. I never claimed Duran interrupted SRL movement of the second fight. How could he do that when SRL didn't try and fight how he did in the second fight? That doesn't change the fact that he did, without question, disrupt SRL typical lateral movement. That is the line of discussion we are currently having.

You seem to believe SRL usually fought how he did in the second fight, and that couldn't be further from the truth. He never again fought like that.. EVER. Not before not after. What I'm saying is, SRL tried to fight how he normally fought people and won. He tried his usually boxer puncher with lateral movement that had served him so well throughout his career till then. Guess what, it failed because of Duran. It didn't fail because SRL decided to fight the wrong fight or use a bad strategy. SRL used the best strat available to him and what he was most comfortable with. Guess what, Duran beat him at what he did best and how he had fought the best. That is what is so impressive.

Which parts do you disagree about in the above post?

 

1) I completely disagree that Leonard fought Duran the way that he usually fights people, especially his top opponents and anyone potentially dangerous. Like most people, I believe instead that Leonard thought that he could stand his ground and beat Duran flat-footed. Maybe he underestimated Duran, maybe he just felt that he needed to earn his respect that way. [Keep in mind, I still think the fight was a toss-up] Pacheco (IIRC) spent the whole fight explaining how shocked he was that Leonard wasn't even trying to move and was just standing around flat-footed. It was striking to anyone watching. Leonard did not try to use even his normal amount of lateral movement and Duran did not prevent it (nor would he have been physically able to).

2) On that point, I think that Leonard obviously did not use the best possible strategy. A smarter strategy would have been to take advantage of the HUGE mobility and footspeed gap. Whether that meant flat-out running or just getting on the ***** of his feet and circling a lot more, I completely disagree that Duran could have prevented him from doing so. Leonard beats Duran every day of the week if he moves and uses his legs. That's no knock against Duran whatsoever--he just doesn't have the physical tools to deal with it, no matter how much or how little he parties in between fights.

 

1. I honestly think you need to watch more of his fights because you couldn't be more wrong. The best people SRL fought were.. Duran... Hearns... Hagler and W.B. Please, don't talk about the fights and how you're expert at them, ACTUALLY watch them. You'll clearly notice in his fights with W.B. and Hearns No. 1 ... Watch SRL movement... I was almost exactly familiar with what he was trying to do with Duran. He was trying to stay in the center of the right while implementing lateral movement and circling at times. However, in BOTH fights one could say he was fighting flat footed JUST the same way. Just watch the tapes and you'll notice he always fought that way, that WAS his style. The fights are right there to watch. The DIFFERENCE was that W.B. and hearns were content to fight from the outside and content to circle mostly in the center of the ring. They believed they could outbox SRL from that position. Now notice their approach and Duran's approach. They never tried to rush in with the same attacks like Duran would, they never tried to plant their head on SRL chest and make it a war on the inside. THAT was the difference. THAT is how Duran prevented SRL from using his typical lateral movement. If you can't watch those fights and see SRL tried the same tactic with Duran, but the difference in its effectiveness was how Duran fought... Well then I really can't help you there. The difference in Ray's NORMAL movement was Duran. Period.

2. That wasn't his best strategy for that fight though. You don't implement a game plan YOU'VE NEVER USED IN A FIGHT BEFORE. It's ludicrous to suggest such a thing. In one of the biggest fights of your life, you fight with your bread and butter and what got you there. True or no? You certainly don't try some wild crazy strategy you've never tried. To even suggest that is ludicrous. Sure, after that fight, he goes well I guess my normal doesn't work.. let's do this. It worked better. great. That doesnt' mean though that he fought the wrong fight the first time.... That is totally and completely false. He fought how he fought best, he just happened to be beaten doing so. No shame in that.

 

1) Your description of Leonard's tactics in the Hearns fight are completely off. Go back and watch the first half of the fight and there's no way you'll find it remotely similar to his performance in the Duran fight. Leonard circled and ran like crazy in that fight, leaping out of punching range any time Hearns tried to launch am attack. WB was a counterpuncher and not as aggressive as Duran, Hearns, or Hagler, so Leonard not circling as much against him wasn't as big of a deal. Benitez was a harmless opponent for Leonard.

2) No, top fighters fight to their strengths and their opponents' weaknesses. Leonards legs were a huge strength that he was downright foolish to not use them better. There is no way that anyone affiliated with Leonard or his camp would have told him that he used a good strategy or fought a smart fight after Duran I. No trainer in the world. What are you saying is completely revisionist and not persuasive (well, maybe to Foxy). But I'll stop repeating my same points now that we've reached an impasse.

 

The problem with what you are saying is that all your comments are in hindsite.

Here is a breakdown of what both fighters or their coaches said PRIOR to the fight.

"I'm not going to be standing still and letting Duran hit me with right hands," Leonard told the Washington Post almost a month before the fight.

So that was obviously the strategy going into the fight. It was felt at the time that Duran never carried the same amount of power up from lightweight and that Leonard was the harder hitter of the two. Dundee said prior to the fight "my guy was the real power puncher in this fight"

But Duran's strategy according to Arcel was fir Duran to fight his fight keep hitting Leonard and he's going to drain him. And when Duran gets his second wind in the 6th or 7th round he's all over the other guy."

After the fight, SRL said "Actually there was nothing that could prepare you for Duran,"

"Duran was a fight within itself. Duran was a crazed, talented, technical boxer. He was a better boxer than people gave him credit for and a devastating puncher...an extremely good defensive fighter who was very elusive. He was not a stationary target."

Now l didn't make this stuff up it's right out of a book called Hands of Stone. And the quotes were from those l've attributed them to. So there's no need to guess about what the strategy was going into that fight the partipants all had their say while they were alive.

In the rematch Leonard himself said he wanted to catch Duran while he was still partying and overweight so he presented an offer his manager couldn't refuse. 8M

 

and did you score round two even as well?

 

:huh Round 2 was one of a handful of rounds that Leonard clearly lost. I don't get it... Are you trying to deny that there were plenty of close rounds?

 

You're being disingenuous now. Everyone knows that Duran got under Leonard's skin by insulting him and his wife multiple times before the fight and questioning his toughness and manhood. Most Duran fans brag about this (when it's convenient for them). To pick a random quote where Leonard says he's not going to stand in front of him all night is worthless, when he clearly goes into the ring and from the very beginning of the fight does just that. Anyone who can watch that fight and come away thinking that Leonard was in there really trying to use his footspeed and lateral movement but couldn't because Super Duran shut him down, just doesn't understand boxing.

But if you're into this cut-and-paste quotes stuff (I'm not), here's an excerpt from a NYT piece after the first fight:

The night after the fight, she asked her husband what millions of other closed-circuit fans had wondered: Why didn't he jab and move more? She had heard all the talk, but she wanted to hear it from her husband.

''He said, 'I had something I wanted to prove to people,' '' Mrs. Leonard recalled, watching her husband sign autographs after a workout at their Maryland camp. ''Then he looked at me and said: 'They were saying I couldn't take a punch. They said I couldn't punch. I wanted to prove to people that I could stand in front of Roberto Duran, that I could take a punch and fight him at his own game. They make Roberto Duran out to be so tough. If he's so tough, how come he didn't knock me out?' ''

''If Ray had fought him another way,'' says Sharon Leonard, his sister, ''people would have said, 'Oh, Duran could have knocked him out, but Leonard just ran all night.' ''

What's your take? Do you really believe that Leonard is lying to save face here because he was physically unable to run and move away from Duran the first fight? Leonard planned to move a lot more during the second fight (the article I pasted this from is full of quotes from Dundee explaining this). Is your take really that he only ran more in the second fight because he lucked out and got an out of shape Duran? Or do you acknowledge that he ran more because he made a huge mental adjustment between fights?

 

Another cut and paste excerpt from a Dundee interview (feel free to completely dismiss in favor of quotes that are more flattering of Duran):

Dundee:
And it just shows you you fight the fight that beats the fighter. And we didn't fight that fight. It was a very close fight. I think if we scored the fight, my guy had a bit of an edge.
The showbiz stuff on Duran's part, with the running of the arms and everything, and, "I win! Get out of here!" That won the fight for him.

ABC Sports
What were you telling Ray, with all that going on?

Dundee
Well, "Box. Don't let the guy get under your skin. Forget about it. He's doing it on purpose. He abused you in front of your wife." I tried to explain that. But, you know, once it's in your craw that you want to kick this guy's butt because he abused you in front of his wife, how do you get that out of there? It takes time. So I think the reflection can be shown and say it's "I told you so," but the next fight, you saw a big difference.

ABC Sports
What did you change in your approach for the next time?

Dundee
I didn't change anything. He did what he was supposed to do the first time. And the first time, he was supposed to box. Ray was a premier boxer. What beats Duran, I knew, was a premier boxer. Not for anything, but when he trained in my gym, I had a Cuban kid -- great lightweight -- that was one of my fighters. He used to slap Duran around in the gym. How? Long left hand, movement, side to side. Used to frustrate Duran. Duran is a great counter-puncher. Great con artist in there. And he could bang on you, but Ray had the style and the talent to kick his butt, and he showed it the next time.

 

Sure l can believe him saying that. The problem is when two fighters step into the ring they both have plans but usually the better fighter imposes his plan and this was obviously Duran.


While we're on the subject if Dundee he also picked Duran to beat Mayeather. Do you want to see that quote too?

You should do yourself a favor and instead if always slamming the guy you should appeciated just how good he was as pretty much everyone has him in their top 10.

 

Duran was an ATG talent and had an amazing career at lightweight. I've acknowledged all of this before.

I think that his best, most inspired performance at 147 would likely allow him to take a decision over Floyd. But realistically, I think that he loses to Floyd more often than he wins at 147 because he was so inconsistent in the ring at WW and psychologically weak outside of the ring (and during his "No Mas" moment too).

I only end up slamming Duran so much here because the myth-making and fairy tale-telling gets me riled up. The irony is that I'm a big advocate of Duran's among my more casual fan friends.

 

Sure l can believe him saying that although l woukdn't mind a reference so l can read it for myself. The problem is when two fighters step into the ring they both have plans but usually the better fighter imposes his plan and this was obviously Duran.


While we're on the subject if Dundee he also picked Duran to beat Mayeather. Do you want to see that quote too?

You should do yourself a favor and instead if always slamming the guy you should appeciated just how good he was as pretty much everyone has him in their top 10.

 

Most of thus is fair. Duran at his best was probably the most complete fighter l've ever seen, especially at lightweight. But as the aged he became less consistent. There's no denying that. He certainly had more peaks and valleys then most ATG's. But although Mayweather was undesputedly more consistent, he's only fought 48 fights. Duran had about 80 fights under his belt when he was the same age.