I don't think it would make the top 20 in terms of entertainment but in terms of a former lightweight champion beating the 2nd best welterweight of all time in his prime, it was a historic win.
I'd say top 10-15 in my opinion, especially when considering the greatness of both fighters and it went 15rds, especially when with the bad intentions of both fighters that night.
Duran was a seasoned professional fighter with "big fight" experience; whereas SRL was just really beginning to come into his own as a "great" fighter. SRL got verbally, pre-fight "rope-a-doped" by Duran in Fight 1.
Really? Not according to all the pundits, sports writers, and the media in general. They were all claiming this guy was the greatest thing since chewing gum as early as his return from the 76 Olympics. Wasn't there huge resentment from the Hearns camp because this guy was getting more money for one fight than Tommy was getting for 4 fights, and against better opposition?
As far as greatest skill level being demonstrated by both sides, it is way up there. There is great action and great chess match moments. A fight to study.
I love chess matches but I don't see this fight as much of one. Leonard used a misguided strategy and suboptimal tactics; Duran used a lot of unartful mauling throughout much of the fight.
That's clearly looking at things in hindsight. Prior to the fight they thought they could win fighting this strategy when SRL fought out he couldn't he tried changing strategies but Duran was simply too relentless to allow him to change much. That said, it did become more competitive near the end of the fight. But simply labelling this as a poor performance by SRL misses what actually occurred and does a great disservice to Duran.