Recently I notced a debate between two of our fine posters (I won't say who) arguing over which challenger was the more worthy. The choices were Duran 1983 version and Leonard 1987 version. Although I have much more respect for what Duran did coming out with no middleweight experience, doing the full 15 and facing a peak Hagler, I must be honest in my assessment and say that Leonard was also the faster, quicker, more versatile challenger even though he really didnt win either. Though Leonard had been off for 3 years, he was much better prepared than he was for his last fight with Howard and was better than the Leonard who had been completely outboxed by Hearns. In fact, this was Leonard's career best performance. It was a great performance. Of course, Hagler was shot which helps him of course and I don't think Ray could have successfully defended his title 'gainst the likes of Micheal Nunn. I also don't buy the fact that Leonard collapsed from exhaustion or wouldn't have made the last 3 rounds. There is no evidence of that. So who was actually the better challenger?
The 1987 version of Leonard could no longer go 15 rounds, and he knew it, which is specifically why he asked for a 12 round fight with Hagler. On that basis alone, I would make Duran the more worthy challenger because he could always go 15 rounds and at a pretty frenetic pace. Ray also only had one fight in 6 years, whereas Duran had remained active throughout the 1980s.
Hagler in some ways fought a stupid fight against Leonard in that he gave away too many early rounds far too easily. I think he was probably a bit too cautious against Duran, but his gameplan was sound enough. I'll have to think about this...
That doesn't mean he could not go 15. We ae talking only three more rounds. Leonard had done 15 twice before and 14 with no apparant problems. What's more, he did 12 rounds two years later and was not breathing hard. He did the 12 with Norris even though he was outclassed. So how could he not make 15 at age 30?
I'm a little confused about the question here. I believe that Leonard was the more formidable opponent for Hagler in terms of size, style, and age. But that only adds to my belief that Duran's stand against Hagler was more impressive when you look at the context of the challenge as well as the performance. In fact, Dundee and Leonard studied Duran's performance against Hagler and used it as a blueprint for their own strategy. Duran formed his strategy on getting Hagler to lead, drawing him out, because Hagler tended to step than punch, step then punch. This allowed Duran to counter, angle around, and break his rythym.
