Who was the better fighter, p4p at his peak? Duran or Leonard?

Duran fought the last round like he had the fight in the bag, he was right. In fact, after 12 rounds, he just needed one even round out of 9 on the judges cards (3x3) to win it.

 

Same here, i've often used this fight as an example of a close fight where I see a definitive winner every time out.

Yep. I think Teflon Don gave him the nod after peering over the judges shoulders. Leonard fought the last few rounds like the crown was slipping away, which it was. When the final bell goes his expression suggests he's not at all confident he's won.

I had Montreal closer myself.

Good detective work, Columbo. The Real Truth would be proud.

I imagine most people have De La Hoya - Trinidad by a point or two to Oscar. The official decision is still a robbery.

Yes, the Leonard-Duran chat has been really good on here of late. Good to to Ray getting some credit too.

 

I'm not comparing the opponents. I'm merely using the two fights as indicators of the best versions of Ray and Roberto.

 

That's fine, but can we agree that it's far less challenging to look good against Esteban DeJesus than it would be Thomas Hearns?

 

Agreed.

Duran was 6-1, 6-3 & 8-3 up on the cards when he got the stoppage in the 12th vs DeJesus in their 3rd fight.

SRL was 8-6, 9-5 & 8-5 down on the cards when he got the stoppage in the 14th vs Hearns in their 1st fight.

Hearns was comfortably the greater win of the two.

 

Duran-Barkley is my favourite overall performance from Hands of Stone. Now there's a fight where it's perfectly appropriate to obsess over a weight disparity and the fact the winner was long long past his best.

Legendary stuff.

 

Yeah it was a crazy win & performance from Roberto.

SRL 1 is his greatest win though. Throughout all of boxing history, how many consensus top 2 all time greats at a weight, lost during their prime at that weight, vs a fighter whose best weight division was 2 lower?

I can think of 2 such examples, only 1 if we don't count newspaper decisions. If we do, Soldier Bartfield beating Greb (WW beating a top 2 all time MW, at MW) & Duran vs SRL 1 (ATG LW beating a top 2 all time WW, at WW).

Duran's victory over SRL would probably win a poll of the greatest win in all of boxing's illustrious history.

 

Agreed.

Purely from an aesthetic point of view though, I really liked Duran's beautiful counterpunching against Barkley. I find that more attractive to watch than the ugly slugfest of Montreal. Don't really rate that fight all that highly as a spectacle to be honest.

But in terms of what's the greater more legacy defining win? No comparison. It's Leonard I.

 

Well, Eye in the Ring has your back for Holmes vs Norton, it doesn’t have mine. It is no longer a reputable go to reference point.

As to that Columbo comment - how did you falking know I go around at night wearing a trench coat and nothing else? Nice detection work yourself Mister. An open and shut case or a case of open and shut you might call it.

 

Bokaj, this is disingenuous. We know Duran was indisciplined. He was indisciplined right from his later days at Lightweight. In lightweight non-title fights with no weight limit he never even breached 140 and now suddenly at the ripe age of 28 he suddenly grew 12 lbs in size? Bs. I even posted the article in the other thread by the ring magazine insider. New orleans was an eff up of massive proportions on his part. He came in fine for the 1st fight.

You are completely mistaking fighting weight with fat. A non-athletic guy of Duran's dimensions can easily walk around at 170 pounds, that doesn't mean that it is his natural weight aka the weight he might feel the most comfortable fighting at. Heck, Duran was fighting in his 40s with a pot belly at 168 lbs. That doesn't mean it was his natural weight. Duran already looked slower at 147 lbs than he did at 135, with relatively lesser work rate as well. If that was his natural weight the change wouldn't be noticeable. It's ridiculous that you are constantly arguing against excuses from the Duran camp while arguing for something so plainly ridiculous in order to justify Leonard losing to the smaller guy.

 

Benitez had a split decision victory over Palomino at 147. But he did lose to some no name contenders at 154. His physique looked great at 154 and he looked just as fast. Hearns looked an even bigger puncher at 154, and his frame allowed him to retain his attributes at heavier weights. 154 was probably his sweet spot with the glass he packdd in the chin.

Round robins are useless in boxing. Having a better record against the same competition (not exactly that either as it was a different division altogether), doesn't tell us much when the said two fighters already have faced each other quite a few times. The discussion between Duran and Leonard always comes down to the fights they fought against each other. There is a lot of room for argument there. I think it's absurd to ignore everything that went into the fights and the sizes of the fighters involved. Goes against everything I know about boxing. I don't think you need Duran's longevity or overall career as argument here.

Another thing that is constantly ignored is manner of Leonard's victory over his best opposition. For some reason, Duran's manner of victories get picked apart to bits but nobody ventures further than the number on the paper for Leonard. I don't think Hearns 1 was exactly a great display of prowess on Leonard's part. His least controversial and dominating victory is arguably only Benitez.

 

Although a competitive fight, the controversy rating is ridiculous and just puts more stock in my opinion that EoTr doesn't know....

I don't think it is regarded a robbery by any stretch. Besides, I imagine that's the best a smaller fighter can perform against a certified top 20 ATG.

 

Those cards are very close for Leonard. I had it 10-3 for Hearns at the time of stoppage. I can see 9-4 but not anything more than that.

 

That's the thing, he wasn't undsiciplined for one previous title fight. He could slack off a bit when he didn't have to make weight, as in DeJesus 1 and Viruet 1, but was always on point for his title fights even the whole way at LW. He had no Tiberi nights. He made weight fine and was in shape and that didn't of course change when he friggin' went up two weight classes.

It's just so silly the whole thing, even if we didn't have the MrKoolKevin's thread that I posted with clear facts about that he made weight well and was in shape.

But now I've stayed entirely for long on this subject, so I'll leave it for now.

 

Yeah, I am bored of this too. I did go through the entire thread. He was slightly above weight 3 days before the 1st one as well. Freddie Brown criticized him to the media. Mrkoolkevin had an article there related to it. Nothing like the 9 lbs extra weight 3 days before the 2nd one though. (As per the Ring magazine editor)