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

Three top shelf posters, including McGrain and Drew101 scored a narrow win for Leonard. Tho i don't agree it shows that there are some top shelf boxing experts out there that did actually have Leonard pipping it. It's never been regarded as a robbery but as i say, a minority of respected commenters did see it for Ray.

 

Benitez dominated Palomino.

Clayton's score for Palomino was controversial, as most thought Benitez had clearly won the fight. Pat Putnam called Clayton's score "a shocker" and wrote: "The decision shouldn't have been close."
When Clayton's score was announced, Howard Cosell, who called the fight for ABC-TV, said, "I should like to talk to Mr. Clayton about that." In his 1986 autobiography, I Never Played The Game, Cosell called Benitez's performance "one of the most beautifully executed fights that I had ever witnessed."
Lew Wheaton of the Associated Press wrote: "Benitez had much the better of the fight."
Reflecting on the fight in a 2006 article, Michael Katz, who covered the fight for the New York Times, wrote:
I watched as the self-proclaimed "Bible of Boxing" put on a clinic. The art of self-defense was never more pervasive. The masterful Benitez won at least 12 of the 15 rounds, I figured. Then they announced a split decision. The crowd moaned. . . . Now, there are some ring officials of whom the late Frankie Carbo – the mobster who pretty much ran boxing in the Fifties – would say, "See that guy? I can buy him for a cup of coffee." I’m not saying Clayton was one of these. I’m not saying he wasn’t, either. After the Benitez fight, I confronted the Philadelphian who was better known as a referee. I demanded that he explain his strange scorecard. "You’ve got to count body punches," he said. Palomino was a fine body-puncher, but in this fight, Benitez landed most of those shots. His elbows took care of Palomino’s. I pressed on with the interrogation. Finally, Clayton said, "Well, the sun was in my eyes."
Bob Arum, who promoted the fight, was furious over Clayton's score. "Nobody in their right mind could have scored that fight for Palomino," he said.

Two of Duran's greatest ever showings were at Welterweight and he would go on to win world titles at 154lbs and 160lbs, so it's patently absurd to argue that he was just a blown up Lightweight, which is what you want to do in order to soften the blow of his losses.

Yes, his most dominating and impressive performance was against Wilfred Benitez, a bonafide all time great that handled Duran with disconcerting ease. Thanks for pointing this out.

 

The Palomino fight was very close, and I say this as someone who scored Benitez-Duran 11-4.

Duran went 31-15 after Welterweight. If he did bad consistently, he would never be rated as high as he is. His worst losses are also at 154 and 160. It's utterly absurd that you are somehow conflating this with him being a natural ww just to soften the blow of prime SRL losing to the smaller guy. I don't even consider ww Duran non-prime, but your arguments wouldn't fly anywhere else.

The guy who lost to matthew hilton and got koed by Davey moore, all before age 28? Jk. But Benitez is probably the least prestigious of all the 5. Your favoritism is blinding you Addie. I have always given credit to Hearns, Benitez and Hagler for beating Duran the way they did. You on the other hand jump to Eotr trying to twist a relatively dull night against Viruet 1 as some sort of close fight when it's Duran, but would never do the same for Leonard who arguably has 2 blatant robberies propping up his record.

 

I disagree with you.

You are conflating me saying Duran was an elite Welterweight to him somehow being a natural one.

 

Okay. You see the fight you see.

I am sorry but that wouldn't be so surprising if you claimed that at some point now. That's credit to Duran. It doesn't erase the physical disadvantages at higher weights that come with it.

 

Maybe the man who outsmarted and schooled the other so badly, a narrative was created suggesting the other supposedly forgot all his boxing experience and chose to 'stand and brawl' because of some shabby insults.

 

I have always said and maintain that the prefight dialogue from Angelo and Ray was that Ray was the bigger man and wouldn't concede ground and whilst an excellent boxer-puncher, excessive dancing, bolo punching and staying on the outside wasn't Ray's MO.

Fighting the wrong fight is just merely the justification used to minimise the comprehensiveness of his first loss to a rude, mannerism-crude great fighter that he should have beaten decisively as the bigger, faster and harder hitting fighter.

 

Better fighter at their peak?

Duran's peak as a fighter was at 135lbs. Ray Leonard's was at 147lbs as far as we know since his career got stunted in 1982.

The way i look at P4P is even it out. Same height and speed and power relative to their divisions. They both were elite skillwise. Leonard would still have an edge in speed but it would be only marginal.
Duran's power was frighting at 135. He knocked out anyone who didn't run from him. He also knocked out those that did run from him. He was able to close the distance better than he did at 147 and above.

What if we reversed the situation? We make Ray Leonard start as a 122lber. In his early 20s. Ray stands 5-4 in height. At age 30 could he move up and beat Duran at 135lb? Leonard would be shorter by a couple of inches but still faster fhan Duran. Im pretty sure without the height and range advantage Ray wouldn't be dropping his hands sticking his chin out.

That's a tough ask for any Jr Featherweight. Leonard possibly could do it because of his intangibles, ring IQ. I think Duran would beat him though.

 

There's really not much between them. No-one can tell me Leoanrd didn't learn valuable lessons from the Duran loss and improve a bit as a fighter. It was the perfect, and pretty much final learning experience to make him frighteningly well rounded. It was a lesson in mental warfare and humility, among other things. Leonard was right at his peak when he retired. IMO he was in a similar position to Ali when he hit exile. Both would never be as great again. Duran had been there for a while. It's amazing how well he carried 147 for a couple of fights, true greatness. He well and truly mastered the art, from all sides.

At the end of the day Duran is a better technician, Leonard has the edge in physical gifts. The consensus will be Duran. I sometimes, rightly or wrongly, wonder how the particular fighter appears against other ATG's of his division when looking at such questions. H2H is hypothetical of course, but i find it worthy of a quick thought. I'd only favor SRR against Leonard at 147. There's a handful who might potentially beat him, but none I'd favor. As a matter of fact I'd mildly favor Leonard in other matchups. Duran is in a similar boat. I'd mildly favor him over Whitaker. Armstrong would be a very mild underdog as well. I'd like to see more of Benny Leonard. I can't think of anyone I'd out and out favor tho.

 

t’s a very tricky call since both are all-time greats, no doubt. But I give the edge to Leonard. Duran was a monster at lightweight, one of the greatest ever in that division, but when you look at the overall pound-for-pound picture, Ray's biggest wins are against better and more diversified opposition. He beat better welterweights than Duran beat lightweights at their best—Benitez, Hearns and of course Duran himself in the rematch. And let’s not forget, Leonard was still young and a bit raw when Duran edged him the first time—he fought the wrong fight and admitted as much. In New Orleans, he showed exactly how much better he could be when he used his legs and fought smart. Ray's victory over Hagler, no matter what you feel, was an exceptional performance.

Duran had more longevity, no question, especially given Ray’s injury and long layoffs. But pound-for-pound is about skill, adaptability, and who you’d pick if size was equal—and Leonard just had more tools in the bag. He could box, bang, adjust mid-fight, and rise to the moment against the very best. That's what puts him slightly ahead for me. Again, both exceptional fighters and it's a razor thin pick.

 

One moved up two weight classes and beat a consensus top 3, in one of the strongest historical divisions ever, whilst said opponent was in his prime and the smaller one was getting slightly past his.

P4P? Duran. Definitely Duran. Leonard's only comparable feat is against Hagler but Marvin was not prime and the result is still considered controversial. Duran's win over Leonard is very, very arguably the greatest single win of all time.

I also don't understand the scores for Leonard in bout 1. Duran's inside work and defense was clearly better. Leonard was missing a lot of shoeshines and hitting elbows and shoulders all night, whereas Duran was digging very short, damaging shots to the midsection. It's even more apparent in the recent HD uploads from Top Rank. Clear win for Duran imo.

 

Duran proved it was him when he beat Leonard at 147 in his prime. He also had a far longer career.

 

I agree that the fight in Montreal wasn't as close as the official judges had it. Similar to Duran's fight with Hagler. That probably wasn't a 1 point fight either.
I'm not sure if he was Leonard already being a bonafide Superstar (which he was) or because they had it in Montreal. Where Leonard had won Gold. His adopted hometown so to speak. Mike Trainer was very shrewd, he didn't do anything by accident.
Duran by 3 or 4 points at least. There was alot of even rounds, not alot of clean punching. I supposed you would have to give Ray everyone of those rounds to make it an argument. Tough to do without being able to land clean punches. The number of punches Duran slipped at point blank range was astonishing considering Ray's legendary handspeed. I don't think anyone made Leonard miss so often.