What welterweights would you pick to beat the Duran of the first Leonard fight?

[Maxmomer]

He was on fire that night. Maybe the best performance from one of the best fighters of all time P4P. What welterweights would you pick to win?

[PowerPuncher]

Defensive, stick and move merchants. Duran nuthuggers claim he was past his best after this fight, didnt train properly, insert your excuse, but in reality when someone presented movement, speed and good defense he had nightmares. Whitaker, R Leonard, Benitez, Mayweather, amongst others. Plus Robinson and Hearns beat him for different reasons.

Other tough match ups that may well beat him include Galivan, Curry, Forrest, DLH, Quartey, Napoles

[itrymariti]

There are the obvious players, but an interesting dark horse is Basilio. Possibly the only man that might be able to handle Duran on the inside. I'm not saying he would, but it's one to think about.

[Bokaj]

Defensive, stick and move merchants. Duran nuthuggers claim he was past his best after this fight, didnt train properly, insert your excuse, but in reality when someone presented movement, speed and good defense he had nightmares. Whitaker, R Leonard, Benitez, Mayweather, amongst others. Plus Robinson and Hearns beat him for different reasons.

Other tough match ups that may well beat him include Galivan, Curry, Forrest, DLH, Quartey, Napoles

Must make a prime Robinson favourite. Even at MW he had such perfect movement, heavy punch and granite chin. It's almost imposssible to envision him being beat at WW when bringing his best.

[Bokaj]

There are the obvious players, but an interesting dark horse is Basilio. Possibly the only man that might be able to handle Duran on the inside. I'm not saying he would, but it's one to think about.

Would be a great fight, for sure.

[red cobra]

I would have to say, right off the top of my head...Hearns and of course...Napoles, with Robinson and possibly...possibly now...Kid Gavilan.

[red cobra]

I believe that Benitez deserves mention...and I don't care if that's sacriledge...but after all, he did boss Duran at junior middle and at his best I think welter would be no different.

[MRBILL]

He was on fire that night. Maybe the best performance from one of the best fighters of all time P4P. What welterweights would you pick to win?

NONE!!! In June of 1980, nobody from 135 to 150 pounds was gonna beat Duran in the ring.... In June of '80, Duran was pumped, psyched and in-shape at a TIGHT 145 pounds.........

Again, Duran did immediately balloon up in weight after the brawl in Montreal against SRL, but Duran still looked physically good at 147 in Nov. for SRL in New Orleans........ Duran may have been slightly drained from rapid weight loss, etc.... But he still could've beaten 90% of the welter's out there; just not a charged SRL in New Orleans......... Duran mentally was not the same in New Orleans......

MR.BILL:bbb

[Seamus]

NONE!!! In June of 1980, nobody from 135 to 150 pounds was gonna beat Duran in the ring.... In June of '80, Duran was pumped, psyched and in-shape at a TIGHT 145 pounds.........

Again, Duran did immediately balloon up in weight after the brawl in Montreal against SRL, but Duran still looked physically good at 147 in Nov. for SRL in New Orleans........ Duran may have been slightly drained from rapid weight loss, etc.... But he still could've beaten 90% of the welter's out there; just not a charged SRL in New Orleans......... Duran mentally was not the same in New Orleans......

MR.BILL:bbb

Duran did not train a lick after Montreal. And the Leonard camp knew he would react this way which is why they booked the fight for as soon as possible. And per the topic question, I would lay my money on this version of Duran over just about any welter that can be mentioned. Basilio is a nice idea, Robinson does not provide enough footage at that weight for me to assess...

[MRBILL]

Duran did not train a lick after Montreal. And the Leonard camp knew he would react this way which is why they booked the fight for as soon as possible. And per the topic question, I would lay my money on this version of Duran over just about any welter that can be mentioned. Basilio is a nice idea, Robinson does not provide enough footage at that weight for me to assess...

Some of the hoopla after Montreal is over played about Roberto Duran... It is true that Duran ballooned in weight during the months of July and August of 1980, and by Sept of '80, R.D. was reported above 170 pounds.... Some claim he was at upward of 184 pounds, but I smell some bullshit there..... Still, all in all, by Nov. 1980, down in New Orleans, Duran managed to make 147 pounds.... Was he drained or weaken??? Probably to a degree...... Did he still show muscle tone and texture in his body in the rematch??? YES!! So, weather Duran trained hard or not, he was in pretty good shape at 147 pounds and his body had tone to it..... Duran was NOT a slob for the rematch.... He was also NOT in top form, either.... Still, he was fighting SRL on fairly even terms going into round 8 at the Superdome...... Duran quit from frustration due to SRL's clowning and jiving.... It was a bold move; one Duran later regretted..... Point is, Duran was not a slob or pig in New Orleans.... R.D. in that condition was still able to beat "9" other 147 lb. contenders / pretenders.......... IMO!!!

MR.BILL:bbb:rasta:thumbsup

[Duodenum]

Only Robinson, in my estimation. After Montreal, KO Magazine conducted a poll to name the greatest WW of all time. Duran came in second to Robby, and that's how I've had it ever since. 147 was not the best weight for Hearns or Walker. Duran's chin was never dented at this weight. Against Monroe Brooks, he demonstrated one punch knockout power (with a body shot, no less). Nobody ever dominated Palomino like he did, and only Duran was ever able to drop Palomino in a later round. (Armando Muniz caught the slow starting Carlos cold in their first match.)

[techks]

Not much. I can only think about Benetiz & Hearns.

[MRBILL]

Roberto Duran was the # 1 pound-4-pound fighter in the world after Montreal......

MR.BILL

[Tin_Ribs]

Other than the usual suspects, Rodriguez would have given Duran fits IMO.

[Dempsey1238]

Micky Walker is my main pick.

Robinson is other pick.

[WhataRock]

I think that version is capable of beating anyone whoever laced them up at the weight...but I think he would have to catch guys like Robinson or Hearns on a bad night to pick up the win.

A lot of 50-50 calls aswell...The kind of fights that would split opinion.

[brando18b4h]

The only other WW I would give a chance to beat this version of Duran is Sugar Ray Robinson who I rate as the best P4P fighter of all time. however I have only seen limited footage of Robinson at this weight and I just find it hard to envision anyone beating Roberto on that night.

[MRBILL]

Also, I gotta say that the Duran from the "Palomino-Leonard" fights from 1979 / '80, would beat the ever lovin' shit out of Julio C. Chavez from 1989 to 1993...... Duran by KO over Chavez in a one-sided encounter / affair........ Peace....

MR.BILL

[natonic]

Only Robinson for sure. Benitez was stronger and more mature and Duran wasn't quite "Montreal" Duran when he fought Benitez. I don't believe Tommy Hearns is a slam dunk to beat "Montreal" Duran. Maybe a great mover like Luis Manuel Rodriguez could pull it off but no sure thing.

[JohnThomas1]

Sugar Ray Robinson
Thomas Hearns
Sugar Ray Leonard (post initial encounter)

Less confident - Gavilan would be tough, Napoles too, Armstrong interesting, Benitez interesting, Walker and Burley interesting.

[MRBILL]

I agree with whoever stated that Duran of early '82 against Benitez was NOT as tuned or primed like he was for SRL in Montreal earlier in '80........ I know HBO remarked that Duran looked good going in against Benitez, but that song changed after 4 or 5 rds......... Physically I thought Duran looked pretty good at 152 pounds, but he was sluggish and breathing hard by round 10...... Duran was NOT the same.......

MR.BILL

[Popkins]

(bracing myself for the outrage)... No-one except Robinson. And I include Ray Leonard and Thomas Hearns in that. Napoles would give him a great fight though.

[robert ungurean]

Noboby beats Duran on that night.

[The Morlocks]

He was on fire that night. Maybe the best performance from one of the best fighters of all time P4P. What welterweights would you pick to win?
Noone. But I'd include the palimino fight as well.:hat

[The Morlocks]

NONE!!! In June of 1980, nobody from 135 to 150 pounds was gonna beat Duran in the ring.... In June of '80, Duran was pumped, psyched and in-shape at a TIGHT 145 pounds.........

Again, Duran did immediately balloon up in weight after the brawl in Montreal against SRL, but Duran still looked physically good at 147 in Nov. for SRL in New Orleans........ Duran may have been slightly drained from rapid weight loss, etc.... But he still could've beaten 90% of the welter's out there; just not a charged SRL in New Orleans......... Duran mentally was not the same in New Orleans......

MR.BILL:bbb
Or physically if you look at his physique. Plus he looked bored from the beginninng. Duran hunger was satiated in Montreal and the fierce warrior and style was NEVER seen again.:rasta

[The Morlocks]

Only Robinson, in my estimation. After Montreal, KO Magazine conducted a poll to name the greatest WW of all time. Duran came in second to Robby, and that's how I've had it ever since. 147 was not the best weight for Hearns or Walker. Duran's chin was never dented at this weight. Against Monroe Brooks, he demonstrated one punch knockout power (with a body shot, no less). Nobody ever dominated Palomino like he did, and only Duran was ever able to drop Palomino in a later round. (Armando Muniz caught the slow starting Carlos cold in their first match.)
That was "Big Book of Boxing" the result one also had a great tribute to Victor Galindez right before he died.:rasta

[The Morlocks]

Also, I gotta say that the Duran from the "Palomino-Leonard" fights from 1979 / '80, would beat the ever lovin' shit out of Julio C. Chavez from 1989 to 1993...... Duran by KO over Chavez in a one-sided encounter / affair........ Peace....

MR.BILL
At lightweight he puts him out in 10.

[frankenfrank]

Hearns :yep
donald curry is always a good option also.
robinson of course.
marlon starling
delahoya
paul williams (the one who murderred quintana)

maybe even vernon forrest , but i will not argue about this idea.

[ironchamp]

Robinson
Hearns

I give Shane Mosley a decent shot

[la-califa]

If you followed the recent "Latin Welterweight Tourney" Most posters here actually picked Luis Rodriguez to defeat Duran.

[Bill Butcher]

Robinson, Hearns & Leonard of the 2nd Duran fight all beat him.

[Bill Butcher]

Duran did not train a lick after Montreal. And the Leonard camp knew he would react this way which is why they booked the fight for as soon as possible. And per the topic question, I would lay my money on this version of Duran over just about any welter that can be mentioned. Basilio is a nice idea, Robinson does not provide enough footage at that weight for me to assess...

You seen how Robinson handled MWs & he was still in his prime then, there is grainy footage of his WW days & there is good footage of his very 1st MW days, there wouldnt be a big difference in his style, only the fact that he is battering bigger men in the MW division.

Robinson would tear Duran up.

[Bill Butcher]

Noboby beats Duran on that night.

Nah, SRL came mighty close fighting Duran`s fight.

Robinson would fuck him up badly.

[Sweet Pea]

I honestly think Duran was capable of beating Robinson on that night. It would've likely been an upset that Robinson rebounded from, but that style of rough, uber-skilled clinch-fighting may've been exactly what was needed to take Robinson out of his comfort zone. I think Duran had the tools to pull off the upset if he was on the same form as he was for that fight. Again though, I'd fully expect Robinson to make the adjustments to get the win in a rematch. Hopefully Duran wouldn't have been in as pitiful condition for it as he was the Leonard rematch, though.

[Flea Man]

Robinson, Hearns & Leonard of the 2nd Duran fight all beat him.

No chance. He woyuld still get to Leonard; he was more focused.

He'd get to Hearns eventually too.

Robinson vs THAT Duran might be the greatest Welterweight fight ever.

[Hookie]

First of all, the fight was very close. Duran fought the best fight he ever fought. Leonard fought well but he did not fight to the best of his ability.

So, the first person I will pick is a well prepared Sugar Ray Leonard. Leonard easily beat Duran in the rematch. I'm not saying he beat Duran at Duran's very best, but I do think the rematch was a good indication of what a fight between the best ever WW version of Duran vs. the best ever WW version of Leonard would look like.

Other great WWs that would beat this version of Duran?

Sugar Ray Robinson was the best ever at this weight.

Henry Armstrong would have an excellent chance of beating Duran at LW or WW.

Kid Gavilan had a head carved out of diamond. He was never stopped in 143 pro fights and Duran wouldn't stop him either. Gavilan had a considerable height and reach advantage. Both men had good speed but Gavilan was more elusive. Duran punched much harder. It's a pick-em fight imo.

Thomas Hearns crushed him at 154 and I don't see why he couldn't do it at 147Lbs.

Wilfred Benitez beat Duran at 154 and I think he would have an excellent chance at doing it at 147 as well.

[Mantequilla]

Duran Leonard 1 was only so close because DUran eased up late, likely feeling he had the fight won.through 12 Leonard was lucky if he took 4 clear rounds.

[Sweet Pea]

I'm not saying he beat Duran at Duran's very best, but I do think the rematch was a good indication of what a fight between the best ever WW version of Duran vs. the best ever WW version of Leonard would look like.The first matchup was a much better indicator. Leonard was in prime shape just as Duran was, there are no excuses outside of the typical "Leonard fought the wrong fight" mumbo jumbo. Maybe because Duran made him fight that fight? I doubt very strongly if Leonard meant to be stung by those huge shots during the 2nd and 4th rounds, backed up and beaten up on the ropes. He attempted to box within range, as he typically did, Duran was just a master of closing and keeping the distance.

Both men had good speed but Gavilan was more elusive.Hardly.

[Duodenum]

That was "Big Book of Boxing" the result one also had a great tribute to Victor Galindez right before he died.:rastaRight you are, and I have that January 1981 issue in hand as I type. Farhood's tribute to Galindez was indeed an excellent and timely accolade.

[Hookie]

Hey, I'm being unbiased. Duran vs. Leonard I was a close fight... no matter what the reason was.

Duran was already a legend. Leonard looked to be the future of the sport. Duran fought the best fight of his career... Leonard would get better. Leonard had a great win over Benitez but he hadn't even fought Hearns yet.

Duran was totally outclassed in the 2nd and 3rd fights.

As for Kid Gavilan? Yeah, he was more elusive than Duran in my opinion. Duran did some subtle things in the ring but he was far from a slickster. I'm not saying Gavilan would beat him. I'm just saying he would have a chance. As for Duran hurting Gavilan? Forget about it!

[Hookie]

I liked Duran a lot... but sometimes too much is made of his career pre-Leonard.

He beat Buchanan in a very dirty fight (KO13) but they never fought again.

He was dropped and beat by DeJesus (L10) but DeJesus waited a long time for a rematch. DeJesus dropped him in the rematch as well. Duran won the 2nd (KO11) and 3rd (KO12) fights.

He beat Palomino (W10) who had already lost to Benitez.

Instead of thinking he was one of the best WWs ever when he beat Leonard... try thinking he rose to the occasion that night and see how that fits ya!

"Montreal Duran" is that like "Tokyo Douglas"?

[Sweet Pea]

To each his own, but you're the only person I know who'd insinuate that Gavilan had the better defense than Duran. Duran may have had the best defense of any such brand of offensive fighter in the history of the sport.

[Sweet Pea]

Hell, I'd take the Duran of the Palomino fight against damn near any Welterweight as well.

[robert ungurean]

Hell, I'd take the Duran of the Palomino fight against damn near any Welterweight as well.
Me Too

[Doppleganger]

Robinson, Hearns & Leonard of the 2nd Duran fight all beat him.
I'd second that with a few others having a reasonable shot, Benitez, Gavilan, Napoles; even the likes of SSM and ODLH might have an outside chance though it would be only that.

Much is made of Duran in Montreal (and he was great that night) but SRL played into his hands and fought the wrong type of fight for him. And paid for it. It's true that a lot that is down to what Duran did but still, SRL tried to impose himself, being the bigger man, and it was exactly what Duran wanted. Put it another way. Does the Duran of the first fight beat the SRL fighting the tactics of the 2nd fight? I've already argued previously why I think Tommy still gets to Duran at WW. SRR is the consumate all-round fighter, like Duran but bigger.

[Bokaj]

I honestly think Duran was capable of beating Robinson on that night. It would've likely been an upset that Robinson rebounded from, but that style of rough, uber-skilled clinch-fighting may've been exactly what was needed to take Robinson out of his comfort zone. I think Duran had the tools to pull off the upset if he was on the same form as he was for that fight. Again though, I'd fully expect Robinson to make the adjustments to get the win in a rematch. Hopefully Duran wouldn't have been in as pitiful condition for it as he was the Leonard rematch, though.

A prime Robinson combines quite much of what both Leonard and Hearns brought to the table when they beat Duran. Robinson is the favourite IMO, perhaps even a clear one. Great fight, though.

[itrymariti]

Duran did some subtle things in the ring but he was far from a slickster.

What?! Have you ever seen Duran fight?!

[Hookie]

What?! Have you ever seen Duran fight?!

Yeah... a lot! Have you?

Duran is no doubt an all-time great P4P fighter. Let's not rewrite history though. Duran wasn't a pretty boy. He was no defensive wizard. He was accurate but he wasn't a technical wizard. Duran didn't confuse and frustrate opponents to the point that they didn't even want to throw punches. Guys like R. Leonard, P. Whitacker, Roy Jones Jr., and Floyd Mayweather fit in this category.

Duran had a ton of 1st round KO wins but against who? He might have looked like a "slickster" in some of his fights but not against the top fighters he faced. Duran won fights with pressure. Duran didn't stick and move. Duran stayed close, attacked the body, and imposed his will... you're trying to turn him into Willie Pep or something!

[itrymariti]

Yeah... a lot! Have you?

Duran is no doubt an all-time great P4P fighter. Let's not rewrite history though. Duran wasn't a pretty boy. He was no defensive wizard. He was accurate but he wasn't a technical wizard. Duran didn't confuse and frustrate opponents to the point that they didn't even want to throw punches. Guys like R. Leonard, P. Whitacker, Roy Jones Jr., and Floyd Mayweather fit in this category.

Duran had a ton of 1st round KO wins but against who? He might have looked like a "slickster" in some of his fights but not against the top fighters he faced. Duran won fights with pressure. Duran didn't stick and move. Duran stayed close, attacked the body, and imposed his will... you're trying to turn him into Willie Pep or something!

Duran wasn't a defensive fighter, but that doesn't mean that his defence wasn't excellent. It was always a means to the end of aggression; as you say Duran was a brawler after all. That aside, I can count on one hand the number of fighters I've ever seen slip punches better than he did. Against Barkley, Leonard, De Jesus particularly, he was virtually unhittable. He'd just effortlessly slip a jab and get to the inside.

Check out 21 seconds into this video of the third fight with De Jesus. De Jesus traps Duran in a corner with absolutely nowhere to go, and throws several fast head-shots. Duran avoids them all, spins De Jesus round and unloads.


[Only registered and activated users can see links]



Check out 4:20 to the end of the final round of Duran/Leonard I. Duran doesn't even bother throwing punches in this last round, and lets SRL get off on him all he wants. Leonard hits nothing but air.


[Only registered and activated users can see links]



When he had to, Duran could showcase defensive excellence. At 135 he didn't have to concentrate on defence too much; he was so strong he could just bull inside and over-power his opponents. But don't let that fool you into thinking that he was just a crude slugger. The guy's head movement really was second to none, and the latter half of his career illustrates that.

There aren't many

[GPater11093]

There are the obvious players, but an interesting dark horse is Basilio. Possibly the only man that might be able to handle Duran on the inside. I'm not saying he would, but it's one to think about.

Nice shout there definitly had the strength and ruggedness to stay on the inside with Duran and push him back. Also had the combination punching that could give Duran problems. Very tough fight but i honestly beleive Durans superior defence wins this. And i know Carmen was no mug when it came to defence but in the end he was more hittable than Duran was.

Other than the usual suspects, Rodriguez would have given Duran fits IMO.

Definitly mixture of speed, movement and combination punching to give Duran fits, also i really like Luis's quick counters as his opponent advances that could keep Duran off him.

Nah, SRL came mighty close fighting Duran`s fight.

Robinson would fuck him up badly.

I thought Duran won it pretty handily myself.

I honestly think Duran was capable of beating Robinson on that night. It would've likely been an upset that Robinson rebounded from, but that style of rough, uber-skilled clinch-fighting may've been exactly what was needed to take Robinson out of his comfort zone. I think Duran had the tools to pull off the upset if he was on the same form as he was for that fight. Again though, I'd fully expect Robinson to make the adjustments to get the win in a rematch. Hopefully Duran wouldn't have been in as pitiful condition for it as he was the Leonard rematch, though.

I think Robinson as the strength and power to keep Duran from being all over him and has the speed and movement to keep away. However from watching films of a Welterweight Ray Robinson he was alot more offensive minded and was better IMO when he let his hands go in combinations now this would bode well against Duran. But i think Duran, whilst not matching Ray offensivly, is solider defensively and that could win him it. But what a fight it would be.

Some names i give a chance

Hearns - Obvious style advantage as the range and power to stay at distance and can pick Duran off from their. I would say Hearns KO8.

Napoles - Think he can pull it off but his paper skin puts doubt in my mind i think him and Duran are fairly similar, both guys come forward but combine their defence with their offence, both hit hard and in combinations and both have good chins. Even fight IMO.

SRR - Already discussed above

LMR - Already discussed above


just a shout here - Emile Griffith?

[Flea Man]

Yeah... a lot! Have you?

Duran is no doubt an all-time great P4P fighter. Let's not rewrite history though. Duran wasn't a pretty boy. He was no defensive wizard. He was accurate but he wasn't a technical wizard. Duran didn't confuse and frustrate opponents to the point that they didn't even want to throw punches. Guys like R. Leonard, P. Whitacker, Roy Jones Jr., and Floyd Mayweather fit in this category.

Duran had a ton of 1st round KO wins but against who? He might have looked like a "slickster" in some of his fights but not against the top fighters he faced. Duran won fights with pressure. Duran didn't stick and move. Duran stayed close, attacked the body, and imposed his will... you're trying to turn him into Willie Pep or something!


What, all the time? No, it is you that needs to watch more Duran.

Watch his patient dissection of Guts Ishimatsu.

[Hookie]

Duran wasn't a defensive fighter, but that doesn't mean that his defence wasn't excellent. It was always a means to the end of aggression; as you say Duran was a brawler after all. That aside, I can count on one hand the number of fighters I've ever seen slip punches better than he did. Against Barkley, Leonard, De Jesus particularly, he was virtually unhittable. He'd just effortlessly slip a jab and get to the inside.

Check out 21 seconds into this video of the third fight with De Jesus. De Jesus traps Duran in a corner with absolutely nowhere to go, and throws several fast head-shots. Duran avoids them all, spins De Jesus round and unloads.

When he had to, Duran could showcase defensive excellence. At 135 he didn't have to concentrate on defence too much; he was so strong he could just bull inside and over-power his opponents. But don't let that fool you into thinking that he was just a crude slugger. The guy's head movement really was second to none, and the latter half of his career illustrates that.

There aren't many

You showed me a clip of the 3rd fight with DeJesus... toward the end of the fight. DeJesus was already beat up. What about the 1st two fights? Duran went down in both of these fights! If DeJesus barely hit him, what's that say about Duran's chin? We all know that Duran had a good chin. DeJesus landed plenty on Duran.

Leonard landed plenty on Duran in all 3 fights, get real.

Barkley? Are you serious? This fight could have went either way.

I love that you love boxing so much... but I think you might be a little delusional when it comes to Roberto Duran.

[Hookie]

Hey, I was a big Duran fan. Like I said, he is an all-time great. I'm just telling it like it is. I just don't think he was flawless in all categories like some of you are suggesting. He wasn't that hard to figure out but you had to be a great fighter to beat him because as a total package he was very good.

I'm not trying to make him out to be a limited brawler... he wasn't. He was very good in everything. I'm just saying that compared to guys like Robinson, Leonard, Whitacker, and some others he looked far from a technical wizard.

[The Morlocks]

First of all, the fight was very close. Duran fought the best fight he ever fought. Leonard fought well but he did not fight to the best of his ability.

So, the first person I will pick is a well prepared Sugar Ray Leonard. Leonard easily beat Duran in the rematch. I'm not saying he beat Duran at Duran's very best, but I do think the rematch was a good indication of what a fight between the best ever WW version of Duran vs. the best ever WW version of Leonard would look like.

Other great WWs that would beat this version of Duran?

Sugar Ray Robinson was the best ever at this weight.

Henry Armstrong would have an excellent chance of beating Duran at LW or WW.

Kid Gavilan had a head carved out of diamond. He was never stopped in 143 pro fights and Duran wouldn't stop him either. Gavilan had a considerable height and reach advantage. Both men had good speed but Gavilan was more elusive. Duran punched much harder. It's a pick-em fight imo.

Thomas Hearns crushed him at 154 and I don't see why he couldn't do it at 147Lbs.

Wilfred Benitez beat Duran at 154 and I think he would have an excellent chance at doing it at 147 as well.
I NEVER have seen that fight as close. Not when I saw it on the night it happened or the many times since then. I had Duran winning 11 of the rounds. The best though is from the 4 kings book when Leonard talks about his sorryass brother Roger charging Duran after the fight and Leonard said, "Duran just nailed him" one punch and Roger was out. And the Ring had Roger a top 10 jr-mid at that time. Duran beat Leonard after being Lt.weight champ for 7 years an then moving up. He beat him in his 13th year. In Leonard and Hearns 13th year they were getting their asses kicked by norris and a wide assortment for Hearns.:rasta

[The Morlocks]

I liked Duran a lot... but sometimes too much is made of his career pre-Leonard.

He beat Buchanan in a very dirty fight (KO13) but they never fought again.

He was dropped and beat by DeJesus (L10) but DeJesus waited a long time for a rematch. DeJesus dropped him in the rematch as well. Duran won the 2nd (KO11) and 3rd (KO12) fights.

He beat Palomino (W10) who had already lost to Benitez.

Instead of thinking he was one of the best WWs ever when he beat Leonard... try thinking he rose to the occasion that night and see how that fits ya!

"Montreal Duran" is that like "Tokyo Douglas"?
Purely ASSININE GIBBERISH!:hat

[China_hand_Joe]

Sugar Ray Leonard for one can beat the Duran from the first fight.

Others that come to mind Mayweather, Whitaker, Tszyu and obviously Hearns.

Not Sugar Ray Robinson, no way, no how. He struggled somewhat with Basilio, Duran eats him alive.

[The Morlocks]

Sugar Ray Leonard for one can beat the Duran from the first fight.

Others that come to mind Mayweather, Whitaker, Tszyu and obviously Hearns.

Not Sugar Ray Robinson, no way, no how. He struggled somewhat with Basilio, Duran eats him alive.
We must be in some kind of alternate universe. By the way even Leonard said that Duran made him miss more than anyone else and that includes Benitez. And judging from Benitez' currant state maybe they didn't all miss him after all. Hopefully Wilfred will be taken care of well by the Lord.:hat

[itrymariti]

You showed me a clip of the 3rd fight with DeJesus... toward the end of the fight. DeJesus was already beat up. What about the 1st two fights? Duran went down in both of these fights! If DeJesus barely hit him, what's that say about Duran's chin? We all know that Duran had a good chin. DeJesus landed plenty on Duran.

I'm not sure that's particularly relevant. I'm not saying the guy was literally unhittable. Jesus, even Sweet Pea and Ali went down a few times. Duran made mistakes early in the fight, and was made to pay by a very, very seasoned opponent. What's important is that for 90% of the second and third fights he repeatedly made De Jesus miss.

Leonard landed plenty on Duran in all 3 fights, get real.

Well, yes, he landed. I mean, it's a boxing match. My point is that most of the time Duran was extremely slick. If he wasn't, Leonard would have just peppered and moved all night long: after all, he was much taller and had a very significant edge in reach. The only reason Duran was able to do anything against Leonard was because he slipped and went to the inside as soon as Leonard threw anything.

Barkley? Are you serious? This fight could have went either way.

Post your scorecard if you think it was that controversial.

Anyway, it doesn't matter. Duran was fighting someone with an almost comic size advantage over him. If you were new to the sport you might have thought it was some sort of circus act! Again, it was his world-class ability to make Barkley hit air and then counter that even kept him remotely in the fight, let alone winning it.

Seriously, Duran wouldn't have got anywhere near as far as he did without his defensive abilities. There's a big difference between a very strong, imposing Lightweight and somebody who can pitch a shut-out against De Jesus, walk all over Buchanan and go up in weight and beat Ray Leonard.

[The Morlocks]

Sugar Ray Leonard for one can beat the Duran from the first fight.

Others that come to mind Mayweather, Whitaker, Tszyu and obviously Hearns.

Not Sugar Ray Robinson, no way, no how. He struggled somewhat with Basilio, Duran eats him alive.
I think to put down Robinson like this is rediculous. I think this Duran could beat him but have NO doubt that Robinson was BY FAR except for Armstrong, the greatest welter taht ever lived and the welterweight prime Robinson would wipe out basilio in 10. :rasta

[Hookie]

Sugar Ray Leonard for one can beat the Duran from the first fight.

Others that come to mind Mayweather, Whitaker, Tszyu and obviously Hearns.

Not Sugar Ray Robinson, no way, no how. He struggled somewhat with Basilio, Duran eats him alive.

Robinson was 137 years old when he fought Basilio (at MW) and he had already had a million fights.

You do know that at age 30 he was 128-1-2 1NC right? He wouldn't fight Basilio for another 6 years! Duran was 29 when he fought Leonard the first time.

The only loss Robinson had in 132 fights was a close decision to Jake Lamotta who Robinson went 5-1 (1) against lifetime.

Also, do you really think Duran wouldn't have problems with Basilio? Basilio was only stopped by one fighter in 79 pro fights and that wasn't until his 75th and 76th fights (vs. Gene Fullmer). Basilio beat Robinson 1 out of 2, Tony DeMarco, Billy Graham, and Ike Williams among others.

Take the blinders off people.

[Hookie]

Back to Duran. I never said the man was a human punching bag. Duran was amazing!!! I just don't think he was quite as good as some of you make him out to be. Like I have said thruout... Duran was one of the best. Some of you are acting like he never lost DeJesus, Leonard, Hearns, Benitez, etc. though.

Sure, he slipped punches to get inside on Leonard and Barkley... he sure as hell wasn't jabbing his way in on guys way taller with way longer reaches. Sure, he had good head movement. He also wasn't hard to find and sometimes left himself open when throwing punches... just like plenty of fighters. There isn't anything wrong with it as long as you win.

To base all of this off of one fight is kinda crazy to me.

Why not ask if "Tokyo" Douglas could beat Ali?

[redrooster]

Defensive, stick and move merchants. Duran nuthuggers claim he was past his best after this fight, didnt train properly, insert your excuse, but in reality when someone presented movement, speed and good defense he had nightmares. Whitaker, R Leonard, Benitez, Mayweather, amongst others. Plus Robinson and Hearns beat him for different reasons.

Other tough match ups that may well beat him include Galivan, Curry, Forrest, DLH, Quartey, Napoles

We didnt say it, Randy Gordon said it. And taking the point of view of a correspondent witnessing the two fighters first handcarries more weight than the opinions of an ESBer

[The Wanderer]

Robinson and Hearns I'd favor over him.

Leonard and Benitez would always be interesting because of the difference in style, each one if they fight the right way and utilizing the right tactics might be able to pull it off, but they'd be the underdogs in my book rather than the favorites.

Whitaker might be able to play defense and outmove Duran, but I don't know if he would score enough in the meantime to have a prayer of taking it on the cards.

Aside from that, not bloody many. Not anyone else that I've seen enough footage of to feel comfortable favoring them.

By the way, I just have to laugh my ass off at people pulling out names like Tszyu or De La Hoya. Whatever you guys are smoking, you're getting your money's worth.

[laxpdx]

SRR for sure. Definitely a competitive bout but I have little doubt Ray would come out on top, whether it be by decision or late TKO.

Napoles has both the skill and punch, and I think he has a good chance if he's not cut too badly. Possibly Basilio too, as he also had the punch.

Emile Griffith as well. I mean, if he managed to outpoint Dick Tiger, twice...

[Sister Sledge]

I hate to say this, but has anyone ever thought that Leonard might have had an off-night? I have to think that Duran is a bit overrated at WW. Yes, he beat Leonard, but has had off-nights before, and had his opposition been better, he would have lost.
Duran fought a great fight, but it's clear that SRL did not fight his fight. Palomino was on the decline, let's not forget, and Duran fought a few ham n eggers that he didn't exactly look great against. Let's not forget that Randy Turpin fought a great fight against Robinson the first time, but that was the highlight of his career.
I don't think that it's a coincidence that Duran never had a win that came close to ever being as big as this one. One great win doesn't make him the best WW ever: it just means he fought a great fight.

[Rise Above]

Cant go past Robinson but I'd also pick Gavilan and maybe Basilio.

[WhataRock]

I hate to say this, but has anyone ever thought that Leonard might have had an off-night?

He was at his peak..less then a year before he had his best performance of his career up until that point and the probably the best overall performance of the rest of his career.

His conditioning was obviously top notch with the way he finished that fight and absorbed the punishment he received.

He had a bad night because the result didnt go his way...not because he wasnt prepared.

I have to think that Duran is a bit overrated at WW. Yes, he beat Leonard, but has had off-nights before, and had his opposition been better, he would have lost.

Leonard is the 2nd best welterweight ever...Palomino is a very good champion who would have continued to prosper had it been a weaker era.

Thats not good enough for you? Thats pretty friggen good. Of course there were more names to take on at the time but Leonard was big scalp.


Duran fought a great fight, but it's clear that SRL did not fight his fight.

How is that clear?

My Pespsi challenge still stands for anyone who can find a fight of Leonard pre-Duran or for that matter any fight after the rematch up until his first retirement..where Ray used that amount of consistent movement, where he was up on his toes constantly to the point of almost running.
That WAS NOT his type of fight. He was far more of a boxer-puncher then a cute pure boxer. He never had any qualms about battling someone on the inside or being the aggressor. His fight was generally to switch between patient counter puncher and a more aggressive combo puncher when he saw fit. The fight he attempted the first time around.
He made adjustments against a clearly less prepared Roberto in the rematch and frustrated him to the point of making him quit. He certainly wasnt beating him up or schooling him until he had 1-1/12 big rounds just before the end.
You can see that either way if you want...Im not going to argue with people anymore. I choose to believe Duran wasnt the same kind of fighter that he was in the first fight but at the same time I take absolutely nothing away from Leonard. I just take a little less away from Duran then other people do because I think the evidence points to him not being in the same kind of shape physically or mentally.

Palomino was on the decline, let's not forget,


Evidence?

Carlos acquitted himself very well less then 6 months earlier against Benitez. He looked fine in his fight with Duran.

Its fairly widely felt that Palomino was one of the those rare examples of a fighter who retired whilst just about at their peak.

and Duran fought a few ham n eggers that he didn't exactly look great against.

He phoned in a couple performances and took on a straight up runner in Speedy which rarely make a fighter look good.
But its fairly obvious that he really came to the plate against the best fighters he faced at the weight...Starting with his brutal showing against top contender (albeit jnr welter contender) Brooks and ending with his pièce de résistance against Leonard in Montreal.

Let's not forget that Randy Turpin fought a great fight against Robinson the first time, but that was the highlight of his career.

That comparison is a bit of stretch I reckon mate.


[/QUOTE]I don't think that it's a coincidence that Duran never had a win that came close to ever being as big as this one. One great win doesn't make him the best WW ever: it just means he fought a great fight.[/QUOTE]

No one is claiming that and check out the welterweight rankings the classic forum compiled to see how who we feel are the greatest at welter.

But that great performance is one of the best of any fighter...ever. And what this thread is about is asking who beats that version of Duran at welter. That list is very short.

[itrymariti]

My Pespsi challenge still stands for anyone who can find a fight of Leonard pre-Duran or for that matter any fight after the rematch up until his first retirement..where Ray used that amount of consistent movement, where he was up on his toes constantly to the point of almost running.
That WAS NOT his type of fight. He was far more of a boxer-puncher then a cute pure boxer. He never had any qualms about battling someone on the inside or being the aggressor. His fight was generally to switch between patient counter puncher and a more aggressive combo puncher when he saw fit. The fight he attempted the first time around.

In the Olympics (if that counts), Leonard was practically running by default, particularly against Limasov. Obviously, in the second Duran fight, he had a lot more movement. So I think the ability was there. It's a good point you make, though, since pretty much all of Leonard's wins as a pro pre-Duran (including vs. Benitez) involved stand-up boxing/punching more than anything else, and Duran just took that all away from him in Montreal.

[China_hand_Joe]

By the way, I just have to laugh my ass off at people pulling out names like Tszyu or De La Hoya. Whatever you guys are smoking, you're getting your money's worth.

I think you are underestimating Tszyu horrifically.

The man had a top 10 ATG level skillset and is capable of either brutalising Duran or even clowning him with a masterful boxing performance.

The man was awe-inspiring like a prime Roy Jones Jr, even with his more refined style.

[WhataRock]

In the Olympics (if that counts), Leonard was practically running by default, particularly against Limasov. Obviously, in the second Duran fight, he had a lot more movement. So I think the ability was there. It's a good point you make, though, since pretty much all of Leonard's wins as a pro pre-Duran (including vs. Benitez) involved stand-up boxing/punching more than anything else, and Duran just took that all away from him in Montreal.

He was doing that a little more then and yeah most definitely the potential was there as he showed again in the Hagler fight and in others when he came back and was fighting at the higher weight.

But even then I remember quite clearly being the aggressor early on against the Ruski he faced. And I believe that was Lisamov.
Im fairly certain he only got on his bike later on in the fight have really standing his crowd and putting the Soviet bloke under the pump earlier on.

He went to war with the Cuban bloke at times and kind of toyed with whoever he fought in the semi, some white european cant recall his name.
Clinton McKenzie he certainly didnt fight like the did against Duran in the rematch..again more efficient shuffling and short bouncing rather then constant and sweeping movements..That fight was more of shootout at range, kind of like the Benitez fight.

I might be off but I honestly cant recall him employing that style all that much even in the Olympics.

By in large as a pro that was not his style or tactical approach to fighting. That adjustment in strategy was made in training for the rematch and it worked well. I just dont feel it was his fight..he fought his fight in the first one and it didnt work so well.

[itrymariti]

It's also strange that Leonard chatted a lot in the run-up to the fight about how he'd seen Duran's fights with Viruet, and how he was going to be constantly up on the balls of his feet, moving and circling to the right etc.

[Popkins]

Nah, SRL came mighty close fighting Duran`s fight.

Robinson would fuck him up badly.

Silly comment. Please tell me what fights of Robinson's you have actually seen at welterweight?

No-one "fucks him up badly" at 147. The guy dominated prime Ray Leonard for 12 rounds. It doesn't get much better than that. And his insanely good inside game would be horrible for Robinson to deal with. If SRR won, he would have to go to hell and back first.

[Genesis]

How can Chinahand use a 37 year old Robinson against Basilo to validate a win for Duran V Robinson?

People can say the Duran that lost to Kirkland Lang in 1982 gets KO'd in 4 by Robinson, or the Duran that looked shot to pieces in Leonard III would get killed by Robinson.

[itrymariti]

How can Chinahand use a 37 year old Robinson against Basilo to validate a win for Duran V Robinson?


There's no shame in losing to Carmen :deal

[Hookie]

I hate to say this, but has anyone ever thought that Leonard might have had an off-night? I have to think that Duran is a bit overrated at WW. Yes, he beat Leonard, but has had off-nights before, and had his opposition been better, he would have lost.
Duran fought a great fight, but it's clear that SRL did not fight his fight. Palomino was on the decline, let's not forget, and Duran fought a few ham n eggers that he didn't exactly look great against. Let's not forget that Randy Turpin fought a great fight against Robinson the first time, but that was the highlight of his career.
I don't think that it's a coincidence that Duran never had a win that came close to ever being as big as this one. One great win doesn't make him the best WW ever: it just means he fought a great fight.


good post

[Duodenum]

I hate to say this, but has anyone ever thought that Leonard might have had an off-night?This only holds water if one accepts the notion that Ray choked. Montreal was the most hyped non heavyweight promotion in ages. He had just crushed Green in lethal fashion, and was dealing with an older and smaller opponent moving up from 135. There was no guarantee of a rematch for the loser, so both had to make the most of what might well be their only opportunity. (For an extended period after Montreal, the futures of both combatants was up in the air. It was at this moment that I thought Duran should make a beeline for a WW unification with Hearns, before he had a chance to eat and party away his edge.)

Duran had it locked up in the scoring after ten rounds. In fact, an unofficial UPI report read live on the USA east coast evening newscasts following the conclusion of the tenth round stated that Duran had just won nine of the first ten rounds of their match still in progress. (The late WCVB-TV Channel 5 sports director Don Gillis read this transcript during his segment on the Boston newscast that night.) At this same moment, Duran himself correctly announced to his corner after round ten that he had already clinched the scoring. Official scorecards shortly verified the accuracy of UPI's, and his own reporting.

El Cholo's control over the first ten rounds in Montreal is comparable to the degree with which he beat Palomino over ten. The decisive phase of this battle was a near whitewash.

[Mantequilla]

completely agree.Leonard only seemed to have the intiative for about two rounds circa 5th.Other than that Duran was as MRBILL might say "putting some serious wood on him".

[Sweet Pea]

I hate to say this, but has anyone ever thought that Leonard might have had an off-night? I have to think that Duran is a bit overrated at WW. Yes, he beat Leonard, but has had off-nights before, and had his opposition been better, he would have lost.
Duran fought a great fight, but it's clear that SRL did not fight his fight. Palomino was on the decline, let's not forget, and Duran fought a few ham n eggers that he didn't exactly look great against. Let's not forget that Randy Turpin fought a great fight against Robinson the first time, but that was the highlight of his career.
I don't think that it's a coincidence that Duran never had a win that came close to ever being as big as this one. One great win doesn't make him the best WW ever: it just means he fought a great fight.Palomino didn't look on the decline to me. He'd just went 12 hard-fought rounds in a much closer than remembered bout with Benitez. And I certainly don't think Leonard had an off-night. He fought a great fight himself, he was just outdone by the better man that night. Noone who fights like he did during the championship rounds of a fight where he'd already recieved so much punishment is having an off night. He showed more grit and resolve in that fight than any other, and fought very well.

[Bill Butcher]

Silly comment. Please tell me what fights of Robinson's you have actually seen at welterweight?

No-one "fucks him up badly" at 147. The guy dominated prime Ray Leonard for 12 rounds. It doesn't get much better than that. And his insanely good inside game would be horrible for Robinson to deal with. If SRR won, he would have to go to hell and back first.

Ive seen him in his earliest MW fights & thats close enough.... Duran is yet again being badly overrated, he is one of my favourite fighters but c`mon, back to reality people.
He didnt dominate shit for 12 rds vs SRL either, he was winning tho, the Leonard of the 2nd fight beats any version of Duran, the Montreal version by UD.
Benitez would always frustrate him, not sure who would win that one but I know who did win when they did fight - & pretty clearly at that.

Hearns has too many physical advantages for Duran, period, as does Robinson, both hit too hard & both are faster as well as superior distance boxers.

Robinson was a bigger man naturally than even Leonard, who was a full WW at his best, he didnt KO guys like Lamotta & Fulmer by accident... Duran would be in a world of shit vs a bigger AND superior fighter that just has too much for him.

[Bill Butcher]

This only holds water if one accepts the notion that Ray choked. Montreal was the most hyped non heavyweight promotion in ages. He had just crushed Green in lethal fashion, and was dealing with an older and smaller opponent moving up from 135. There was no guarantee of a rematch for the loser, so both had to make the most of what might well be their only opportunity. (For an extended period after Montreal, the futures of both combatants was up in the air. It was at this moment that I thought Duran should make a beeline for a WW unification with Hearns, before he had a chance to eat and party away his edge.)

Duran had it locked up in the scoring after ten rounds. In fact, an unofficial UPI report read live on the USA east coast evening newscasts following the conclusion of the tenth round stated that Duran had just won nine of the first ten rounds of their match still in progress. (The late WCVB-TV Channel 5 sports director Don Gillis read this transcript during his segment on the Boston newscast that night.) At this same moment, Duran himself correctly announced to his corner after round ten that he had already clinched the scoring. Official scorecards shortly verified the accuracy of UPI's, and his own reporting.

El Cholo's control over the first ten rounds in Montreal is comparable to the degree with which he beat Palomino over ten. The decisive phase of this battle was a near whitewash.

:lol: Comedy gold.

Keep that shit up, outstanding :good

[Bing]

Robinson, Hearns definitely imo

[Duodenum]

Palomino didn't look on the decline to me. He'd just went 12 hard-fought rounds in a much closer than remembered bout with Benitez.15 rounds, actually, under the Puerto Rican sun, and he attempted a characteristic late charge. One of Palomino's goals was to retire by 30, and he achieved this. (Having a degree and money in the bank, he certainly didn't need to continue fighting.) And I certainly don't think Leonard had an off-night. He fought a great fight himself, he was just outdone by the better man that night. No one who fights like he did during the championship rounds of a fight where he'd already received so much punishment is having an off night. He showed more grit and resolve in that fight than any other, and fought very well.While the outcome was already decided by the championship rounds, Ray's body was mottled black and blue from the punishment he had taken. Even though Duran let up on his throttle a bit, it was still a remarkable display of toughness, energy and conditioning SRL demonstrated after the body beating he'd taken. An off night would suggest wilting in such a situation, not a late rally.

Duran, SRL and Palomino were 15 round iron men, and taking nine of ten rounds from the latter two at this stage probably required the services of a top five or ten P4P ATG.

[Sweet Pea]

Robinson was a bigger man naturally than even Leonard, who was a full WW at his best.No, he wasn't. Both men were full Welterweights standing roughly the same height with similar reaches. Robinson often weighed in well below the MW limit for his bouts at the weight.

[Popkins]

Ive seen him in his earliest MW fights & thats close enough....

I don't think it is, not to make such a cocksure, definite and damning verdict.

Duran is yet again being badly overrated, he is one of my favourite fighters but c`mon, back to reality people.

Have you seen the Palomino fight? Have you seen the first Leonard fight? I will assume so. That man was easily as good as anyone else who has ever fought at welter, just watch his performances, the proof is in the pudding.

He didnt dominate shit for 12 rds vs SRL either, he was winning tho,

He was winning clearly and comfortably against a prime version of one of the top two or three welterweights ever in a hell of a fight. Again I ask, what more proof do you need of his effectiveness at 147??

the Leonard of the 2nd fight beats any version of Duran, the Montreal version by UD.

The Leonard of the second fight was the Leonard of the first fight. Had Ray undergone a sudden metamorphosis in between those fights?? I don't think so. He was the same superb fighter he always was. It was Duran who was different.

Duran beat the best SRL. SRL did not beat the best Duran. This is unquestionable.

Benitez would always frustrate him, not sure who would win that one but I know who did win when they did fight - & pretty clearly at that.

Again, have you seen the first Leonard fight? No way does Benitez live with that version of Duran, truly one of the top two or three fighting machines in boxing history.

Hearns has too many physical advantages for Duran, period,

Period nothing. The Montreal Duran stops the Hearns of the first Leonard fight. For all Tommy's great skill and power at 147, you can't pretend he wasn't very vulnerable, maybe not against good solid B class fighters like Cuevas, but ATG welters like SRL and Duran would expose that frailty over 15 rounds. Tommy was at a weight too low for him, and his chin was not just suspect, but proven to be a weak spot by Leonard. I'm tired of everyone reacting like its blasphemy to point out Hearns's chin. Yes he was an amazing fighter, but at times he could be all over the place with merely glancing shots from a powerful opponent. He would outbox Duran, he would hurt and punish him, but in the end Duran would make the breakthrough and leave him in a crumpled heap.

At 154, Hearns beats Duran 10 times out of 10. But this is one of those rare instances where one weight class does make a great difference to how a fight would go.

as does Robinson, both hit too hard & both are faster as well as superior distance boxers.

Do you think the Montreal Duran would allow it to be made into a fight from distance? Prime Ray Leonard couldn't keep him off. Duran was the greatest swarming infighter of all-time. If he wanted the fight to be at close quarters, it would be at close quarters for the most part. He was too fast, too incessant, too rampaging to be held off.

Robinson was a bigger man naturally than even Leonard, who was a full WW at his best,

As Pea has already pointed out, this is inaccurate. Robinson was small at mw.

he didnt KO guys like Lamotta & Fulmer by accident... Duran would be in a world of shit vs a bigger AND superior fighter that just has too much for him.

I've never said that Duran would definitely beat Robinson. But the fact that he beat a prime Ray Leonard at 147 proves that on his night he could hang with anyone who ever fought at that weight. You said Robinson would "fuck him up badly" and "tear him to pieces", or something like that. My point is that Robinson would do nothing of the sort. He probably would beat Duran (probably), but he would have to come through a monumental war to get that win. If Duran cut the ring off the same way he did against Leonard, Robinson would have a horrific time with him on the inside. Of course SRR may come through it as he was insanely good, but to imply it would be a blast-out is silly.

[stevebhoy87]

Its a very intresting question. The more i watch the Duran from Palomino and Leonard 1 the more i realise what a special fighter he was, amazing offensively and one of the best defensive fighters as well. His ability to combine the 2 at the same time is unmatched in my opinion. Getting inside landings his shots then rolling, slipping and sliding his opponents return fire. However there are a few i give have the best shout

Leonard from the rematch. Now i totally agree that leonard in the 1st fight fought his usual fight, he was a boxer puncher, a brilliant one and he believed that he would get the best of the smaller duran from his usual style. I think he learnt a very valuable lesson from the fight however and he worked on a different style completly, one unusual to him for the rematch, but one laid out to give duran more problems. A leonard using far more lateral movement, attacking only when he knew he would land and clowing around would have always effected duran and caused him issues. Now a Montreal Duran would be more capable of getting at leonard than the version we seen in mew orleans, Duran was a step quicker and far more intense that night, he would have done everything to get inside and been more of a handful when there. My best guess is that Duran would still beat Leonard, but tighter and he would have needed the last 3 rounds to do so.

Hearns, while Duran was clearly past his best when he actually fought hearns, the hitman would always have caused him a nightmare styles wise. His speed, size, reach and power is a nightmare for Duran. Duran of course would have more to combat him if we take his 147 version, he would not get blown out and would get inside hearns and when he was there would cause damage, could he get there often enough is the question, my best guess would be Duran getting taken out around 9 after taking one to many straight rights on the way inside but a Duran stoppage or TKO could not be ruled out

Robinson. Duran is the fighter i give the best chance of beating Ray at 147, for me a highly technical inside fighter, espicially one with the skill and defence of roberto has the best chance of getting to SRR. While i wouldn't be at all suprised to see roberto to pull this one out i have to favour Robinson, for me he was more effective of the back foot than leonard, he could get more leverage from his punches and i think his footwork was slightly more impressive. I dont see Duran getting inside with Robinson as often as he did in montreal and when he does he will be taking more fire to get there. Robinson is a massive puncher, accurate and fast. I see Duran taking too much and after a close 1st 10 robinson either having a late TKO or him beginning to slow down and robinson pulling away for a tight UD or SD

I also give Rodriguez and Griffith a decent shout against Duran, I favour him clearly over everyone else

[natonic]

I take Duran - Leonard I at face value. Duran just beat him. Great fight between 2 great fighters. The experience Leonard gained in the first fight was vital in the 2nd fight. Leonard just didn't have the answers for Duran in the 1st fight. However, the suggestion that Duran took his foot off the pedal in the championship rounds is utter bullshit. He was trying to kill Leonard. They were trying to kill each other. That's why it's one of the greatest fights ever.

[JohnThomas1]

Duran beat the best SRL. SRL did not beat the best Duran. This is unquestionable.


I'd hate to in court with you on the jury. Leonard was still improving when Duran beat him, and the experience did him no end of good.

Duran taught Leonard the art of psychological warfare, and oh how he turned it on him next fight regardless of Duran's excuses and supporters. Duran was calling his wife a whore and other such rot before the first fight, and by the time the bout was underway there was Leonard looking to kill him, playing right into the experienced masters hands. Duran may have been the one soul who knew how well he could offset an aggressive Leonard.

Leonard took Duran's lessons and never looked back. He was a master of the psychological side from then on, as evidenced in Duran 2, Hearns I and Hagler.

Leonard was probably hitting his absolute peak around or just after the Hearns fight i'd say. Unfortunately he retired about this time. He was pre peak Duran I, even if we only took experience into account.

[WhataRock]

No doubt he matured mentally and learnt from the first Duran fight.

But I still dont buy the pre peak story..Again one of his most complete performances was against Benitez 6 months earlier.

I didnt see a performance like that again...He flat out looked below par against Bonds..and quality of opposition and styles aside I wasnt as impressed with him against Kalule and Hearns either..not to say they werent very impressive wins, I just felt his fight with Wilfred was the best I ever saw of him at welter.

[JohnThomas1]

No doubt he matured mentally and learnt from the first Duran fight.

But I still dont buy the pre peak story..Again one of his most complete performances was against Benitez 6 months earlier.

I didnt see a performance like that again...He flat out looked below par against Bonds..and quality of opposition and styles aside I wasnt as impressed with him against Kalule and Hearns either..not to say they werent very impressive wins, I just felt his fight with Wilfred was the best I ever saw of him at welter.

Peak isn't prime. It can't be argued IMO that the Duran experience didn't forward him as a fighter. People can excuse Duran and belittle and bemoan Leonard all they like, but tactically and mentally he was ready to perform to perfection in the rematch, regardless of stories, allowances and whatever else comes forth.

Benitez, tho tricky and a great fell nicely into SRL and Dundee's perfect gameplan. Leonard was at least as fast, had a much better chin and hit substancially harder. The fight was his for the taking as long as he was patient and stuck to his plan. He was hardly getting up vs Bonds, and he was known to struggle vs southpaws (which makes Hagler coming out righty even more ridiculous) anyway, which Kalule and Bonds were.

As for Hearns, well for all we know there may not have been another Welter in history that would have beat him, or certainly VERY few. Who was going to look good against him? Leonard showed true tenacity and greatness to hang in there, bide his time, rough it out and seize the moments when they eventually came - at a price. His win over Hearns impresses the shit out of me personally, because i weigh up the factors and take into account what was up against him. Benitez couldn't penetrate Hearns and he made a then resurgent Duran look like an inept sparring partner.

The Leonard who fought Duran was going to do no better against Hearns, and may have even done less well. Going in vs Hearns he sure knew he could be beaten, because he had been. I'd venture even beside the rage that he was overconfident vs Duran. Why would he not be? Duran was just previously a lightweight and who knew he could rise to such dramatic heights.

[Bokaj]

The Leonard of the second fight was the Leonard of the first fight. Had Ray undergone a sudden metamorphosis in between those fights?? I don't think so. He was the same superb fighter he always was. It was Duran who was different.

Duran beat the best SRL. SRL did not beat the best Duran. This is unquestionable.

I dumbfounded by this claim. It's so stupid it's almost unreal. You can speculate that it was so, but it's an astronomical distance from unquestionable. And yet I see very good posters claim this. The Duran myth sure warps minds.

Again, have you seen the first Leonard fight? No way does Benitez live with that version of Duran, truly one of the top two or three fighting machines in boxing history.

Pretty much like above. To claim this with such surety when Benitez very comfortably beat Duran just a couple of years after Montreal... Can't take it seriously.

Period nothing. The Montreal Duran stops the Hearns of the first Leonard fight

:lol: Unbelievable. Hearns spanked him like no ATG ever been spanked before or since. But you are sure four years and 8 lbs would more or less reverse this? I lack for words.

The three claims you make here are bad separately, but together they erode 100% of your credibility on the subject.

[Mantequilla]

Duran wasn't an all-time great anymore when he fought Tommy Hearns, or one at 154 or middleweight period.

Look at where a lot of other great fighters were at similar periods in their careers ie..multiple weightclasses and several years past their best and you will find much worse defeats than that.

even Duran has worse himself, against laing for instance.

[Flea Man]

:lol: Comedy gold.

Keep that shit up, outstanding :good

In regards to Durans performance in Montreal, he's talking the absolute truth. So if you find that funny you must have an odd sense of humour.

[JohnThomas1]

Duran wasn't an all-time great anymore when he fought Tommy Hearns, or one at 154 or middleweight period.

Look at where a lot of other great fighters were at similar periods in their careers ie..multiple weightclasses and several years past their best and you will find much worse defeats than that.

even Duran has worse himself, against laing for instance.

Regardless Duran was coming off two superb efforts vs Cuevas and Moore and a very respected one vs Hagler. Nobody ever blew Duran out either before Hearns or years after. Heck, he beat Hearns victor at 160 well after the Hearns blowout.

I'm pretty sure Duran wouldn't think the Laing loss worse than the Hearns one. The thing is Duran was still performing superb deeds, even if in patches.

[Mantequilla]

Don't get me wrong, Hearns win was awesome, and Duran was still very good.I make no excuses for him losing to Benitez or Hearns personally, they were better junior middleweights than he was.

BoKaj's statement was a bit misleading though imo.You have to take into account what stage each fighter was at in their career.

[JohnThomas1]

Don't get me wrong, Hearns win was awesome, and Duran was still very good.I make no excuses for him losing to Benitez or Hearns personally, they were better junior middleweights than he was.

BoKaj's statement was a bit misleading though imo.You have to take into account what stage each fighter was at in their career.

Fair enough mate.

[Bokaj]

BoKaj's statement was a bit misleading though imo.You have to take into account what stage each fighter was at in their career.

Sure. Duran was past his prime. No doubt about that.

It's the tendency to make these fanciful claims about how a peak Duran really would have perfomed if not for this or for that, etc, that gets to me.

It's not inconceivable that the best Duran at WW beats the best Hearns at WW, but one have to be aware that such a claim is fraught with speculation.

[The Morlocks]

I don't think it is, not to make such a cocksure, definite and damning verdict.



Have you seen the Palomino fight? Have you seen the first Leonard fight? I will assume so. That man was easily as good as anyone else who has ever fought at welter, just watch his performances, the proof is in the pudding.



He was winning clearly and comfortably against a prime version of one of the top two or three welterweights ever in a hell of a fight. Again I ask, what more proof do you need of his effectiveness at 147??



The Leonard of the second fight was the Leonard of the first fight. Had Ray undergone a sudden metamorphosis in between those fights?? I don't think so. He was the same superb fighter he always was. It was Duran who was different.

Duran beat the best SRL. SRL did not beat the best Duran. This is unquestionable.



Again, have you seen the first Leonard fight? No way does Benitez live with that version of Duran, truly one of the top two or three fighting machines in boxing history.



Period nothing. The Montreal Duran stops the Hearns of the first Leonard fight. For all Tommy's great skill and power at 147, you can't pretend he wasn't very vulnerable, maybe not against good solid B class fighters like Cuevas, but ATG welters like SRL and Duran would expose that frailty over 15 rounds. Tommy was at a weight too low for him, and his chin was not just suspect, but proven to be a weak spot by Leonard. I'm tired of everyone reacting like its blasphemy to point out Hearns's chin. Yes he was an amazing fighter, but at times he could be all over the place with merely glancing shots from a powerful opponent. He would outbox Duran, he would hurt and punish him, but in the end Duran would make the breakthrough and leave him in a crumpled heap.

At 154, Hearns beats Duran 10 times out of 10. But this is one of those rare instances where one weight class does make a great difference to how a fight would go.



Do you think the Montreal Duran would allow it to be made into a fight from distance? Prime Ray Leonard couldn't keep him off. Duran was the greatest swarming infighter of all-time. If he wanted the fight to be at close quarters, it would be at close quarters for the most part. He was too fast, too incessant, too rampaging to be held off.



As Pea has already pointed out, this is inaccurate. Robinson was small at mw.



I've never said that Duran would definitely beat Robinson. But the fact that he beat a prime Ray Leonard at 147 proves that on his night he could hang with anyone who ever fought at that weight. You said Robinson would "fuck him up badly" and "tear him to pieces", or something like that. My point is that Robinson would do nothing of the sort. He probably would beat Duran (probably), but he would have to come through a monumental war to get that win. If Duran cut the ring off the same way he did against Leonard, Robinson would have a horrific time with him on the inside. Of course SRR may come through it as he was insanely good, but to imply it would be a blast-out is silly.
I agree. with these posts. :rastaLong live Roberto Duran!:hat

[PowerPuncher]

I hate to say this, but has anyone ever thought that Leonard might have had an off-night? I have to think that Duran is a bit overrated at WW. Yes, he beat Leonard, but has had off-nights before, and had his opposition been better, he would have lost.
Duran fought a great fight, but it's clear that SRL did not fight his fight. Palomino was on the decline, let's not forget, and Duran fought a few ham n eggers that he didn't exactly look great against. Let's not forget that Randy Turpin fought a great fight against Robinson the first time, but that was the highlight of his career.
I don't think that it's a coincidence that Duran never had a win that came close to ever being as big as this one. One great win doesn't make him the best WW ever: it just means he fought a great fight.

Leonard did have an off night, mainly because he fought flatfooted and went toe-toe and try to knock out an ageing great who had insulted his wife. Ofcourse Leonard shouldnt have underestimated Duran and instead used lateral movement and focused in getting in and out. He was also hurt and a bit out of it after the second round. Great performance by Duran but we saw Roberto gets outboxed when Leonard chooses to stick and mvoe

The only difference between Leonard-Duran 1 and the rematch is Leonard's gameplan. Yes Duran got out of shape, but he was always an alcoholic taco eating fat boy between fights

This forum takes Duran nuthugging and turns it into a new religion.

[Flea Man]

Leonard did have an off night, mainly because he fought flatfooted and went toe-toe and try to knock out an ageing great who had insulted his wife. Ofcourse Leonard shouldnt have underestimated Duran and instead used lateral movement and focused in getting in and out. He was also hurt and a bit out of it after the second round. Great performance by Duran but we saw Roberto gets outboxed when Leonard chooses to stick and mvoe

The only difference between Leonard-Duran 1 and the rematch is Leonard's gameplan. Yes Duran got out of shape, but he was always an alcoholic taco eating fat boy between fights

This forum takes Duran nuthugging and turns it into a new religion.


Given some of your comments, particularly regarding Floyd, that's a bit rich.

[Stonehands89]

Robinson, slight favorite. His willingness to mix it up, however, would be to Duran's advantage considering Duran's superior defense.

Burley. Here's a man who would psychologically convinced himself that his arms were elastic and his hands were lead. And that's precisely how he punched and it was enough to chill heavyweights. Duran's power was good at WW but Burley's power was off the charts. And Burley was a stylist... A former sparring said that Burley moved like a cloud out there and punched like a fool. I think Duran would have real problems reading and responding to this phenomenon. Given their respective styles, I'd favor Burley more than I'd favor Sugar Ray himself over Duran.

Cocoa Kid really gives me pause but I can't do any more than engage in speculation most shameful. He was good enough to handle Holman Williams repeatedely -outboxing him no less, and was powerful enough to drop Robinson in sparring when he was 36 years old...

I thought about Walker, but I think he came into his own as a MW. He'd beat Duran at 160, but not the Montreal Duran at 147. Great fight though.
I also wonder about Shane. But Shane makes mistakes. Also, Duran was quick enough to avoid getting overwhelmed by anyone's speed that night.

I'd favor Duran over WW Armstrong, Ross, and McLarnin....

[Sister Sledge]

Palomino didn't look on the decline to me. He'd just went 12 hard-fought rounds in a much closer than remembered bout with Benitez. And I certainly don't think Leonard had an off-night. He fought a great fight himself, he was just outdone by the better man that night. Noone who fights like he did during the championship rounds of a fight where he'd already recieved so much punishment is having an off night. He showed more grit and resolve in that fight than any other, and fought very well.

Palomino didn't have the desire to be the best anymore. He lost his hunger. Once you lose that, even though you have the physical skills, you still won't be the fighter you used to be. This is not taking anything away from Duran's performance.
Concerning Leonard having an off-night, I don't believe he was totally prepared for Duran. He never fought anyone like Duran, and was taken out of the fight early. It's a testament to Leonard that he came back in the later rounds. The fact is SRL learned from this fight. I feel that the Leonard in the 2nd Duran fight would beat the Duran of the Montreal fight. It's just like when Duran fought Dejesus the first time and lost. Duran came back a better fighter.
I was actually rooting for Duran at the time, so I loved the fact that he won, but it's just a great win to me. There are several fighters who stood a chance of beating him. Heanrs, Robinson, Gavilan, Walker, and Griffith to name a few.

[Popkins]

I dumbfounded by this claim. It's so stupid it's almost unreal. You can speculate that it was so, but it's an astronomical distance from unquestionable. And yet I see very good posters claim this. The Duran myth sure warps minds.

:huh I can't even work out what your problem with that statement is. To anyone who has seen these men fight throughout their careers, the statement is quite patently correct.

The finest all-round performance of Leonard's career was Benitez IMO. Due to his extensive amateur background and God-given natural talents, Ray Leonard was not a fighter who evolved much through his short career, in beating Benitez he was as good as he would be, and he maintained this high quality level until his first retirement.

And if you can watch the first Duran-SRL fight then the second, and genuinely do not see any physical or mental difference in Duran, then I think you should consider switching your allegiance to another sport.

Pretty much like above. To claim this with such surety when Benitez very comfortably beat Duran just a couple of years after Montreal... Can't take it seriously.

I don't even know what 'surety' is, but from the context I can work it out. Again, if you can't see the difference between the super-motivated, superbly conditioned Duran of Palomino and Leonard I fights, and the version who was yet another weight class further from his natural and fought at lmw, well then I can't help you. I can't make you see and understand things that you clearly do not at the moment.

Do you seriously think you could have dropped Benitez instead of Leonard into the ring in Montreal, and Benitez would have won?? I think you've been on the Christmas sherry a little too early.

:lol: Unbelievable. Hearns spanked him like no ATG ever been spanked before or since. But you are sure four years and 8 lbs would more or less reverse this? I lack for words.

Four years and eight pounds mean a hell of a lot to a natural lightweight already in his 30s. This should be obvious.

Example: Antonio Tarver put Roy Jones to sleep in 2 rounds in 2004 at 175lbs. Do you think Antonio Tarver would have put Roy Jones to sleep in 2 rounds at 175lbs in 2002, the year that Jones utterly dominated and stopped Clinton Woods? Nope.

Change anything about a fight, and the result could change completely. Two years and zero pounds made a hell of a difference to Jones, and by the same token four years and eight pounds made a hell of a difference to Duran.

Every fighter is different as is every situation.

The Duran of Montreal who beat a prime Leonard vs the Hearns of 1981 who was stopped by a prime Leonard. Of course it would not be anything like a two-round blowout.

The three claims you make here are bad separately, but together they erode 100% of your credibility on the subject.

I can say with complete surety that I genuinely could not care less in any way about your opinion. :good

[JohnThomas1]

And if you can watch the first Duran-:huhSRL fight then the second, and genuinely do not see any physical or mental difference in Duran, then I think you should consider switching your allegiance to another sport.


And if you don't think Leonard picked up a WORLD of experience and knowledge (knowledge = power) losing to Duran you should consider the same

:good

[Popkins]

And if you don't think Leonard picked up a WORLD of experience and knowledge (knowledge = power) losing to Duran you should consider the same

:good

:lol: You think the difference in Ray Leonard between those two fights was as great as the difference in Duran between those two fights??

Come on mate, sober up. Watch the fights.

[itrymariti]

Leonard did have an off night, mainly because he fought flatfooted and went toe-toe and try to knock out an ageing great who had insulted his wife. Ofcourse Leonard shouldnt have underestimated Duran and instead used lateral movement and focused in getting in and out. He was also hurt and a bit out of it after the second round. Great performance by Duran but we saw Roberto gets outboxed when Leonard chooses to stick and mvoe


When did Leonard ever fight like that pre-Duran? The only instance of that I can remember was the Olympics.

[Bummy Davis]

SSR,Basilio, but fight 1 was a great welter version of Duran that was not reproduced at that weight.....Duran at 135-140 was about unbeatable in condition and He was top 10 based on Leonard 1, a bit short of a prime at that weight

[WhataRock]

You will be waiting a long time for someone to answer that question itry.

Apparently Leonard's "fight", you know the one he plumb forgot about in the first match, was one that he was keeping a secret....Just thought he fight a completely different way his whole career just for the hell of it.

[JohnThomas1]

:lol: You think the difference in Ray Leonard between those two fights was as great as the difference in Duran between those two fights??

Come on mate, sober up. Watch the fights.

What's the difference between SRL and Duran comparatively got to do with it? You made the statement

Duran beat the best SRL. SRL did not beat the best Duran. This is unquestionable.

Terrible post.

The bottom line beside all of this is reputation. Leonard gained many supporters in his never say die loss to Duran, whilst Duran never ever fully erased the stigma of his quitting. It's a thorn in his side that will never be completely dislodged. In most cases it cost him a top 5 (possibly 3) P4P spot ever. Leonard lost nothing, in fact he probably gained. If he beat Duran it would have been a simple case of so he should have beat a lightweight, however great.

Regardless of supposed circumstance, he garnered points for coming back and making the (seemingly) ultimate of macho men surrender in the most embarrassing of circumstances.

[Popkins]

What's the difference between SRL and Duran comparatively got to do with it? You made the statement



Terrible post.

The bottom line beside all of this is reputation. Leonard gained many supporters in his never say die loss to Duran, whilst Duran never ever fully erased the stigma of his quitting. It's a thorn in his side that will never be completely dislodged. In most cases it cost him a top 5 (possibly 3) P4P spot ever. Leonard lost nothing, in fact he probably gained. If he beat Duran it would have been a simple case of so he should have beat a lightweight, however great.

Regardless of supposed circumstance, he garnered points for coming back and making the (seemingly) ultimate of macho men surrender in the most embarrassing of circumstances.

And yet the statement is still true. Duran beat the best Leonard, Leonard did not beat the best Duran. Simple. Watch the fights, study their careers, and there is no other way of thinking of it.

[JohnThomas1]

When did Leonard ever fight like that pre-Duran? The only instance of that I can remember was the Olympics.

When did Leonard stand his ground, move so little and mix it up so much as he did vs Duran?

Better still, lets look at Leonard Duran II


:good

[JohnThomas1]

And yet the statement is still true. Duran beat the best Leonard, Leonard did not beat the best Duran. Simple. Watch the fights, study their careers, and there is no other way of thinking of it.

I rest my case

:good

[Addie]

I don't understand why it's so easy for you guys to believe that Duran could lose so much in the space of 6 months. If he put on weight between fights that's his own problem, and we criticize Leonard for wanting an immediate rematch when in reality if he had waited longer, we'd have said, "he waited for Duran to slide". It's just rubbish. What I do know is, Duran looked perfectly fine and in fighting shape in the ring to me, and he was losing on the cards prior to quitting. Great win for Leonard.

Duran was wonderful in their first fight, however, but as we know, fighters have great days whereas others have bad days. This was arguably Duran's finest hour and he would never ever repeat such a performance again. I wouldn't pick to many Welterweight in history to have overcome him, perhaps Leonard of the Duran II fight and Robinson. That's it.

[WhataRock]

When did Leonard stand his ground, move so little and mix it up so much as he did vs Duran?

Better still, lets look at Leonard Duran II


:good

Have quick geezer at all your early Leonard fights JT ...might want to check out Leonard-Duran I again aswell.

Ray moved about as much as he always did but he was sort of forced to fight his way through this fight because he dropped so many early rounds...He had absolutely no qualms about mixing it up with anyone before he faced Duran..Many of his fights, probably most of his career up until that point he spent standing his ground or on the front foot.

Thats just how he fought..its as simple as that.

Its one of the biggest myths in boxing that the true Ray Leonard came out for the rematch....because the evidence is just not there.

He did fight the wrong in their first encounter...it just happen to be his fight though.

[Popkins]

When did Leonard stand his ground, move so little and mix it up so much as he did vs Duran?

Better still, lets look at Leonard Duran II


:good

Pete Ranzany, 1979. Track it down, watch it, get back to me :good

[JohnThomas1]

Pete Ranzany, 1979. Track it down, watch it, get back to me :good

Seen it plenty ;)

So you come back with a guy with a 55% ko ratio that got axed in the 4th round? :lol:

[Popkins]

Seen it plenty ;)

So you come back with a guy with a 55% ko ratio that got axed in the 4th round? :lol:

:huh You asked when he fought in the same style. He fought in the same style in this fight. What part of this don't you understand?

[JohnThomas1]

Have quick geezer at all your early Leonard fights JT ...might want to check out Leonard-Duran I again aswell.

Ray moved about as much as he always did but he was sort of forced to fight his way through this fight because he dropped so many early rounds...He had absolutely no qualms about mixing it up with anyone before he faced Duran..Many of his fights, probably most of his career up until that point he spent standing his ground or on the front foot.

Thats just how he fought..its as simple as that.


Well let us say

Leonard's exceptional talent and diversity allowed him to come out and fight a completely different fight in the rematch. The sort of fight that was needed. History shows us a number of all time greats that did just this.

[Bokaj]

:huh I can't even work out what your problem with that statement is. To anyone who has seen these men fight throughout their careers, the statement is quite patently correct.

The finest all-round performance of Leonard's career was Benitez IMO. Due to his extensive amateur background and God-given natural talents, Ray Leonard was not a fighter who evolved much through his short career, in beating Benitez he was as good as he would be, and he maintained this high quality level until his first retirement.

And if you can watch the first Duran-SRL fight then the second, and genuinely do not see any physical or mental difference in Duran, then I think you should consider switching your allegiance to another sport.

You can just as easily reverse this, and say that the Leonard of Montreal did look no way as good as he did against Benitez or in the rematch. It has to do with the opposition, not just the fighter himself.

Just as Duran's great perfomance in Montreal made Leonard look ineffectual, Leonard's great (but less exciting perfomance) in the rematch made Duran look ineffectual. No great mystery, really.

The case for Duran being in terrible shape for the rematch is not strong. It was just 6 months after his arguably greatest perfomance and his own trainer said he was in shape. He also didn't look tired or winded in the least when he quit. There are claims that he was in poor shape, but those can be found in virtually every case when a popular ATG fighter losses surprisingly and embarassingly.

The case for Leonard being better in rematch is actually stronger. Duran seems to clearly have got into his head before the first fight by insulting his wife, and in any case a fight like that was of course a great lesson for a fighter who so far had had no difficulties in his career.

All in all, objectively there's no substantial argument behind claiming that Leonard was closer to his best in Montreal than Duran was in the rematch.


I don't even know what 'surety' is, but from the context I can work it out. Again, if you can't see the difference between the super-motivated, superbly conditioned Duran of Palomino and Leonard I fights, and the version who was yet another weight class further from his natural and fought at lmw, well then I can't help you. I can't make you see and understand things that you clearly do not at the moment.

Do you seriously think you could have dropped Benitez instead of Leonard into the ring in Montreal, and Benitez would have won?? I think you've been on the Christmas sherry a little too early.

A Benitez that himself was nearer the tail end of his career than Duran was, beat Duran convincingly. Again, it's just silly to claim with utter conviction that Duran would beat him peak for peak. Perhaps he would, perhaps he wouldn't, but nothing in their actual fight really pointed towards it. Anything else is free speculation.

Four years and eight pounds mean a hell of a lot to a natural lightweight already in his 30s. This should be obvious.

Example: Antonio Tarver put Roy Jones to sleep in 2 rounds in 2004 at 175lbs. Do you think Antonio Tarver would have put Roy Jones to sleep in 2 rounds at 175lbs in 2002, the year that Jones utterly dominated and stopped Clinton Woods? Nope.

Change anything about a fight, and the result could change completely. Two years and zero pounds made a hell of a difference to Jones, and by the same token four years and eight pounds made a hell of a difference to Duran.

Every fighter is different as is every situation.

The Duran of Montreal who beat a prime Leonard vs the Hearns of 1981 who was stopped by a prime Leonard. Of course it would not be anything like a two-round blowout.

No, but to reverse the result is poor thinking. And Tarver is a poor comparison, since Jones already had beaten him.

The blow out is closer to Tyson-Spinks or something like that. Between that and Holmes-Tyson, I'd say. No version of Spinks would ever stand a chance against Tyson, but a prime Holmes, perhaps. Still, though, someone predicting even a prime Holmes easily handling Tyson is not to be taken seriously.

I can say with complete surety that I genuinely could not care less in any way about your opinion. :good

So, that's why you spent so much time responding to it?:D

[WhataRock]

Exactamondo...He changed things up and frustrated the hell out of Duran. You cant take anything away from Ray, some more ardent Duran supporters do play down that win but thats not fair at all. I do think another myth is that he schooled the bejesus out of Roberto in that fight.

He was doing a hell of a lot of dancing, a hell of a lot of taunting..but not much punching and even less landing. Though he was clearly ahead and taking over when Roberto packed it in, I dont think he looked anymore comfortable in the ultra mobile role then he did taking it to Duran in the first match...for the first 4 or 5 rounds anyway.

Anyway..I never ever take anything away from Leonard for the rematch. He was the better man that night, like Roberto was the first time. I just a little less away from Duran then other people do. Not really in a historical sense, Duran lost, he quit and thats a big negative. Just I dont really think its like a template for knocking off the best version of a welter Duran..Some people seem to use that fight to justify picking any generic boxer/mover thats ever laced them up at welter beating Duran.


Merry Christmas all.

[JohnThomas1]

:huh You asked when he fought in the same style. He fought in the same style in this fight. What part of this don't you understand?

What part i don't understand is how a poster could not possibly ascertain the differences between a Pete Ranzany and a Roberto Duran and their respective bouts.

[Popkins]

What part i don't understand is how a poster could not possibly ascertain the differences between a Pete Ranzany and a Roberto Duran and their respective bouts.

Irrelevant. The issue was Leonard's style. He fought in the same style in both fights.

[JohnThomas1]

Exactamondo...He changed things up and frustrated the hell out of Duran. You cant take anything away from Ray, some more ardent Duran supporters do play down that win but thats not fair at all. I do think another myth is that he schooled the bejesus out of Roberto in that fight.

He was doing a hell of a lot of dancing, a hell of a lot of taunting..but not much punching and even less landing. Though he was clearly ahead and taking over when Roberto packed it in, I dont think he looked anymore comfortable in the ultra mobile role then he did taking it to Duran in the first match...for the first 4 or 5 rounds anyway.

Anyway..I never ever take anything away from Leonard for the rematch. He was the better man that night, like Roberto was the first time. I just a little less away from Duran then other people do. Not really in a historical sense, Duran lost, he quit and thats a big negative. Just I dont really think its like a template for knocking off the best version of a welter Duran..Some people seem to use that fight to justify picking any generic boxer/mover thats ever laced them up at welter beating Duran.


Merry Christmas all.

Hey no worries, i accept that there are two distinct points of view on this one and i respect yours mate. You're a fine poster and i enjoy your reads.

Merry Christmas :drink

[Popkins]

Still, though, someone predicting even a prime Holmes easily handling Tyson is not to be taken seriously.

:nut

Easily handling??

Here is what I actually said:

The Montreal Duran stops the Hearns of the first Leonard fight. For all Tommy's great skill and power at 147, you can't pretend he wasn't very vulnerable, maybe not against good solid B class fighters like Cuevas, but ATG welters like SRL and Duran would expose that frailty over 15 rounds. Tommy was at a weight too low for him, and his chin was not just suspect, but proven to be a weak spot by Leonard. I'm tired of everyone reacting like its blasphemy to point out Hearns's chin. Yes he was an amazing fighter, but at times he could be all over the place with merely glancing shots from a powerful opponent. He would outbox Duran, he would hurt and punish him, but in the end Duran would make the breakthrough and leave him in a crumpled heap.

Someone completely misquoting someone else in order to win an argument is to be taken even less seriously.

[itrymariti]

When did Leonard stand his ground, move so little and mix it up so much as he did vs Duran?

In pretty much every fight he had in his professional career?

[itrymariti]

Pete Ranzany, 1979. Track it down, watch it, get back to me :good

He did it much more often than that.

[Bokaj]

:nut

Easily handling??

Here is what I actually said:



Someone completely misquoting someone else in order to win an argument is to be taken even less seriously.

Sure. But I also made allowances for that Holmes was further from his prime and lasting four rounds. Anyhow, you do have point. It was lazy of me to exagerrate.

But still, the confidence you place in what is essentially speculation is really silly. And you have the same confidence concerning just about every loss Duran suffered. No matter how clear it was. Taken together that's a new kind of silly.

For the record, I'm just as unconvinced by Tyson fan boys claiming without even the slightest doubt that a prime Tyson would have beaten Lewis and Holyfield. And for those who'd go as far as claiming it's not even open for serious debate... You get the picture, I hope. I really hope.

[JohnThomas1]

He did it much more often than that.

Well things sure changed in the Dooran rematch ;)

Winners are grinners ---> :D

:good

[Popkins]

He did it much more often than that.

Agreed. But I wanted to give that confused chap a specific example to track down, and that fight is an especially good example of it IMO.

[Popkins]

Well things sure changed in the Dooran rematch ;)

Winners are grinners ---> :D

:good

Are you alright?

[JohnThomas1]

I don't understand why it's so easy for you guys to believe that Duran could lose so much in the space of 6 months. If he put on weight between fights that's his own problem, and we criticize Leonard for wanting an immediate rematch when in reality if he had waited longer, we'd have said, "he waited for Duran to slide". It's just rubbish. What I do know is, Duran looked perfectly fine and in fighting shape in the ring to me, and he was losing on the cards prior to quitting. Great win for Leonard.

Duran was wonderful in their first fight, however, but as we know, fighters have great days whereas others have bad days. This was arguably Duran's finest hour and he would never ever repeat such a performance again. I wouldn't pick to many Welterweight in history to have overcome him, perhaps Leonard of the Duran II fight and Robinson. That's it.

When it comes to SRL, well he beat everyones favourite mate. Duran, Hearns and Hagler. He's going to pay for this with many, and i am sure you see plenty of places where he does. He has the ability to decimate an otherwise balanced and measured poster.

:good

[JohnThomas1]

Are you alright?

I'm fine, are Paccy steriod claims getting to you a bit?

[Popkins]

Sure. But I also made allowances for that Holmes was further from his prime and lasting four rounds. Anyhow, you do have point. It was lazy of me to exagerrate.

Fine.

But still, the confidence you place in what is essentially speculation is really silly.

I can't really give my own opinion without suggesting that I believe it, can I? That's sort of what an opinion is. If I sounded really uncertain of it, it wouldn't be my opinion.

And you have the same confidence concerning just about every loss Duran suffered. No matter how clear it was. Taken together that's a new kind of silly.

:huh You don't know me, and you have read me making comment about one solitary Duran loss.

Again, it is a new kind of silly to either lie or twist matters as you please.

For the record, I'm just as unconvinced by Tyson fan boys claiming without even the slightest doubt that a prime Tyson would have beaten Lewis and Holyfield. And for those who'd go as far as claiming it's not even open for serious debate... You get the picture, I hope. I really hope.

I get the picture that you are not very tolerant of anyone who thinks differently from you.

I think 1987 Tyson stops any version of Holyfield, because as I have already explained with the Tarver-Jones example (I did not score Tarver-Jones 1 for Jones), changing the circumstances of a fight can impact on the result immeasurably.

[Popkins]

When it comes to SRL, well he beat everyones favourite mate. Duran, Hearns and Hagler. He's going to pay for this with many, and i am sure you see plenty of places where he does. He has the ability to decimate an otherwise balanced and measured poster.

:good

SRL is one of my favourite fighters of all-time. I rate him unbelievably highly and my posting history will verify this.

However, my affection for him still does not alter this crystalline scientific fact:

Duran beat the best SRL. SRL did not beat the best Duran.

Merry Xmas to all

[Popkins]

I'm fine, are Paccy steriod claims getting to you a bit?

Not really, I'm on steroids myself and I'm glad they are getting some publicity. Very underrated drug in my opinion.

[JohnThomas1]

SRL is one of my favourite fighters of all-time. I rate him unbelievably highly and my posting history will verify this.

However, my affection for him still does not alter this crystalline scientific fact:

Duran beat the best SRL. SRL did not beat the best Duran.

Merry Xmas to all

:lol:

[JohnThomas1]

Not really, I'm on steroids myself and I'm glad they are getting some publicity. Very underrated drug in my opinion.

Ah ok, that explains everything.

Cheers for the honesty

:good

[itrymariti]

Well things sure changed in the Dooran rematch ;)

Winners are grinners ---> :D

:good

Things did change, but not as massively as everyone seems to think. Leonard wasn't really boxing and moving so much as he was boxing then moving. I mean, he wasn't giving Duran the kind of movement that e.g. Viruet was giving him; he was mostly just trying to avoid confrontation for as much of the fight as possible, fighting in spurts.

Leonard made some adjustments, and that certainly contributed to the victory. But let's not exaggerate: Duran was getting hit with shots in Fight II that he quite simply wouldn't have got hit with in Montreal.

[Doppleganger]

Duran beat the best SRL.

Merry Xmas to all
But did he? The very fact that SRL altered his style after Duran perhaps turned him into a better fighter?

Merry Christmas everybody. :partytime

[Popkins]

But did he? The very fact that SRL altered his style after Duran perhaps turned him into a better fighter?

Merry Christmas everybody. :partytime

Did Leonard ever look as good again as he did against Benitez? I think it was his most complete and all-round best ever performance. JMO.

[JohnThomas1]

But did he? The very fact that SRL altered his style after Duran perhaps turned him into a better fighter?

Merry Christmas everybody. :partytime

When a guy like you is on the same side of the fence, well lets just say i sleep a little easier

:happy

Merry Xmas mate! :thumbsup

[Bokaj]

I can't really give my own opinion without suggesting that I believe it, can I? That's sort of what an opinion is. If I sounded really uncertain of it, it wouldn't be my opinion.

Yes, it would. It would only indicate that you know the difference between an opinion based on speculation and having knowleadge of an absolute fact.

:huh You don't know me, and you have read me making comment about one solitary Duran loss.

Well, three actually (Leonard, Benitez and Hearns).


I get the picture that you are not very tolerant of anyone who thinks differently from you.

I'm not tolerant of posters who mistake speculation based on anecdotal "evidence" for absolute truth, and who in turn show little tolerance for those not convinced by this speculation. They belong in General.

I think 1987 Tyson stops any version of Holyfield, because as I have already explained with the Tarver-Jones example (I did not score Tarver-Jones 1 for Jones), changing the circumstances of a fight can impact on the result immeasurably.

Did I have you pegged, or what!:lol:

[Popkins]

Yes, it would. It would only indicate that you know the difference between an opinion based on speculation and having knowleadge of an absolute fact.

OK, from now on I will add the prefix

"I kind of think that, though I'm not really very sure mind, but I kind of think that...."

to any opinion I post again. Will we be friends then?? Goody.

Well, three actually (Leonard, Benitez and Hearns).

How have I written off Duran's losses to Benitez and Hearns exactly?? Duran was a natural lightweight, and he lost fair and square to both men at lightmiddle in his mid 30s.

That doesn't automatically mean the fight and the result are the same at a different time, at a different weight, and with different circumstances though.

I'm not tolerant of posters who mistake speculation based on anecdotal "evidence" for absolute truth, and who in turn show little tolerance for those not convinced by this speculation. They belong in General.

You have repeatedly misrepresented things I have said on this thread. That is not even behaviour befitting of the General. And the thoroughly weird comment from you below does you even less credit:

Did I have you pegged, or what!:lol:

:nut What a bizarre fellow you are. You "had me pegged" as someone who would think that peak Mike Tyson beats the best version of Evander Holyfield at heavyweight??

Yes, you'd need to be a real psycho to think that, wouldn't you? I should be certified and committed immediately.

[Doppleganger]

Did Leonard ever look as good again as he did against Benitez? I think it was his most complete and all-round best ever performance. JMO.
Taking into consideration the opponent who was just about in his prime I'd probably agree. The thing is though that he did learn from Duran I and applied it in Duran II. OK, you might argue that in the second fight Duran wasn't in the same shape and there's all kinds of shit about the seafood and so on. Fact of the matter is that SRL had learned and for whatever real reason Duran chose to stop fighting in round 8 of the second fight.

The only other meaningful fight he had post-Duran II, before he was forced into injury based retirement, was against Hearns, a fighter with unusual physical gifts. It's very hard to look good (or even win) against prime Hearns unless you throw hell for leather and go right at him (Hagler) or get lucky (Barkley). SRL got the win against Tommy courtesy of round 6 basically, which turned the fight.

We probably never saw the very best of SRL. So it's premature to say that Duran beat the best version of SRL. IMO, the best version of SRL (that we saw) fought Tommy Hearns in 1981.

[Doppleganger]

When a guy like you is on the same side of the fence, well lets just say i sleep a little easier

:happy

Merry Xmas mate! :thumbsup
Thanks mate!

Have a good one down under, butchering innocent shrimps on barbies, roasting kangaroos for christmas dinner or whatever you lot get up to at Christmas. :D

[Bokaj]

OK, from now on I will add the prefix

"I kind of think that, though I'm not really very sure mind, but I kind of think that...."

to any opinion I post again. Will we be friends then?? Goody.

Actually, just skipping "this is not a matter for debate" and the suggestion that anyone with a different opinion knows jack about boxing will suffice just fine.

Especially when your claim is nothing but speculation.


How have I written off Duran's losses to Benitez and Hearns exactly?? Duran was a natural lightweight, and he lost fair and square to both men at lightmiddle in his mid 30s.

That doesn't automatically mean the fight and the result are the same at a different time, at a different weight, and with different circumstances though.

No. But it doesn't automatically mean the opposite either. And that's really the heart of the matter, so to speak.

[Popkins]

It's very hard to look good (or even win) against prime Hearns unless you throw hell for leather and go right at him (Hagler) or get lucky (Barkley).

Did Barkley get lucky twice in two different ways?

SRL got the win against Tommy courtesy of round 6 basically, which turned the fight.

Dunno if I'd go along with that one, the fight see-sawed again and again after round 6.

We probably never saw the very best of SRL. So it's premature to say that Duran beat the best version of SRL.

We saw the very best SRL that ever fought. Saying he might have been better if he had fought during his retirement is just speculation. Leonard had a career, and you can watch his fights and choose what you think the very best performance of his career was. I'd choose Benitez.

IMO, the best version of SRL (that we saw) fought Tommy Hearns in 1981.

I disagree. I am a great dis-believer in the first Leonard-Hearns fight, but that's for another thread at another time.

[Popkins]

Actually, just skipping "this is not a matter for debate" and the suggestion that anyone with a different opinion knows jack about boxing will suffice just fine.

Especially when your claim is nothing but speculation.


"I kind of think that, though I'm not really very sure mind, but I kind of think that.... Duran beat the best SRL, while SRL did not beat the best Duran".

No. But it doesn't automatically mean the opposite either. And that's really the heart of the matter, so to speak.

"I kind of think that, though I'm not really very sure mind, but I kind of think that.... the best Tyson would beat the best heavyweight Holyfield".

You all happy now?

[Doppleganger]

Did Barkley get lucky twice in two different ways?
I'm not even going to touch the 2nd fight which was way after Tommy's prime. Even the first fight Tommy was 2 years post-prime. Barkley got lucky in the first fight not because it was a lucky punch (it wasn't) but because Tommy gave him a window of opportunity when the fight was all but won. Nothing Barkley did engineered that opportunity. He carried on doing what he had been doing the whole fight which was throwing full power hooks to the head in the hope that one landed. One did.

Dunno if I'd go along with that one, the fight see-sawed again and again after round 6.
Well it did see-saw but the damage done in round 6 caught up with Tommy later in the fight. Manny Steward pretty much says that too.

We saw the very best SRL that ever fought. Saying he might have been better if he had fought during his retirement is just speculation. Leonard had a career, and you can watch his fights and choose what you think the very best performance of his career was. I'd choose Benitez.
Fair enough. I'd probably go along with Benitez being his best performance. Whether it was the best SRL ever is a different matter.

I disagree. I am a great dis-believer in the first Leonard-Hearns fight, but that's for another thread at another time.
Another contentious subject. Look forward to participating in it.

[JohnThomas1]

Did Barkley get lucky twice in two different ways?

So you're claiming Hearns to be prime in the rematch?

:patsch

We saw the very best SRL that ever fought. Saying he might have been better if he had fought during his retirement is just speculation. Leonard had a career, and you can watch his fights and choose what you think the very best performance of his career was. I'd choose Benitez.

I'll choose Duran II!!!!!

I disagree. I am a great dis-believer in the first Leonard-Hearns fight, but that's for another thread at another time.

Yet you tell us you're this GREAT Leonard fan and love him and, and, and :lol:

ffs

[Popkins]

I'm not even going to touch the 2nd fight which was way after Tommy's prime. Even the first fight Tommy was 2 years post-prime. Barkley got lucky in the first fight not because it was a lucky punch (it wasn't) but because Tommy gave him a window of opportunity when the fight was all but won. Nothing Barkley did engineered that opportunity. He carried on doing what he had been doing the whole fight which was throwing full power hooks to the head in the hope that one landed. One did.

It wasn't an act of God that Tommy was hurt by that punch, it was his own inherent frailty as a fighter.

Well it did see-saw but the damage done in round 6 caught up with Tommy later in the fight. Manny Steward pretty much says that too.

Leonard's finishing combinations were absolutely magnificent. I'd rather attribute the end of the fight to that than anything else.

Fair enough. I'd probably go along with Benitez being his best performance. Whether it was the best SRL ever is a different matter.

Fair enough.

Another contentious subject. Look forward to participating in it.

Perhaps one day we shall.

[Popkins]

So you're claiming Hearns to be prime in the rematch?

:patsch



I'll choose Duran II!!!!!



Yet you tell us you're this GREAT Leonard fan and love him and, and, and :lol:

ffs

I think you should calm down a little, you're going to end up in the hospital on Christmas.

Where and how did I do anything even remotely like claim Hearns was prime in the Barkley rematch?? I'm saying that Barkley did not "get lucky" with Hearns, because he beat him twice in two different ways. That would have to be some crazy luck now, wouldn't it?

You choose Duran II? That speaks volumes, to be honest. Benitez was a far more complete all-round performance than Duran II, where Leonard spent much of his time clowning around.

Can you read?? I said I am a great dis-believer in the first Leonard-Hearns fight. How in your small, strange brain does that mean I am not a Ray Leonard fan?

[JohnThomas1]

I think you should calm down a little, you're going to end up in the hospital on Christmas.


You're the fool on steroids, but of course they don't harm your health if you know what you're doing :lol:

Where and how did I do anything even remotely like claim Hearns was prime in the Barkley rematch??

Well, Dopp said

It's very hard to look good (or even win) against prime Hearns unless you throw hell for leather and go right at him (Hagler) or get lucky (Barkley).

You said in reply

Did Barkley get lucky twice in two different ways?

Doesn't get much easier to follow ffs :patsch

You choose Duran II? That speaks volumes, to be honest. Benitez was a far more complete all-round performance than Duran II, where Leonard spent much of his time clowning around.

Leonard totally embarrassed a guy that had just beaten him very recently. Benitez didn't look like beating him. Hell, he made him quit.

Maybe for you it's about looking pretty and eloquent, but for some it's the "W" column and getting the job done :good


Can you read?? I said I am a great dis-believer in the first Leonard-Hearns fight. How in your small, strange brain does that mean I am not a Ray Leonard fan?

I think redrooster has found his lifelong soulmate :good

[Bokaj]

"I kind of think that, though I'm not really very sure mind, but I kind of think that.... Duran beat the best SRL, while SRL did not beat the best Duran".



"I kind of think that, though I'm not really very sure mind, but I kind of think that.... the best Tyson would beat the best heavyweight Holyfield".

You all happy now?

Well, throw a blow job from Scarlett Johanssen in the bargain, and you're sure getting close.

[teeto]

I've always favoured Robinson clearly, there's always been people who feel Duran on this night could do it, not me.

[MrMarvel]

Duran that night ranks with the best welterweights. Robnson beats him. Hearns always presents a problem. Gavilan and Griffith would trouble him. Napoles was very good. Maybe Whitaker. That would be interesting.

That Duran beats Ray Leonard everytime, though. Duran was just better than Leonard at that weight. He dominated a prime Leonard. He also dominated Palomino, who was an outstanding welterweight. Duran was proven at the welter. You have to rank him very highly.

[Dempsey1238]

I still think this guy would smash Duran.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Popkins]

You're the fool on steroids, but of course they don't harm your health if you know what you're doing :lol:

Well, Dopp said

You said in reply

Doesn't get much easier to follow ffs :patsch

Your point doesn't really cut it though, considering Barkley beat him twice, and I had already explained why I did not think that you could say Barkley was "lucky":

It wasn't an act of God that Tommy was hurt by that punch, it was his own inherent frailty as a fighter.

Leonard totally embarrassed a guy that had just beaten him very recently. Benitez didn't look like beating him. Hell, he made him quit.

Benitez was a more complete boxing performance by far. The Duran fight was more high profile sure, but Leonard did not prove the range of his ability in that fight, especially not his offensive side. As I say, your analysis of Ray's 'best performance' speaks volumes about your grasp of the sport.

Maybe for you it's about looking pretty and eloquent, but for some it's the "W" column and getting the job done :good

:lol: This is a hopelessly idiotic point.

I have been saying that Benitez was Leonard's best performance. How on earth is deciding on a fighter's best performance about the "W column and getting the job done"??? That doesn't even make sense, in fact it borders on rank stupidity.

Benitez was a "W" where Leonard got the job done as was Duran II anyway, but in order to decide on what was the better performance you have to distinguish between them... don't you???

I distinguish between them and choose Benitez as the superior performance by looking beyond the "W" and the job being done. I look at Leonard's performance in both, and decide that he showed the full range of his abilities vs Benitez (which he did not do to the same extent in Duran II), and thus decide on Benitez as the better performance because it was (to use your ill-fitting word) "prettier", in that it was a more impressive all-round boxing display.


How exactly does a boxer look 'eloquent' anyway???

I think redrooster has found his lifelong soulmate :good

Wrong again chum. If you look back one page, you will see this comment from myself:

Leonard's finishing combinations were absolutely magnificent. I'd rather attribute the end of the fight to that than anything else.

Does that sound like something redrooster would say?

Nope, did not think so. :good

[Hookie]

I'm surprised this thread is still going? Anyway, every fighter's resume can be picked apart trust me on that. People try to be unbiased or say they are unbiased but nobody really is. You are going to pull for the fighter you like everytime.

[Mantequilla]

It is possible to be biased and yet also realistic and fair you know.

[Stonehands89]

I still think this guy would smash Duran.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]
At middle, he'd win. At Welter? Nah.

[MAG1965]

Hearns would beat him every time. Pernell Whitaker would beat him. Floyd might if he stayed away. To beat Duran you beat him with speed. Foot speed first than hand speed. Benitez beat him easily also.