The skills and abilities of Roberto Duran

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 24 Jan 2006, 00:08

It still amazes me that people rate Duran over Leonard. Yes, in their first fight Duran won. Leonard fought Duran's fight and it was still a very competitive fight. The idea that Duran made Leonard fight that way is just plain wrong. If that was true, Duran would have been able to do it again in their 2nd fight.
However, in their 2nd fight, Leonard fought his normal fight, and outboxed Duran. Duran made excuses, but the fact is that in one of the biggest fights of his career, he quit.

The idea that Duran's career in his other fights is better than the rest of Leonard's career is wrong.
Yes, Duran was the lightweight champion for 6 years, but that certainly wasn't a good era for lightweights. The best guys he beat were Buchanan and DeJesus. Some of his opponents in the 1970's were a joke. The best guys he beat were Buchanan and DeJesus (who beat Duran once). They were good fighters, but nowhere near the fighters that Leonard beat. They don't even compare to Benitez, Hearns, and Hagler.

DoubleM · Post by **DoubleM** » 24 Jan 2006, 00:25

Ambling Alp wrote:It still amazes me that people rate Duran over Leonard. Yes, in their first fight Duran won. Leonard fought Duran's fight and it was still a very competitive fight. The idea that Duran made Leonard fight that way is just plain wrong. If that was true, Duran would have been able to do it again in their 2nd fight.
However, in their 2nd fight, Leonard fought his normal fight, and outboxed Duran. Duran made excuses, but the fact is that in one of the biggest fights of his career, he quit.

The idea that Duran's career in his other fights is better than the rest of Leonard's career is wrong.
Yes, Duran was the lightweight champion for 6 years, but that certainly wasn't a good era for lightweights. The best guys he beat were Buchanan and DeJesus. Some of his opponents in the 1970's were a joke. The best guys he beat were Buchanan and DeJesus (who beat Duran once). They were good fighters, but nowhere near the fighters that Leonard beat. They don't even compare to Benitez, Hearns, and Hagler.

Yea, the two best guys Duran beat were Buchanan and DeJesus... Two excellent fighters... And Duran beat the shit out of both of them. In the first fight with DeJesus, Duran was unprepared (as people say about Robinson-Turpin).
Leonard even admitted Duran forced him to slug it out... Afterwards, Leonard saw Duran was fat and out of shape, and arranged a rematch immediately. He had time to train properly, but didn't. Duran's fault. Nevertheless, he was not in top condition, and had eaten a steak two hours before the fight. Again, Duran's stupid mistake, but the point is, he was not at his best.
Leonard may have beaten those guys you mentioned (I believe Hagler edged him), but Duran got some good licks too. After dominating the lightweight division, shutting out Carlos Palomino and beating Leonard fair n' square himself, he went on to fight at junior middleweight. Duran was never even tall for a lightweight, so competing at this weight was hard for him. He beat Pipino Cuevas and Davey Moore there, as the underdog, and then went on to devise a cunning strategy to give Marvelous Marvin Hagler a run for his money. Five years later, ten plus years and twenty pounds from his prime, Duran beat Iran Barkley for the middleweight title. Leonard had some good wins, but he was a weight hopper. Duran dominated his own weight class, and then went weight hopping.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 24 Jan 2006, 05:08

Ambling Alp wrote:It still amazes me that people rate Duran over Leonard. Yes, in their first fight Duran won. Leonard fought Duran's fight and it was still a very competitive fight. The idea that Duran made Leonard fight that way is just plain wrong. If that was true, Duran would have been able to do it again in their 2nd fight.
However, in their 2nd fight, Leonard fought his normal fight, and outboxed Duran. Duran made excuses, but the fact is that in one of the biggest fights of his career, he quit.

The idea that Duran's career in his other fights is better than the rest of Leonard's career is wrong.
Yes, Duran was the lightweight champion for 6 years, but that certainly wasn't a good era for lightweights. The best guys he beat were Buchanan and DeJesus. Some of his opponents in the 1970's were a joke. The best guys he beat were Buchanan and DeJesus (who beat Duran once). They were good fighters, but nowhere near the fighters that Leonard beat. They don't even compare to Benitez, Hearns, and Hagler.

Ray was a great fighter but Duran achieved more. Ray was well managed and had a great PR team but if you look into the series of fights then to say Ray fought the wrong fight is short-sighted. Ray was very quick, great reflexes and great punch power but he liked to sit down on his punches. He only really took to his bike in Hagler fight.

Duran's opposition is, IMO, better than Ray's. Leonard is a true great but Duran was a special fighter.

elmersalsa · Post by **elmersalsa** » 24 Jan 2006, 09:35

I believe like most here that Duran's most complete victory was against his third fight with DeJesus. Esteban had a look in his eyes like he was really confused. He saw a TOTAL DIFFERENT DURAN. Everytime he tried to throw that perfect and quick left hook, Duran was not there. He made DeJesus missed more times than the 2 previous fights combined.

With Leonard, I was surprised that how he made an accurate and fast puncher like Sugar Ray miss so many blows that night. In thier second encounter, I did not see that same head movement by Duran at all. He also looked lethargic and with no pep in his punches, but still competitive, but not like the night in Montreal. In the second fight, watching Duran's eyes, to me, HE LOST THE FIGHT BEFORE THE OPENING BELL. He realized that he did not had it that night, and I think that is why he quit. Hey, maybe he had stomach cramps. The sorry thing about that was that nobody, absolutely nobody, believed him.

But Roberto, to me, is THE GREATEST FIGHTER THAT I HAVE EVER SEEN IN MY LIFETIME. And I have seen a lot of great ones in my 28 years of watching boxing. He is the best fighter I have seen being in his prime, and the best fighter I have ever seen being washed up.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 24 Jan 2006, 09:59

One of his most significant fights was his loss to Hagler. It was very close at a time where no one gave him a chance. Very very competitive fight. Another reason along with the Barkley fight that I look at the Hearns fight as a fluke.

The Great John L · Post by **The Great John L** » 24 Jan 2006, 10:05

BoxBuzz wrote:One of his most significant fights was his loss to Hagler. It was very close at a time where no one gave him a chance. Very very competitive fight. Another reason along with the Barkley fight that I look at the Hearns fight as a fluke.

I think you're on to something, but I don't think many here will agree with you. Not sure why, because many fighters have been able to avenge KO loses, and certainly Duran was a great fighter and capable of adapting his style for different opponents.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 24 Jan 2006, 10:26

The Great John L wrote:
BoxBuzz wrote:One of his most significant fights was his loss to Hagler. It was very close at a time where no one gave him a chance. Very very competitive fight. Another reason along with the Barkley fight that I look at the Hearns fight as a fluke.
I think you're on to something, but I don't think many here will agree with you. Not sure why, because many fighters have been able to avenge KO loses, and certainly Duran was a great fighter and capable of adapting his style for different opponents.

The Hearns fight ended in an unthinkable and dramatic KO loss. It's hard to think past that image of Duran toppling to the canvas. Essentially a great body puncher, with bags of stamina and a good defence should give Hearns trouble. BUT Duran was way above his best weight and Hearns was a great great fighter.

Seamus · Post by **Seamus** » 24 Jan 2006, 10:46

Hagler vs Duran was a joke. It was possibly the most disappointing performance of Marvelous Marvin's otherwise spectacular career. I remember watching that fight live and in absolute disbelief, as Hagler just plain gave away the first 5 rounds while looking scared and tentative. I don't know what was wrong with him that night, but Marvin never respected any fighter in the ring before or after. Even then, Hagler rallied and dominated the rest of the fight, and the scoring ended up being ridiculously close. Hagler by 2-1-1 pts ! Obvioulsy the judges were scoring any fairly close round for Duran, Yoshida had it 5-4-6 for Hagler on rounds. Had Marvin taken his search and destroy approach that he did against Hamsho II, Hearns and Mugabi, there's no one who will ever convince me that Duran would have answered the bell for the 15th-round.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 24 Jan 2006, 11:04

Seamus wrote:Hagler vs Duran was a joke. It was possibly the most disappointing performance of Marvelous Marvin's otherwise spectacular career. I remember watching that fight live and in absolute disbelief, as Hagler just plain gave away the first 5 rounds while looking scared and tentative. I don't know what was wrong with him that night, but Marvin never respected any fighter in the ring before or after. Even then, Hagler rallied and dominated the rest of the fight, and the scoring ended up being ridiculously close. Hagler by 2-1-1 pts ! Obvioulsy the judges were scoring any fairly close round for Duran, Yoshida had it 5-4-6 for Hagler on rounds. Had Marvin taken his search and destroy approach that he did against Hamsho II, Hearns and Mugabi, there's no one who will ever convince me that Duran would have answered the bell for the 15th-round.

Prime Hagler was a counter-punching boxer. Duran made him lead and Hagler found it tough to adapt. Duran did his homewrok but didn't have the youth or natural size to win the fight.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 24 Jan 2006, 14:17

Exactly, Hagler's problem that night was the man in front of him. He did however solve the problem.

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 24 Jan 2006, 14:49

Duran losing because he didn't train hard is about the lamest excuse I have ever heard. It's the equivalent to "my dog ate my homework".

Perhaps some of Duran's opponents didn't train hard when they fought Duran.

This comment that Leonard saw that Duran had got fat after the first fight and then decided that he wanted to fight Duran again is simply not true. Leonard was saying he wanted a rematch right after the first fight.

Benitez was also publicly challenging Duran immediately after the first Duran-Leonard fight because he knew he would beat Duran.

The bottom line is that Duran won the first fight by a tough decision and lost the 2nd fight by 8th round TKO.

As for Duran having greater competition? Is beating Cuevas, Moore and Barkley supposed to be that impressive? Many other fighters beat those guys as well. Leonard would have toyed with all 3.

Duran achieved more? He won one really huge fight in his whole career. Leonard won 4. He beat Duran, Benitez, Hearns and Hagler.

Duran did have a chance to beat all 3, but he failed.
Benitez outboxed Duran (Apparently he couldn't force Benitez fight Duran's style of fight).

Hearns just about beheaded the supposedly rock chinned Duran in two rounds.

Hagler fought one of the worst fights of his career and still beat Duran.

True, Duran was the best of lightweight in the the 1970's. However, the competition wasn't anything special. Some of it was just awful.

He didn't really dominate the best lightweights that he fought. DeJesus even beat him once. When he moved up in weight and fought better competition, he lost often.

With Duran it's always about excuses. He would have won this fight or that fight because ....

Leonard never quit, didn't make excuses. Unlike Duran, Leonard's record speaks for itself.

KOJOE90 · Post by **KOJOE90** » 24 Jan 2006, 15:10

Decagon wrote:
Ambling Alp wrote:Leonard never quit, didn't make excuses. Unlike Duran, Leonard's record speaks for itself.
Leonard found tons of excuses not to give Hearns and Benitez rematches, and he found plenty of excuses not to fight Hagler until Hagler was ancient.

I seem to recall Leonard offering Hagler a rematch in 1997.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 24 Jan 2006, 15:34

Ambling Alp wrote:Duran losing because he didn't train hard is about the lamest excuse I have ever heard. It's the equivalent to "my dog ate my homework".

Perhaps some of Duran's opponents didn't train hard when they fought Duran.

This comment that Leonard saw that Duran had got fat after the first fight and then decided that he wanted to fight Duran again is simply not true. Leonard was saying he wanted a rematch right after the first fight.

Benitez was also publicly challenging Duran immediately after the first Duran-Leonard fight because he knew he would beat Duran.

The bottom line is that Duran won the first fight by a tough decision and lost the 2nd fight by 8th round TKO.

As for Duran having greater competition? Is beating Cuevas, Moore and Barkley supposed to be that impressive? Many other fighters beat those guys as well. Leonard would have toyed with all 3.

Duran achieved more? He won one really huge fight in his whole career. Leonard won 4. He beat Duran, Benitez, Hearns and Hagler.

Duran did have a chance to beat all 3, but he failed.
Benitez outboxed Duran (Apparently he couldn't force Benitez fight Duran's style of fight).

Hearns just about beheaded the supposedly rock chinned Duran in two rounds.

Hagler fought one of the worst fights of his career and still beat Duran.

True, Duran was the best of lightweight in the the 1970's. However, the competition wasn't anything special. Some of it was just awful.

He didn't really dominate the best lightweights that he fought. DeJesus even beat him once. When he moved up in weight and fought better competition, he lost often.

With Duran it's always about excuses. He would have won this fight or that fight because ....

Leonard never quit, didn't make excuses. Unlike Duran, Leonard's record speaks for itself.

There's a really interesting article about the second fight written from a totally neutral standpoint that basically supports the argument about Duran's stomach cramps and the fact that he was out of shape. I will try to locate it on the internet over the next week.

Leonard would have won the rematch IMO no matter what Duran turned up. Ray was very competitive, a sublime talent in his own right, had something to prove and was the naturally bigger man.

Ray suffered a crisis in confidence after the 1st fight and was apparently constantly looking for ego boosts asking over and over "Is he stronger than me?" and "do you think he's quicker than me."

Ray was told to go after the rematch when he was considering retiring. Duran was partying and listening to his hangers on. he made a huge error and paid for it. he lost the fight and Ray wouldn't give him his rematch. I have the utmost respect for ray as a fighter but his outside the ring posturing has really soured his memory for me. He should have given him another fight. Duran then went into something of a depression and lost toBenitez and Laing amongst others. He may well have lost those fights anyway as he was fighting above his natural weight against two very slick customers.

Cuevas was a very good title holder as was Palomino, and Davey Moore was considered to be a huge talent with a lot of potential. I'd also dispute that his lightweight competition was poor. Buchanan was a top top fighter. DeJesus is still highly thought of... His fate was similar to Valdez at MW who happened to be a top fighter when a true great was ruling his division. And Barkley was a much bigger man than Duran and at that age the win was remarkable.

Ray never quit but he picked his fights very carefully and only ever offered rematches when he considered his opponent to be shot. Hagler gave him 12 months to set up a rematch. Ray said he was retired and that was that. Not so long after the 12 months were up Ray was picking opponents for his catch weight fights. He only fought Heanrs again because it looked like Tommy was finished.

I have to say that there's nobody worse than a convert and I am a convert. For a long time I considered Ray the better of the two but the more I read about them and the more I watch their old fights the more convinced I am that Duran was a better fighter p4p.

BoxBuzz · Post by **BoxBuzz** » 24 Jan 2006, 16:39

When rating Duran and Leanard one to one don't you have to handicap them for their natural size? Wasnt Duran a Natural Lightweight and Leanord a natural Welter? I think Leanord has a natural advantage but when reduced to pound for pound he loses it.

Collins2000 · Post by **Collins2000** » 24 Jan 2006, 17:38

Ezzard wrote:
Seamus wrote:Hagler vs Duran was a joke. It was possibly the most disappointing performance of Marvelous Marvin's otherwise spectacular career. I remember watching that fight live and in absolute disbelief, as Hagler just plain gave away the first 5 rounds while looking scared and tentative. I don't know what was wrong with him that night, but Marvin never respected any fighter in the ring before or after. Even then, Hagler rallied and dominated the rest of the fight, and the scoring ended up being ridiculously close. Hagler by 2-1-1 pts ! Obvioulsy the judges were scoring any fairly close round for Duran, Yoshida had it 5-4-6 for Hagler on rounds. Had Marvin taken his search and destroy approach that he did against Hamsho II, Hearns and Mugabi, there's no one who will ever convince me that Duran would have answered the bell for the 15th-round.
Prime Hagler was a counter-punching boxer. Duran made him lead and Hagler found it tough to adapt. Duran did his homewrok but didn't have the youth or natural size to win the fight.

Excellent points, Ezzard.

DoubleM · Post by **DoubleM** » 24 Jan 2006, 18:24

Seamus wrote:Hagler vs Duran was a joke. It was possibly the most disappointing performance of Marvelous Marvin's otherwise spectacular career. I remember watching that fight live and in absolute disbelief, as Hagler just plain gave away the first 5 rounds while looking scared and tentative. I don't know what was wrong with him that night, but Marvin never respected any fighter in the ring before or after. Even then, Hagler rallied and dominated the rest of the fight, and the scoring ended up being ridiculously close. Hagler by 2-1-1 pts ! Obvioulsy the judges were scoring any fairly close round for Duran, Yoshida had it 5-4-6 for Hagler on rounds. Had Marvin taken his search and destroy approach that he did against Hamsho II, Hearns and Mugabi, there's no one who will ever convince me that Duran would have answered the bell for the 15th-round.

I blame Goody Petronelli partly for this performance... Throughout both the fight and build up, Goody kept banging on about how Duran was lethal on the inside, and how Hagler should box him and move away. Hagler did so, and it got him nowhere. To be honest, he could have easily overpowered Duran - who was tired by the mid rounds - if he took the fight to him. Seeing how Duran destroyed Moore and Cuevas as the underdog just recently, I can't blame Hagler and the Petronellis for being a little wary.

Seamus · Post by **Seamus** » 24 Jan 2006, 18:47

Cuevas and Moore weren't even close to being in Hagler's class though. Hagler made a big mistake by showing Duran too much respect over the first 5 rounds. I have to wonder if he wasen't spooked into thinking he might lose. I think alot of people have forgotten just how dominant Hagler was, and he was more than capable of beating Duran on the inside, as he showed in the later rounds.

DoubleM · Post by **DoubleM** » 24 Jan 2006, 18:52

Seamus wrote:Cuevas and Moore weren't even close to being in Hagler's class though. Hagler made a big mistake by showing Duran too much respect over the first 5 rounds. I have to wonder if he wasen't spooked into thinking he might lose. I think alot of people have forgotten just how dominant Hagler was, and he was more than capable of beating Duran on the inside, as he showed in the later rounds.

Oh no, of course they weren't. But when a great fighter like Duran, known as the Hands of Stone, beats the shit out of two highly regarded fighters as the underdog... It must make one have second thoughts.

But anyway, I doubt Hagler was scared or intimidated. He faced some real bad boys back in Philadelphia, and didn't show any signs of fear, and infact used to intimidate them. Hagler was known for being supremely confident. You can hear Goody Petronelli telling Hagler to box and move, to use his jab, to technically outscore Duran. But Duran, being the tactician and technician he was, was making sure Hagler couldn't carry out his plan. Goody should have seen what was going on and told Hagler to slug it out with Duran and overpower him.

Incase you were implying - I haven't forgotten how dominant Hagler was. Infact, if anyone knows how dominant he was, it's me. He's my favourite fighter of all time

Seamus · Post by **Seamus** » 24 Jan 2006, 19:17

Nah, didn't really have you in mind Double M, it's just that I've heard comments on here in the past from people who don't have that high of an opinion of him.

Getting back to the original subject though, while admittedly dislike Duran, I will admit he was one of the greatest LW's ever.

DoubleM · Post by **DoubleM** » 24 Jan 2006, 19:22

Seamus wrote:Nah, didn't really have you in mind Double M, it's just that I've heard comments on here in the past from people who don't have that high of an opinion of him.

Getting back to the original subject though, while admittedly dislike Duran, I will admit he was one of the greatest LW's ever.

I think some people watch his last three fights or so, and disregard Hagler as just another pressure fighter, with a half decent jab and slow hands. In his prime, he was the most complete fighter I've ever seen.

--

I rate Duran the greatest lightweight of all time - and in terms of skill and head-to-head ability, I rate him in the top five of any weight class. His skills matched that of Pep, but he combined them with sheer viciousness and relentlessness.

I regard his performances from '77-'80 as some of the finest ever. It was amazing how he could dull the effect of a punch by turning his head at the last moment, or make a quick guy like Leonard miss so many punches. Or how his feet were always perfectly positioned to let off a combination. The Palomino fight is one of my favourites for demonstrating Duran's skills and handspeed, especially on the inside.

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 24 Jan 2006, 20:13

Ezzard wrote:
Ambling Alp wrote:Duran losing because he didn't train hard is about the lamest excuse I have ever heard. It's the equivalent to "my dog ate my homework".

Perhaps some of Duran's opponents didn't train hard when they fought Duran.

This comment that Leonard saw that Duran had got fat after the first fight and then decided that he wanted to fight Duran again is simply not true. Leonard was saying he wanted a rematch right after the first fight.

Benitez was also publicly challenging Duran immediately after the first Duran-Leonard fight because he knew he would beat Duran.

The bottom line is that Duran won the first fight by a tough decision and lost the 2nd fight by 8th round TKO.

As for Duran having greater competition? Is beating Cuevas, Moore and Barkley supposed to be that impressive? Many other fighters beat those guys as well. Leonard would have toyed with all 3.

Duran achieved more? He won one really huge fight in his whole career. Leonard won 4. He beat Duran, Benitez, Hearns and Hagler.

Duran did have a chance to beat all 3, but he failed.
Benitez outboxed Duran (Apparently he couldn't force Benitez fight Duran's style of fight).

Hearns just about beheaded the supposedly rock chinned Duran in two rounds.

Hagler fought one of the worst fights of his career and still beat Duran.

True, Duran was the best of lightweight in the the 1970's. However, the competition wasn't anything special. Some of it was just awful.

He didn't really dominate the best lightweights that he fought. DeJesus even beat him once. When he moved up in weight and fought better competition, he lost often.

With Duran it's always about excuses. He would have won this fight or that fight because ....

Leonard never quit, didn't make excuses. Unlike Duran, Leonard's record speaks for itself.
There's a really interesting article about the second fight written from a totally neutral standpoint that basically supports the argument about Duran's stomach cramps and the fact that he was out of shape. I will try to locate it on the internet over the next week.

Leonard would have won the rematch IMO no matter what Duran turned up. Ray was very competitive, a sublime talent in his own right, had something to prove and was the naturally bigger man.

Ray suffered a crisis in confidence after the 1st fight and was apparently constantly looking for ego boosts asking over and over "Is he stronger than me?" and "do you think he's quicker than me."

Ray was told to go after the rematch when he was considering retiring. Duran was partying and listening to his hangers on. he made a huge error and paid for it. he lost the fight and Ray wouldn't give him his rematch. I have the utmost respect for ray as a fighter but his outside the ring posturing has really soured his memory for me. He should have given him another fight. Duran then went into something of a depression and lost toBenitez and Laing amongst others. He may well have lost those fights anyway as he was fighting above his natural weight against two very slick customers.

Cuevas was a very good title holder as was Palomino, and Davey Moore was considered to be a huge talent with a lot of potential. I'd also dispute that his lightweight competition was poor. Buchanan was a top top fighter. DeJesus is still highly thought of... His fate was similar to Valdez at MW who happened to be a top fighter when a true great was ruling his division. And Barkley was a much bigger man than Duran and at that age the win was remarkable.

Ray never quit but he picked his fights very carefully and only ever offered rematches when he considered his opponent to be shot. Hagler gave him 12 months to set up a rematch. Ray said he was retired and that was that. Not so long after the 12 months were up Ray was picking opponents for his catch weight fights. He only fought Heanrs again because it looked like Tommy was finished.

I have to say that there's nobody worse than a convert and I am a convert. For a long time I considered Ray the better of the two but the more I read about them and the more I watch their old fights the more convinced I am that Duran was a better fighter p4p.

I guess the myth continues about Leonard not giving opponents rematches. Was he supposed to fight Duran a 3rd fight time in 1980 or early 1981? If he would have done that, he woyuld have been accused of ducking Hearns. He couldn't fight Hearns again because Hearns immediately moved up to fight as a Jr Middleweight after their first fight. Less than a year after the First Hearns-Leonard fight, Leonard retired because of eye problems.
As for Hagler, do you really think Leonard was scared to fight him again? If anything, Leonard would have an advantage because he wouldn't be as ring rusty.
There are countless examples of guys not getting rematches. Duran himself didn't fight Buchanan again, or Moore again, or Barkley again.
Leonard picked his opponents carefully? Well he did carefully fight and beat 4 all -time greats.

Sorry to hear that poor Roberto was depressed and that is why he lost to the legendary Kirkland Laing. Another great excuse. I guess that's as good as an excuse as the tummy ache that forced him to quit against Leonard.

Ambling Alp · Post by **Ambling Alp** » 24 Jan 2006, 20:22

BoxBuzz wrote:When rating Duran and Leanard one to one don't you have to handicap them for their natural size? Wasnt Duran a Natural Lightweight and Leanord a natural Welter? I think Leanord has a natural advantage but when reduced to pound for pound he loses it.

When Duran fought Leonard, he was still in his twenties and hadn't been a lightweight for 2 years. This was his 8th fight as a welterweight. He was naturally a welterweight by then.
By the way, when Leonard beat Hagler it was his first fight as a middleweight.
Even if you just want to go by what Duran did as a lightweight compared to what Leonard did in career, Leonard had the better career.
Duran beat Buchanan a good but not great fighter, and DeJesus (who beat Duran once). The rest of his competition is nothing special at all.
Leonard beat Benitez,Hearns and Hagler who were much better than Buchanan and DeJesus.

Seamus · Post by **Seamus** » 24 Jan 2006, 20:24

Ambling Alp

I couldn't agree more. We're also supposed to ignore Duran's loss to Wilfred Benitez, and his less than stellar points wins over Nino Gonzalez and Luigi Minchillo, because he was having motivation problems at the time.

Expug · Post by **Expug** » 25 Jan 2006, 02:19

He didnt look to good against Zefferino Gonzales either.

Ezzard · Post by **Ezzard** » 25 Jan 2006, 05:23

Ambling Alp wrote:
BoxBuzz wrote:When rating Duran and Leanard one to one don't you have to handicap them for their natural size? Wasnt Duran a Natural Lightweight and Leanord a natural Welter? I think Leanord has a natural advantage but when reduced to pound for pound he loses it.
When Duran fought Leonard, he was still in his twenties and hadn't been a lightweight for 2 years. This was his 8th fight as a welterweight. He was naturally a welterweight by then.
By the way, when Leonard beat Hagler it was his first fight as a middleweight.
Even if you just want to go by what Duran did as a lightweight compared to what Leonard did in career, Leonard had the better career.
Duran beat Buchanan a good but not great fighter, and DeJesus (who beat Duran once). The rest of his competition is nothing special at all.
Leonard beat Benitez,Hearns and Hagler who were much better than Buchanan and DeJesus.

I don't agree about the weights, not at all. A fighter moves up and puts on msucle but it's not the same. A fighter's power is diminshed and you can never totally be the same fighter you were at the lower weight. Duran was a natural lightweight, Ray a welter.

I don't see what leonard's 1st figth as a MW has got to do with anything? People have discussed here the behind closed doors fights Ray had.

Why did Ray retire? Then after Duran fought Hagler he saw the game plan Duran put into action and realised that Hagler could be beaten. Then ray decided he'd make a comeback. He got embarrassed by the knockdown against Howard and re-retired. He then comes back years later after seeing that hagler has slipped and doesn't even have to fight a contender to get his shot. later he gets to fight for 2 titles at different weights in the same fight? The boxing Alpha boys couldn't do enough for him.