My Daddy Doesn't Like the Great Roberto Duran, but Loves the Great Sugar Ray Leonard

[Onetimeonly]

Do they? That's usually the first thing I hear about the fight. What people forget is that scoring was highly favorable to Duran.

I meant to the more casual fan, at the end of the day the judges made the right decision as they had Hagler winning by UD.

I see, the only place I find casual fans talking about fights from 40 years ago is on here.

[Controversial]

I meant to the more casual fan, at the end of the day the judges made the right decision as they had Hagler winning by UD.

I see, the only place I find casual fans talking about fights from 40 years ago is on here.

Maybe you should get out more lol. I work with lots of boxing fans, or get chatting to people’ in pubs watching fights, most haven’t a clue about boxing but like to watch it.. There are a very few regular contributors on this forum but millions of fans worldwide.

[Onetimeonly]

I see, the only place I find casual fans talking about fights from 40 years ago is on here.

Maybe you should get out more lol. I work with lots of boxing fans, or get chatting to people’ in pubs watching fights, most haven’t a clue about boxing but like to watch it.. There are a very few regular contributors on this forum but millions of fans worldwide.

Nowhere to go here, I used to watch the fights with 20 or 30 friends back in the day. They rarely watch now.

[oogiebe]

Maybe you should get out more lol. I work with lots of boxing fans, or get chatting to people’ in pubs watching fights, most haven’t a clue about boxing but like to watch it.. There are a very few regular contributors on this forum but millions of fans worldwide.

Nowhere to go here, I used to watch the fights with 20 or 30 friends back in the day. They rarely watch now.

Those were the days OTO. We had parties specifically to watch big fights. No more.

[Seamus]

Most of my boxing buddies over the years loved Duran and hated Leonard. Never understood it.

[Ambling Alp II]

Examples of the exceptional boxers that were bigger won the most, Alp:

Carlos Monzon vs Jose "Mantequilla" Napoles
Carlos Monzon vs Emile Griffith (twice)
Marvin Hagler vs Thomas Hearns
Marvin Hagler vs Roberto Duran
Joe Louis vs Billy Conn (twice)
Muhammad Ali vs Bob Foster
Joe Frazier vs Bob Foster
Bob Foster vs Dick Tiger
Kid Gavilan vs Ike Williams (two out of three)
Kid Gavilan vs Beau Jack
Cassius Clay vs Archie Moore
Rocky Marciano vs Archie Moore
Jack Johnson vs Bob Fitzsimmons
Jack Johnson vs Stanley Ketchel
Salvador Sanchez vs Wilfredo Gomez
Wilfredo Gomez vs Carlos Zarate
Alexis Arguello vs Ruben Olivares
Aaron Pryor vs Alexis Arguello
Roy Jones, Jr vs Mike McCallum
Mike Tyson vs Michael Spinks
Georges Carpentier vs Ted "Kid" Lewis
Battling Battalino vs Panama Al Brown
Freddie Miller vs Panama Al Brown
Willie Pep vs Manuel Ortiz
Kid Chocolate vs Fidel La Barba (two out of three)
Ezzard Charles vs Charley Burley (twice)
Gene Fullmer vs Carmen Basilio (twice)
Carmen Basilio vs Ike Williams
Pernell Whitaker vs Azumah Nelson
Pernell Whitaker vs Julio Cesar Chavez (you can talk about a draw all you want to, Whitaker won!)
Jack "Kid" Berg vs Kid Chocolate (twice)
Tony Canzoneri vs Kid Chocolate (twice)
Maxie Rosenbloom vs Mickey Walker
Maxie Rosenbloom vs Ted "Kid" Lewis
Maxie Rosenbloom vs Tiger Flowers
Harry Greb vs Mickey Walker
Battling Battalino vs Fidel La Barba
Tommy Loughran vs Mickey Walker
Tommy Loughran vs Harry Greb (one win a piece)
Floyd Mayweather Jr vs Juan Manuel Marquez
Jack Johnson vs Sam Langford
Sam Langford vs Joe Gans
Sugar Ray Robinson vs Carmen Basilio (one win a piece)

There are 43 examples. And that's just counting of fighters that are in the top 100 greatest pound per pound in my view. If I go and look at other records, I will not finish. I am talking about EXCEPTIONAL vs EXCEPTIONAL all time greats of my top 100 list.

Now, Alp count me of the top 100 greatest boxers in your view, how many little men beat the bigger men. You will not count over 20.







,

Your list is a joke.

First off, you can't count light heavyweights and middleweights fighting heavyweights where the heavyweight is much bigger at the time of the fight. . That isn't the same thing as a guy gradually moving up in and weight and fighting guys of similar weights, which is what Duran did. So take out Louis-Conn, Ali-Foster, Johnson-Ketchel etc.

Johnson outweighed Langford 187-156 at the time of the fight. That is hardly the same thing as Benitez clowning Duran.

Some of your other fights are counting guys that were way past their primes:

Clay-Moore
Foster-Tiger
Jones-McCallum were two former jr middleweights who moved up to 175. McCallum was almost 40.
Robinson-Basilio were two former welterweight s at middleweight. That doesn't count.
Johnson-Fitzsimmons? Seriously? Fitzsimmons was 44 and had a broken elbow.

[Ambling Alp II]

Your dad sounds like he is a lot smarter than you.
Duran Benitez, and Hearns were in Leonard's weight class when they fought. That is a simple fact. All the crybaby excuses in the world doesn't change that.

Leonard never beat an exceptional fighter 20 pounds over his weight class. Neither did Duran.

It's not strange at all for a fighter in the lower weights to move up in weight and be successful. You act like Duran was the only guy whoever did it. Leonard did it. So did Benitez. So did Hearns.

So did Robinson, Armstrong, Greb, Charles, Langford, Arguello, Chavez, ,Canzoneri, Fitzsimmons, Griffith, Jofre, Ross, Walker, Pac, Mayweather, De La hoya, Mosley, Jones, Toney etc. The list goes on and on.

You act like Duran was still weighing 135 when he fought these guys . He wasn't.

If a fighters starts in a lower weight class (not talking about a light heavy fighting a guy well over 200) when he young, he will usually naturally grow out of his original weight class. If he is a great fighter, he will adapt to it. It happens all the time.

Now of the fighters you mentioned above, only these:
Sugar Ray Robinson
Henry Armstrong
Roberto Duran
Harry Greb
Bob Fitzsimmons
Emile Griffith
Mickey Walker

Beat exceptional boxers above their natural weight. When the bigger man was on his prime.

Now you see why Duran's whupping over Sugar Ray was special?

Umn no.

Canzoneri beat McLarnin
Ross beat McLarnin
Charles beat Walcott
Pac beat Marquez
Langford beat Jeannette, Wills, McVey
Here is another one: Harada beat Jofre

[Onetimeonly]

Hagler wasn't bigger than hearns either.

[oogiebe]

Hagler wasn't bigger than hearns either.

Nope. He wasn't. 3 1/2 " shorter and 3" shorter in reach. 1/2 lb less than Tommy.

[Caractacus]

[elmersalsa]

Examples of the exceptional boxers that were bigger won the most, Alp:

Carlos Monzon vs Jose "Mantequilla" Napoles
Carlos Monzon vs Emile Griffith (twice)
Marvin Hagler vs Thomas Hearns
Marvin Hagler vs Roberto Duran
Joe Louis vs Billy Conn (twice)
Muhammad Ali vs Bob Foster
Joe Frazier vs Bob Foster
Bob Foster vs Dick Tiger
Kid Gavilan vs Ike Williams (two out of three)
Kid Gavilan vs Beau Jack
Cassius Clay vs Archie Moore
Rocky Marciano vs Archie Moore
Jack Johnson vs Bob Fitzsimmons
Jack Johnson vs Stanley Ketchel
Salvador Sanchez vs Wilfredo Gomez
Wilfredo Gomez vs Carlos Zarate
Alexis Arguello vs Ruben Olivares
Aaron Pryor vs Alexis Arguello
Roy Jones, Jr vs Mike McCallum
Mike Tyson vs Michael Spinks
Georges Carpentier vs Ted "Kid" Lewis
Battling Battalino vs Panama Al Brown
Freddie Miller vs Panama Al Brown
Willie Pep vs Manuel Ortiz
Kid Chocolate vs Fidel La Barba (two out of three)
Ezzard Charles vs Charley Burley (twice)
Gene Fullmer vs Carmen Basilio (twice)
Carmen Basilio vs Ike Williams
Pernell Whitaker vs Azumah Nelson
Pernell Whitaker vs Julio Cesar Chavez (you can talk about a draw all you want to, Whitaker won!)
Jack "Kid" Berg vs Kid Chocolate (twice)
Tony Canzoneri vs Kid Chocolate (twice)
Maxie Rosenbloom vs Mickey Walker
Maxie Rosenbloom vs Ted "Kid" Lewis
Maxie Rosenbloom vs Tiger Flowers
Harry Greb vs Mickey Walker
Battling Battalino vs Fidel La Barba
Tommy Loughran vs Mickey Walker
Tommy Loughran vs Harry Greb (one win a piece)
Floyd Mayweather Jr vs Juan Manuel Marquez
Jack Johnson vs Sam Langford
Sam Langford vs Joe Gans
Sugar Ray Robinson vs Carmen Basilio (one win a piece)

There are 43 examples. And that's just counting of fighters that are in the top 100 greatest pound per pound in my view. If I go and look at other records, I will not finish. I am talking about EXCEPTIONAL vs EXCEPTIONAL all time greats of my top 100 list.

Now, Alp count me of the top 100 greatest boxers in your view, how many little men beat the bigger men. You will not count over 20.







,

Your list is a joke.

First off, you can't count light heavyweights and middleweights fighting heavyweights where the heavyweight is much bigger at the time of the fight. . That isn't the same thing as a guy gradually moving up in and weight and fighting guys of similar weights, which is what Duran did. So take out Louis-Conn, Ali-Foster, Johnson-Ketchel etc.

Johnson outweighed Langford 187-156 at the time of the fight. That is hardly the same thing as Benitez clowning Duran.

Some of your other fights are counting guys that were way past their primes:

Clay-Moore
Foster-Tiger
Jones-McCallum were two former jr middleweights who moved up to 175. McCallum was almost 40.
Robinson-Basilio were two former welterweight s at middleweight. That doesn't count.
Johnson-Fitzsimmons? Seriously? Fitzsimmons was 44 and had a broken elbow.

What do you mean heavyweights vs Light-heavyweights don't count? Then, why in the hell the fights happened? For an experiment?

Light- heavyweights are fighting 20 or plus pounds above their natural weight.

Duran was a lightweight fighting MIDDLEWEIGHTS in the 80s decade. And won 2 more titles despite the physical advantages he was against. He could not beat exceptional gifted fighters at 154lbs or beyond not because they were better skilled than he. It was because first, THE WEIGHT, and second THE AGE. And third, the guys were bigger and stronger in their natural weight.

Thanks for admitting that SRL didn't beat nobody EXCEPTIONAL 20 pounds above Welterweight. Neither did Duran. But, Davey Moore and Iran Barkley were a league above Donny Lalonde. Thanks.

[elmersalsa]

Name me one all time great of the top 100 in your view that the great Sam Langford beat and had to go to that guy's weight class?

I found that Langford lost to the great Jack Johnson. That's logical. Johnson was bigger, but that doesn't mean he was better.

I hate to break it to you, this sport is full of great fighters that didn't make the prestigious Elmo 100. This should be easy, even for you. Langford beat gans and wills. That's like Duran beating Norton. The guy you think beat the greatest 3 times.

First, the great Sam Langford was BIGGER than the great Joe Gans.

Harry Wills was not a great fighter. What did he do? Beat an undersized and underweight Langford 8 times?

If you say that Will's was a great fighter, let's examine his career.

[elmersalsa]

Now of the fighters you mentioned above, only these:
Sugar Ray Robinson
Henry Armstrong
Roberto Duran
Harry Greb
Bob Fitzsimmons
Emile Griffith
Mickey Walker

Beat exceptional boxers above their natural weight. When the bigger man was on his prime.

Now you see why Duran's whupping over Sugar Ray was special?

Umn no.

Canzoneri beat McLarnin
Ross beat McLarnin
Charles beat Walcott
Pac beat Marquez
Langford beat Jeannette, Wills, McVey
Here is another one: Harada beat Jofre

And none of those victories above are better than Duran whupping Leonard. That was a great feat in any which way you look at it.

Now, answer me:

Did Benitez and Hearns beat Leonard at 147?
Did Duran Los to Hearns, Benitez and Hagler at least at 147?

[Onetimeonly]

I hate to break it to you, this sport is full of great fighters that didn't make the prestigious Elmo 100. This should be easy, even for you. Langford beat gans and wills. That's like Duran beating Norton. The guy you think beat the greatest 3 times.

First, the great Sam Langford was BIGGER than the great Joe Gans.

Harry Wills was not a great fighter. What did he do? Beat an undersized and underweight Langford 8 times?

If you say that Will's was a great fighter, let's examine his career.

I skipped from lightweight to heavy. Duran was bigger than all the lightweights he beat. Don't you ever get sick of being a hypocrite?

[elmersalsa]

First, the great Sam Langford was BIGGER than the great Joe Gans.

Harry Wills was not a great fighter. What did he do? Beat an undersized and underweight Langford 8 times?

If you say that Will's was a great fighter, let's examine his career.

I skipped from lightweight to heavy. Duran was bigger than all the lightweights he beat. Don't you ever get sick of being a hypocrite?

I don't see your point. School me about Harry Wills

[Jaywheel]

Daddy sure didn't school you about smarts.

[Ambling Alp II]

Amen.

[Ambling Alp II]

First, the great Sam Langford was BIGGER than the great Joe Gans.

Harry Wills was not a great fighter. What did he do? Beat an undersized and underweight Langford 8 times?

If you say that Will's was a great fighter, let's examine his career.

I skipped from lightweight to heavy. Duran was bigger than all the lightweights he beat. Don't you ever get sick of being a hypocrite?

He never does. He never gets it.
He wants to count light heavyweights who are severely outweighed by heavyweights at the time of the fight.
However, he want to throw out Duran's losses when Duran himself weighed about the same as his opponent. (He acts like Duran still weighed 1235 for these fights)

He wants to count fights where Fitzsimmons was 44, McAllum was almost 40, Tiger was 37.
However, Duran was tool old when he lost to Benitez and the legendary Laing. Duran was 30 when he lost to Benitez, 31 to Laing.

He thinks he has a smoking gun for argument for Duran being better than Leonard by saying that Davey Moore and Donny Lalonde.

He pretends like Leonard didn't beat Duran.

The hypocrisy is unbelievable.
Now he is saying that Harry Wills is not a great fighter? Come on. Probably because it doesn't fit his current argument about Langford.
He never seems to get why so many people don't take him seriously.

[elmersalsa]

See, the Problem with Ambling Alp in these discussions is that, first, he doesn't like Duran.

Second, HIS ASSESSMENTS, about Duran losing to Hearns, Benitez and Hagler but Sugar Ray beating them was that Leonard beat Benitez and Hearns at 147lbs

But HE DOESN'T GET THE POINT that Duran didn't fight them at 147. He fought them at 154. A division 20lbs north of Lightweight.

If anyone thinks that because he beat those guys and Duran didn't that Sugar Ray was better, IS NOT GIVING A FAIR ASSESSMENT AT ALL.

IS not a smart assessment by any means.

Thanks.

[Ambling Alp II]

I don't like Duran, I have never claimed otherwise. I am not being a phony about it like you are with Leonard. You have sad bad things about Leonard before, and you pretend like you are a fan of his because you think people will think you are being objective. Most people see right through that.

Some guys that I like I rate higher than those I don't. Sometimes I rate the guy I don't like higher. It depends on how good they are. Crazy thought, huh?

I realize that duran fought these guys above 135. What you refuse to acknowldege is that Duran didn't weight 135 when he fought these guys. He gradually added weight as he got older. He got a little stronger and little slower. It's a trade off.

Duran weighed 152 1/2 when he fought Benitez. Benitez weighed 152 and 1/4. Duran had three previous fights over 150. He had not fought at 135 in four years. He was only 30 years old In ever logical way, that is a fair fight. So hell yes, that counts.

When he somehow lost to Kirkland Laing, he actually outweighed Laing 155 to 149. Duran was only 31. No matter how you slice it, that's an embarrassing loss. So yes that counts.

Losing to Hearns by itself isn't embarrassing. Getting face planted to the canvas in the 2nd round is. It's not like he gave Hearns a tough fight.

Yet you want to count fights like Ketchel-Johnson, Foster-Ali and fights where the guy was many years older than Duran was and wonder why people think you are a joke.

[elmersalsa]

I don't like Duran, I have never claimed otherwise. I am not being a phony about it like you are with Leonard. You have sad bad things about Leonard before, and you pretend like you are a fan of his because you think people will think you are being objective. Most people see right through that.

Some guys that I like I rate higher than those I don't. Sometimes I rate the guy I don't like higher. It depends on how good they are. Crazy thought, huh?

I realize that duran fought these guys above 135. What you refuse to acknowldege is that Duran didn't weight 135 when he fought these guys. He gradually added weight as he got older. He got a little stronger and little slower. It's a trade off.

Duran weighed 152 1/2 when he fought Benitez. Benitez weighed 152 and 1/4. Duran had three previous fights over 150. He had not fought at 135 in four years. He was only 30 years old In ever logical way, that is a fair fight. So hell yes, that counts.

When he somehow lost to Kirkland Laing, he actually outweighed Laing 155 to 149. Duran was only 31. No matter how you slice it, that's an embarrassing loss. So yes that counts.

Losing to Hearns by itself isn't embarrassing. Getting face planted to the canvas in the 2nd round is. It's not like he gave Hearns a tough fight.

Yet you want to count fights like Ketchel-Johnson, Foster-Ali and fights where the guy was many years older than Duran was and wonder why people think you are a joke.

And again, YOU MISSED THE DOGGONE POINT.

First, you know well that Duran at 154lbs was not convincing enough. He struggled with NOBODIES like Luigi Minchillo and Nino Gonzalez at 154. He looked so bad that even some boxing experts were saying that the fire was gone. Welterweight and Jr middleweight is 7 pounds over. Or you just don't know that, or you just want to be ignorant about it? Which one is it?

Second, you know damn well that his fights with Benitez and Hearns were not a Welterweight. Leonard beat all of them at 147. Oh! But somehow, Leonard is better than Duran? Duran didn't fight them at 147. Or did he? You know the answer.

Third, if Benitez and Hearns would have beaten Duran at 147 at least, then you can clearly say that Leonard was better. Even though Duran jumped to 12 pounds and the speed was not the same as in Lightweight, but still, his speed at Welterweight was fair enough to judge the fights. But, at 154? Where you know damn well that is 20lbs north of Lightweight, in his 30s and looked FAT, LETHARGIC, and SLOW while Hearns and Benitez looked COMFORTABLE at that weight, YOU KNOW FOR A FACT YOU ARE NOT BEING FAIR, BUT OUTRAGEOUSLY BIASED. That's like Sugar Ray going 20pounds over to fight guys like Matthew Saad Muhammad, Michael Spinks, Marvin Johnson and Dwight Muhammad Qawi. Would Leonard beat those guys? No! Absolutely not! They are or were too big! Sugar STRUGGLED with a BUM called Donny Lalonde. How he is going to beat the Spinks and the Muhammads?

Fourth, sorry, I shouldn't called Lalonde a bum. He is YOUR FRIEND. I APOLOGISE. Even at that, Lalonde had to drop 7 pounds to fight Sugar Ray. And he almost beat Sugar Ray. Some guys are comfortable at other weight class. That's according to their frame. Hearns' frame was tall enough to go all the way to cruiserweight. But, did he looked as good as he did in Welterweight and Jr middleweight? No! He didn't.

My question is: did Benitez and Hearns beat Duran at 147lbs? You don't have to answer. I am aware that my point is getting across to others that read my posts.
Thanks.
.

[Jaywheel]

there's like 5 people that browse that subforum

[elmersalsa]

there's like 5 people that browse that subforum

And what is your take on Leonard vs Duran?

Do you agree that is a FAIR ASSESSMENT that Leonard beat Benitez, Duran and Hearns at 147 and Duran could not beat Benitez and Hearns because it was at 154lbs and Duran was slow and lethargic to fight at that weight?

Tell me your answer

[Ambling Alp II]

I don't like Duran, I have never claimed otherwise. I am not being a phony about it like you are with Leonard. You have sad bad things about Leonard before, and you pretend like you are a fan of his because you think people will think you are being objective. Most people see right through that.

Some guys that I like I rate higher than those I don't. Sometimes I rate the guy I don't like higher. It depends on how good they are. Crazy thought, huh?

I realize that duran fought these guys above 135. What you refuse to acknowldege is that Duran didn't weight 135 when he fought these guys. He gradually added weight as he got older. He got a little stronger and little slower. It's a trade off.

Duran weighed 152 1/2 when he fought Benitez. Benitez weighed 152 and 1/4. Duran had three previous fights over 150. He had not fought at 135 in four years. He was only 30 years old In ever logical way, that is a fair fight. So hell yes, that counts.

When he somehow lost to Kirkland Laing, he actually outweighed Laing 155 to 149. Duran was only 31. No matter how you slice it, that's an embarrassing loss. So yes that counts.

Losing to Hearns by itself isn't embarrassing. Getting face planted to the canvas in the 2nd round is. It's not like he gave Hearns a tough fight.

Yet you want to count fights like Ketchel-Johnson, Foster-Ali and fights where the guy was many years older than Duran was and wonder why people think you are a joke.

And again, YOU MISSED THE DOGGONE POINT.

First, you know well that Duran at 154lbs was not convincing enough. He struggled with NOBODIES like Luigi Minchillo and Nino Gonzalez at 154. He looked so bad that even some boxing experts were saying that the fire was gone. Welterweight and Jr middleweight is 7 pounds over. Or you just don't know that, or you just want to be ignorant about it? Which one is it?

Second, you know damn well that his fights with Benitez and Hearns were not a Welterweight. Leonard beat all of them at 147. Oh! But somehow, Leonard is better than Duran? Duran didn't fight them at 147. Or did he? You know the answer.

Third, if Benitez and Hearns would have beaten Duran at 147 at least, then you can clearly say that Leonard was better. Even though Duran jumped to 12 pounds and the speed was not the same as in Lightweight, but still, his speed at Welterweight was fair enough to judge the fights. But, at 154? Where you know damn well that is 20lbs north of Lightweight, in his 30s and looked FAT, LETHARGIC, and SLOW while Hearns and Benitez looked COMFORTABLE at that weight, YOU KNOW FOR A FACT YOU ARE NOT BEING FAIR, BUT OUTRAGEOUSLY BIASED. That's like Sugar Ray going 20pounds over to fight guys like Matthew Saad Muhammad, Michael Spinks, Marvin Johnson and Dwight Muhammad Qawi. Would Leonard beat those guys? No! Absolutely not! They are or were too big! Sugar STRUGGLED with a BUM called Donny Lalonde. How he is going to beat the Spinks and the Muhammads?

Fourth, sorry, I shouldn't called Lalonde a bum. He is YOUR FRIEND. I APOLOGISE. Even at that, Lalonde had to drop 7 pounds to fight Sugar Ray. And he almost beat Sugar Ray. Some guys are comfortable at other weight class. That's according to their frame. Hearns' frame was tall enough to go all the way to cruiserweight. But, did he looked as good as he did in Welterweight and Jr middleweight? No! He didn't.

My question is: did Benitez and Hearns beat Duran at 147lbs? You don't have to answer. I am aware that my point is getting across to others that read my posts.
Thanks.
.

And you have missed every doggone point that people had made to to for the last 15 years. You never think, never use you brain. Never actually consider what other people are saying.

You keep saying that Leonard fighting light-heavyweights would be the same as Duran fighting at 154. Well, light heavyweight is 28 pounds and four weight classes above 147.
154 is only 3 weight classes and 19 pounds heavier than 135.
So Leonard would have to fight someone at 168 which is 3 weight classes and 21 pounds "North" of 147. . Who was he supposed to beat there that would have meant anything?


No reason that Duran could not have been more successful at 154. He gradually bulked up, like a zillion other guys.
It's not like he fought at 135 one fight and then 154 the next. He did it gradually over a period of several years.
Yet you have no problem counting Ketchel losing to Johnson when he was outweighed by 30 pounds. Or Conn to use Louis.

And Lalonde didn't almost beat Leonard. He scored a knockdown. Leonard dominated most of the rest of the fight before stopping him. It wasn't like he got a dubious decision, like say Duran got against Barkley.

Your hypocrisy knows no end. you have excuses for Duran at 154. However you made crap out of De La Hoya (whom you don't like) when he lost to Hopkins at 160.

[Onetimeonly]

See, the Problem with Ambling Alp in these discussions is that, first, he doesn't like Duran.

Second, HIS ASSESSMENTS, about Duran losing to Hearns, Benitez and Hagler but Sugar Ray beating them was that Leonard beat Benitez and Hearns at 147lbs

But HE DOESN'T GET THE POINT that Duran didn't fight them at 147. He fought them at 154. A division 20lbs north of Lightweight.

If anyone thinks that because he beat those guys and Duran didn't that Sugar Ray was better, IS NOT GIVING A FAIR ASSESSMENT AT ALL.

IS not a smart assessment by any means.

Thanks.

I love Duran, in my top 5 or 6 all-time favorites and you're ridiculous. Trying to shoot down wills as a great win for a former lightweight. Are you laughing when you post that garbage? I got news for you too, Duran's absolute peak was at welter. Dejesus 3 was the only fight at 35 where he looked as good as he did against palomino and Leonard. I really don't know why I bother conversing with you. It's just that you know the fighters and have watched the fights but you're so hypocritical, biased and stubborn that you're an imbecile. Have you ever mentioned Leonard's Olympic gold medal? Or does that only factor in for the great pascual Perez?