BoxRec

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

we had two conversations in recent weeks that i
find uninspiring. i have no interest in continuing
any of these, nor start a third one. please be so
kind and ignore me, as i will do with you. my
comments here refer to other posts, not yours.

thnx.

man wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

we had two conversations in recent weeks that i
find uninspiring. i have no interest in continuing
any of these, nor start a third one. please be so
kind and ignore me, as i will do with you. my
comments here refer to other posts, not yours.

thnx.

Yet you're responding to an emoticon?

Why would I ignore that level of comedy?

Whomever you're talking too, you're repeating the same shit over and over. I don't think the intention of the thread was to rehash old arguments, though that was somewhat inevitable. Now that ya'll have proven Leonard fighting the wrong fight against Duran is a common opinion I disagree with. Do everyone a favor and move on.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
Yet you're responding to an emoticon?

Why would I ignore that level of comedy?

Whomever you're talking too, you're repeating the same poo over and over. I don't think the intention of the thread was to rehash old arguments, though that was somewhat inevitable. Now that ya'll have proven Leonard fighting the wrong fight against Duran is a common opinion I disagree with. Do everyone a favor and move on.

good bye, troll.

man wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:
Yet you're responding to an emoticon?

Why would I ignore that level of comedy?

Whomever you're talking too, you're repeating the same poo over and over. I don't think the intention of the thread was to rehash old arguments, though that was somewhat inevitable. Now that ya'll have proven Leonard fighting the wrong fight against Duran is a common opinion I disagree with. Do everyone a favor and move on.

good bye, troll.

Did someone hack your account? You weren't interested in any more interaction with me after your scathing response to the emoticon. Or was this in response to another poster?

SenorPipino wrote:

man wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Please! Then you don't know the skills and abilities of the great Roberto Duran

i have no idea whether duran had won in any case, but i
am damned sure leonard went into the first fight with the
plan to show the lightweight that he can fight him toe to
toe.

If his skills and abilities were so great on that June night (and they were) how could those skills dissipate so much just 5 months later?
Could it be because Leonard employed a different strategy that neutralized Duran's aggressiveness?
Leonard fought the fight he wanted to in Montreal. It didn't work. He then fought the fight he wanted to in New Orleans. That time his plan was a success.

The STRATEGY was employed outside the ring. Duran was around 200 pounds a month before the rematch. HE CAUGHT DURAN IN AN OFF NIGHT. OFF GUARD.

The night in Montreal? Leonard ALWAYS fought that way. He just fought a better man that neutralized his foot and hand speed by bobbing and weaving and giving him angles, making Sugar Ray miss like he has never missed before. That was something that Leonard never saw before. He gave everything he had and LOST.

That is the reality of both fights. One won when both were at their very best. The other one won catching the other one in an OFF NIGHT. Not at his very best.

The Leonard who stopped Hearns in the 14th round was at least psychologically better than the man who fought in Montreal.

Women are equal to men

macaca wrote:Women are equal to men

elmersalsa wrote:The night in Montreal? Leonard ALWAYS fought that way.

Watch the first round of the fight. Leonard starts out right from the opening bell, with his feet planted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLd_6JDLiT4

Now, watch Leonard against Hearns. Leonard is on his toes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pB6sgVOADY

If you can't see the difference, you need glasses.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:The night in Montreal? Leonard ALWAYS fought that way.

Watch the first round of the fight. Leonard starts out right from the opening bell, with his feet planted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLd_6JDLiT4

Now, watch Leonard against Hearns. Leonard is on his toes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pB6sgVOADY

If you can't see the difference, you need glasses.

I don't know what fight all of you were watching in the first Duran Leonard Bout.
Leonard's plan CLEARLY was to tie up Duran every round. The referee I believe was Carlos Padilla never stopped leonard from doing that all thru
the fight. Then Howard Cosell in his interview attempting to make it appear that Padilla was helping Duran. Leonard throwing flurries and most of them never even touched Duran and then tie him up...typical Ali tactic only Ali used to illegally grab the other fighter around the neck and pull him down.
Leonard planted his feet when he was tying Duran up all night long... and if you watch the fight you will clearly see that Leonard was running around the ring and Duran having to cut the ring off
Not sure why everyone thinks its ok for someone to get on his bicycle and run around the ring and the other fighter is supposed to chase him.
You usually can tell the runners from the boxer/puncher by their KO records

keithmoonhangover wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:The night in Montreal? Leonard ALWAYS fought that way.

Watch the first round of the fight. Leonard starts out right from the opening bell, with his feet planted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLd_6JDLiT4

Now, watch Leonard against Hearns. Leonard is on his toes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pB6sgVOADY

If you can't see the difference, you need glasses.

I need glasses? I think it's the other way around. You don't know the skills and abilities of the great Roberto Duran

What about the fight with the great Wilfred Benitez? Did Leonard run?
What about his fights with Floyd Mayweather, Sr., Randy Shields, Ayub Kalule, Andy Price, Dave Boy Green, and Armando Muniz? Did Leonard run?

What makes you think that if Leonard would have stick and move in Montreal, he would have won the fight?
Is Duran a brute?
A guy with no boxing skills?
No class?
One dimensional?

Duran was not going to be denied in Montreal. He trained very hard, and was on probably, on the best shape of his life.

If you think that Duran in fight #1 was the same Duran in fight #2 with Leonard, then YOU NEED GLASSES!!!

Il Duce wrote:Ray Leonard vs. Wilfred Benitez II

At Light-Middleweight in May 1982

In My Opinion,

A stronger and physically bigger 23 1/2 year-old - Wilfred Benitez edges Ray Leonard over 15-Rounds.

I don't know about that one. It would be a better fight than the first, though.

elmersalsa wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:The night in Montreal? Leonard ALWAYS fought that way.

Watch the first round of the fight. Leonard starts out right from the opening bell, with his feet planted.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLd_6JDLiT4

Now, watch Leonard against Hearns. Leonard is on his toes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pB6sgVOADY

If you can't see the difference, you need glasses.

I need glasses? I think it's the other way around. You don't know the skills and abilities of the great Roberto Duran

What about the fight with the great Wilfred Benitez? Did Leonard run?
What about his fights with Floyd Mayweather, Sr., Randy Shields, Ayub Kalule, Andy Price, Dave Boy Green, and Armando Muniz? Did Leonard run?

What makes you think that if Leonard would have stick and move in Montreal, he would have won the fight?
Is Duran a brute?
A guy with no boxing skills?
No class?
One dimensional?

Duran was not going to be denied in Montreal. He trained very hard, and was on probably, on the best shape of his life.

If you think that Duran in fight #1 was the same Duran in fight #2 with Leonard, then YOU NEED GLASSES!!!

I don't need glasses to see the facts. Leonard proved he was a warrior in the first fight. Duran quit like a coward in the second.

keithmoonhangover wrote:I don't need glasses to see the facts. Leonard proved he was a warrior in the first fight. Duran quit like a coward in the second.

Leonard was more skilled than Duran imo. Not saying Duran is a ham and egger but Leonard edges him in skill I think. Leonard said in their first fight he could have boxed and ran and probably would have won the fight but wanted to go toe to toe with Duran to prove a point and that he could go toe to to with a guy like Duran

CrazyHorse wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:I don't need glasses to see the facts. Leonard proved he was a warrior in the first fight. Duran quit like a coward in the second.

Leonard was more skilled than Duran imo. Not saying Duran is a ham and egger but Leonard edges him in skill I think. Leonard said in their first fight he could have boxed and ran and probably would have won the fight but wanted to go toe to toe with Duran to prove a point and that he could go toe to to with a guy like Duran

keithmoonhangover wrote:

I don't need glasses to see the facts. Leonard proved he was a warrior in the first fight. Duran quit like a coward in the second.[/quote]

The facts are that Leonard always fought going forward. That he abandoned his strategy is a bunch of HOGWASH. HE LOST TO A BETTER MAN. Hugging and clutching and grabbing to survive is not a warrior. He (Leonard) would have get KO'd if he'd really did slug or fight. He did not do none of that. He clutched and grabbed and that is a fact.

The other fact is that anybody that thinks that that was the same Duran of Montreal in fight #2 NEED GLASSES. Leonard caught Duran in AN OFF NIGHT.

Those are facts, sir.

CrazyHorse wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:I don't need glasses to see the facts. Leonard proved he was a warrior in the first fight. Duran quit like a coward in the second.

Leonard was more skilled than Duran imo. Not saying Duran is a ham and egger but Leonard edges him in skill I think. Leonard said in their first fight he could have boxed and ran and probably would have won the fight but wanted to go toe to toe with Duran to prove a point and that he could go toe to to with a guy like Duran

That Leonard was more skilled? Then why Duran outboxed him the first fight?

CrazyHorse wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:I don't need glasses to see the facts. Leonard proved he was a warrior in the first fight. Duran quit like a coward in the second.

Leonard was more skilled than Duran imo. Not saying Duran is a ham and egger but Leonard edges him in skill I think. Leonard said in their first fight he could have boxed and ran and probably would have won the fight but wanted to go toe to toe with Duran to prove a point and that he could go toe to to with a guy like Duran

Personally I'm convinced that it's your ability/knowledge that is lacking as apposed to your needing glasses...but I would not rule out your
eyesight also being a factor based on your observations and conclusions. I don't mean that to be rude. But seriously...I think your
viewing these fights that way because you are a Leonard fan and most likely dislike Roberto Duran.
However... Using the word "warrior" to describe Leonard and "coward" to describe Duran is absolutely what led me to make the remarks
I made above. I think what you are doing here... is your attempting to play role reversals here. Everyone knows Duran has more
Knock Outs than Leonard has Wins.
Duran was a knockout/Counter puncher with great Defensive Skills. Leonard was a runner/throw a few flurries
tie up his opponents and no knock out power. His defensive skills were to get on his bicycle and hold his opponents.
Roberto Duran a coward and Leonard a warrior....REALLY!

RAPIDFIRE wrote:Roberto Duran a coward and Leonard a warrior....REALLY!

In that fight, he was a coward. What else do you call someone who quits in the middle of a fight when they are seemingly unhurt?

CrazyHorse wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:I don't need glasses to see the facts. Leonard proved he was a warrior in the first fight. Duran quit like a coward in the second.

Leonard was more skilled than Duran imo. Not saying Duran is a ham and egger but Leonard edges him in skill I think. Leonard said in their first fight he could have boxed and ran and probably would have won the fight but wanted to go toe to toe with Duran to prove a point and that he could go toe to to with a guy like Duran

Duran was the superior defensive fighter. That was the main problem in Montreal, Leonard couldn't consistently land and Duran could.

Seamus wrote:The Leonard who stopped Hearns in the 14th round was at least psychologically better than the man who fought in Montreal.

Unquestionably, he knew he could get through the toughest of times after the beating he absorbed in Montreal.

Il Duce wrote:Listen to Ray Leonard in his post-fight interview after his first fight with Roberto Duran.

Ray said, that 'every punch from Roberto hurt'. He had never felt punches that hard before,
and his ribs felt like they were getting hit with a crow bar.

It was one of the most brutal beatings I've ever seen. And I consider that a complement to Leonard that he remained competitive and closed strong. It amazes me when his fanatics refuse to admit that he got the shit kicked out of him, it's a lot like Frazier/Ali 1, they both took a Rocky Balboa drubbing and were better for it.

Nile4000 wrote:Antonio Cervantes would've cleaned Roberto Duran's clock had they fought around 74/75.

It would have been a terrific showdown around that time, since Cervantes beat Esteban De Jesus in a formidable fashion. Probably much easier than Duran.

Not sure if it's a common opinion, but I've heard it plenty on here in the past.

Foreman automatically beats prime Tyson and Marciano, because of the way he ahndles Frazier.

I think peak Tyson would be a very tough fight for George and I think Rocky by late stoppage is a definite possibility.