BoxRec

i think this kind of thread is flawed from the getgo.
a fighter can look very good against fighter A and be
the same guy, doing the same thing and look not
that good against fighter B.

best example is duran - leonard 1 and 2. roberto's
weight issue was no big factor early on in the second
and still it was a very different fight, simply because
the opponent was so different. plus - as someone
pointed out already - the first was really close and sugar ray
had - out of hybris - chosen a game plan that surprised
everyone.

someone mentioned tyson - spinks. i doubt holyfield
would have been intimitated like that at any point. mike
looked THAT great IMHO 'cause spinks was psyched out
long before he left the dressing room.

IMO no boxer was ever invincible on any night ...
(with the exception of joe louis against schmeling II ... :) ...)

Counter-puncher wrote:Can you just give it a fcking rest so maybe the whole thread doesn't get swamped in your boring mutual spamfest, and some interesting points that nobody is discussing might get discussed instead.

man wrote:

Dancin' Dan wrote:Leonard only won 3 rounds against Duran? What fight are you watching? Great performance by both fighters. Duran won an extremely close fight. Great fight. Two legends. That is enough in itself. No need to make up a story. Doesn't make Duran or Leonard any less great.

Leonard just won 3 rounds, buddy. See the fight in how Duran cut off the ring and kept himself. He was aware of his surroundings, gave the Sugar Man a WHUPPING, and clearly he was the better man. That HOGWASH about Leonard didn't fight his fight is pure BALONEY. Leonard was the bigger man, some writers were asking about if Duran could take a shot from a welterweight. Can he take Sugar Ray's power, can he cope with Sugar Ray's speed. All those questions were answered. Duran even surprised me with his speed. He moved that head. It's unconceivable, but he moved that head and gave impossible angles for Leonard to hit. Manos de Piedra was FANTASTIC. The greatest performance seen in my view since Smokin' Joe at FOTC.

man wrote:i think this kind of thread is flawed from the getgo.
a fighter can look very good against fighter A and be
the same guy, doing the same thing and look not
that good against fighter B.

best example is duran - leonard 1 and 2. roberto's
weight issue was no big factor early on in the second
and still it was a very different fight, simply because
the opponent was so different. plus - as someone
pointed out already - the first was really close and sugar ray
had - out of hybris - chosen a game plan that surprised
everyone.

someone mentioned tyson - spinks. i doubt holyfield
would have been intimitated like that at any point. mike
looked THAT great IMHO 'cause spinks was psyched out
long before he left the dressing room.

IMO no boxer was ever invincible on any night ...
(with the exception of joe louis against schmeling II ... :) ...)

With the exception of Louis-Schmeling?
Yeah, I agree. Almost impossible to say a guy was "unbeatable" for even his best fight, much less for several years.

elmersalsa wrote:

man wrote:

Dancin' Dan wrote:Leonard only won 3 rounds against Duran? What fight are you watching? Great performance by both fighters. Duran won an extremely close fight. Great fight. Two legends. That is enough in itself. No need to make up a story. Doesn't make Duran or Leonard any less great.

Leonard just won 3 rounds, buddy. See the fight in how Duran cut off the ring and kept himself. He was aware of his surroundings, gave the Sugar Man a WHUPPING, and clearly he was the better man. That HOGWASH about Leonard didn't fight his fight is pure BALONEY. Leonard was the bigger man, some writers were asking about if Duran could take a shot from a welterweight. Can he take Sugar Ray's power, can he cope with Sugar Ray's speed. All those questions were answered. Duran even surprised me with his speed. He moved that head. It's unconceivable, but he moved that head and gave impossible angles for Leonard to hit. Manos de Piedra was FANTASTIC. The greatest performance seen in my view since Smokin' Joe at FOTC.

next time i watch it, i will have your
thoughts in mind. last time i saw it,
i had ray giving a brave and stupid
performance, where he simply went
toe to toe from the get go and if i
recall correctly even the commentator
pointed this unexpected tactics out
as early as round one, which clearly
indicates this strategy was a decision
and not something duran forced onto
him.

elmersalsa wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:Pre ban Ali is a close to unbeatable as I've seen.

So was the great Joe Frazier before the Terry Daniels and Ron Stander fights

So was the great Roberto Duran between 1967-80 time frame.

So was the great Willie Pep between 1940-48

Unbeatable and close to unbeatable are not the same.

Sugar Ray Robinson was close to unbeatable during the 1940's, losing one fight.

Willie Pep was close to unbeatable BETWEEN 1940 and 1948, losing one fight.

Roberto Duran was close to unbeatable during the 1970's, losing one fight.

Scypion wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:Pre ban Ali is a close to unbeatable as I've seen.

So was the great Joe Frazier before the Terry Daniels and Ron Stander fights

So was the great Roberto Duran between 1967-80 time frame.

So was the great Willie Pep between 1940-48

Unbeatable and close to unbeatable are not the same.

Sugar Ray Robinson was close to unbeatable during the 1940's, losing one fight.

Willie Pep was close to unbeatable BETWEEN 1940 and 1948, losing one fight.

Roberto Duran was close to unbeatable during the 1970's, losing one fight.

well said and I hope this clears things up.

man wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

man wrote: Leonard just won 3 rounds, buddy. See the fight in how Duran cut off the ring and kept himself. He was aware of his surroundings, gave the Sugar Man a WHUPPING, and clearly he was the better man. That HOGWASH about Leonard didn't fight his fight is pure BALONEY. Leonard was the bigger man, some writers were asking about if Duran could take a shot from a welterweight. Can he take Sugar Ray's power, can he cope with Sugar Ray's speed. All those questions were answered. Duran even surprised me with his speed. He moved that head. It's unconceivable, but he moved that head and gave impossible angles for Leonard to hit. Manos de Piedra was FANTASTIC. The greatest performance seen in my view since Smokin' Joe at FOTC.

next time i watch it, i will have your
thoughts in mind. last time i saw it,
i had ray giving a brave and stupid
performance, where he simply went
toe to toe from the get go and if i
recall correctly even the commentator
pointed this unexpected tactics out
as early as round one, which clearly
indicates this strategy was a decision
and not something duran forced onto
him.

This is not a BIASED VIEW. Duran on that night in Montreal had the fight UNDER CONTROL. It's unconceivable how he moved that head at close quarters. Am I and Howard Cossell blind? I mean, watch Duran's hand and foot coordination. How he made Sugar Ray miss in impossible of angles. Talking about boxing. This is something that you folks got to learn. Not only can you outbox going backwards like the great Muhammad Ali, but, forward, giving angles like Duran. He had the fight so under control that he even motioned to Ray, "Hit my chin. Hit my chin, hit it, hit it!" That was some classic stuff! That performance in Montreal could never be duplicated. No matter how Ray came that night. Even if he ran like a chicken, he would've lost. Why? Cause the way Duran carried and was aware of his surroundings.
It was definitely Duran's finest hour.

Please, Elmer - the Duran v Leonard 1 bout needs its own thread, it's got a life of its own and has hijacked this thread.

L.A. kidd wrote:jerry quarry vs mac foster..... quarry was great that night, unbeatable.

rocky Marciano vs jersey joe walcot first fight.... rocky would not be denied.

Carmen basilio vs sugar ray robinson first fight.... carmine wasn't to be denied.

sugar ray vs jake lamotta last fight.........the greatest the sugarman has ever looked.

I was wondering if anyone would mention Robinson'e last fight with LaMotta in 1951, for the middleweight title, AKA the Valentine's Day massacre. Don't know if it was Robinson's greatest fight, because he had a lot of fights as a welterweight that are not on film.

elmersalsa wrote:

man wrote:

Dancin' Dan wrote:Leonard only won 3 rounds against Duran? What fight are you watching? Great performance by both fighters. Duran won an extremely close fight. Great fight. Two legends. That is enough in itself. No need to make up a story. Doesn't make Duran or Leonard any less great.

Leonard just won 3 rounds, buddy. See the fight in how Duran cut off the ring and kept himself. He was aware of his surroundings, gave the Sugar Man a WHUPPING, and clearly he was the better man. That HOGWASH about Leonard didn't fight his fight is pure BALONEY. Leonard was the bigger man, some writers were asking about if Duran could take a shot from a welterweight. Can he take Sugar Ray's power, can he cope with Sugar Ray's speed. All those questions were answered. Duran even surprised me with his speed. He moved that head. It's unconceivable, but he moved that head and gave impossible angles for Leonard to hit. Manos de Piedra was FANTASTIC. The greatest performance seen in my view since Smokin' Joe at FOTC.

So elmersalsa your on this page contradicting your ass off about Duran moving up in weight what was your thought's about fighter's moving up
even one that are clearly [that's in your word's] the best ever in their weight class that they fought in...........................................remember Pryor the best ever Jr welter[that's what you said] that would struggle to beat any good welter YOUR A CLASSIC

And before you do Cuevas and Palomino were GOOD fighter's NOT GREAT FIGHTER'S

IMO the Buster Douglas that beat Tyson would have beaten any other active Heavyweight at that time

ade the grenade wrote:IMO the Buster Douglas that beat Tyson would have beaten any other active Heavyweight at that time

What about Evander Holyfield?

There's no way he'd have beaten Holyfield: he might have put in a better performance than his pathetic defence some months later, but he never had the tools to beat Holyfield.

If Douglas could have fought as well as he did against Tyson, that would have been a great fight.

A fit and motivated Michael Dokes v a fit and motivated Buster Douglas would have been some scrap.

(Was the Bobby Stewart that Dokes lost to in the '74 Golden Gloves final the man who first taught Tyson to box in Tryon?)

palooka wrote:A fit and motivated Michael Dokes v a fit and motivated Buster Douglas would have been some scrap.

(Was the Bobby Stewart that Dokes lost to in the '74 Golden Gloves final the man who first taught Tyson to box in Tryon?)

"Bobby Stewart of Tribes Hill won the National Golden Gloves Tournament as a light heavyweight in 1974, beating Mike Dokes in Denver, Colorado.

It was the high point of Stewart’s amateur boxing career and was preceded by numerous regional bouts. His amateur record was 45 wins and 5 losses.

Amsterdam had a lively boxing scene years ago. Stewart was raised in Amsterdam on McDonnell Street and Chapel Place. His father was a New York State Police officer and his mother worked in local doctors’ offices.

Stewart turned professional after the 1974 Golden Gloves Tournament and won 13 of his 16 fights. But he was disturbed by what he felt was an unfair decision in one of the professional fights. He regrets that he did not wait to compete in the 1976 Olympics before embarking on his professional boxing career.

By 1976 he was working as a counselor at the former Tryon School, a facility in Perth for youths in trouble with the law. Over the years he also tended bar at Russo’s Tavern in Amsterdam and the Chelsea House in Tribes Hill.

Mike Tyson, a street tough from Brooklyn, was one of the inmates at Tryon in the late 1970s. Tyson wanted to learn boxing techniques and wanted Stewart to train him. Tyson even acted up so he could get transferred to Elmwood, the cottage at Tryon that housed the toughest young males where Stewart was assigned."

ade the grenade wrote:

palooka wrote:A fit and motivated Michael Dokes v a fit and motivated Buster Douglas would have been some scrap.

(Was the Bobby Stewart that Dokes lost to in the '74 Golden Gloves final the man who first taught Tyson to box in Tryon?)

"Bobby Stewart of Tribes Hill won the National Golden Gloves Tournament as a light heavyweight in 1974, beating Mike Dokes in Denver, Colorado.

It was the high point of Stewart’s amateur boxing career and was preceded by numerous regional bouts. His amateur record was 45 wins and 5 losses.

Amsterdam had a lively boxing scene years ago. Stewart was raised in Amsterdam on McDonnell Street and Chapel Place. His father was a New York State Police officer and his mother worked in local doctors’ offices.

Stewart turned professional after the 1974 Golden Gloves Tournament and won 13 of his 16 fights. But he was disturbed by what he felt was an unfair decision in one of the professional fights. He regrets that he did not wait to compete in the 1976 Olympics before embarking on his professional boxing career.

By 1976 he was working as a counselor at the former Tryon School, a facility in Perth for youths in trouble with the law. Over the years he also tended bar at Russo’s Tavern in Amsterdam and the Chelsea House in Tribes Hill.

Mike Tyson, a street tough from Brooklyn, was one of the inmates at Tryon in the late 1970s. Tyson wanted to learn boxing techniques and wanted Stewart to train him. Tyson even acted up so he could get transferred to Elmwood, the cottage at Tryon that housed the toughest young males where Stewart was assigned."

Thanks, Grenade

And I don't understand why nobody in here speaks about the great performance of the great Salvador Sanchez vs the great Wilfredo Gomez. Last night was the 34th anniversary of that fight. I don't see no featherweight boxer, dead or alive, beating Salvador that night. He was INCREDIBLY TERRIFIC!

elmersalsa wrote:This is not a BIASED VIEW. Duran on that night in Montreal had the fight UNDER CONTROL. It's unconceivable how he moved that head at close quarters. Am I and Howard Cossell blind? I mean, watch Duran's hand and foot coordination. How he made Sugar Ray miss in impossible of angles. Talking about boxing. This is something that you folks got to learn. Not only can you outbox going backwards like the great Muhammad Ali, but, forward, giving angles like Duran. He had the fight so under control that he even motioned to Ray, "Hit my chin. Hit my chin, hit it, hit it!" That was some classic stuff! That performance in Montreal could never be duplicated. No matter how Ray came that night. Even if he ran like a chicken, he would've lost. Why? Cause the way Duran carried and was aware of his surroundings.
It was definitely Duran's finest hour.

rewatched the fight. clear as daylight that
leonard chose the wrong strategy. all else
is guessing, this is a fact. roberto managed
to get under his skin and it paid of. close
but clear win for roberto mainly due to ray
underestimating the light weight's power.

man wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:This is not a BIASED VIEW. Duran on that night in Montreal had the fight UNDER CONTROL. It's unconceivable how he moved that head at close quarters. Am I and Howard Cossell blind? I mean, watch Duran's hand and foot coordination. How he made Sugar Ray miss in impossible of angles. Talking about boxing. This is something that you folks got to learn. Not only can you outbox going backwards like the great Muhammad Ali, but, forward, giving angles like Duran. He had the fight so under control that he even motioned to Ray, "Hit my chin. Hit my chin, hit it, hit it!" That was some classic stuff! That performance in Montreal could never be duplicated. No matter how Ray came that night. Even if he ran like a chicken, he would've lost. Why? Cause the way Duran carried and was aware of his surroundings.
It was definitely Duran's finest hour.

rewatched the fight. clear as daylight that
leonard chose the wrong strategy. all else
is guessing, this is a fact. roberto managed
to get under his skin and it paid of. close
but clear win for roberto mainly due to ray
underestimating the light weight's power.

Come on, man, not again. Did you see Duran's foot and hand and head movements? How did he made Ray missed? Duran was in TOTAL CONTROL. It was a brilliant performance. The best performance after Smokin' Joe's FOTC.

elmersalsa wrote:Come on, man, not again. Did you see Duran's foot and hand and head movements? How did he made Ray missed? Duran was in TOTAL CONTROL. It was a brilliant performance. The best performance after Smokin' Joe's FOTC.

1. i don't dispute that roberto fought a
great fight.
2. the defining factor of the fight was sugar
deciding to be flat footed. could it have got
differently had he boxed? maybe, we do not
know, but we do know that he was not forced
to this strategy, he chose it. and we know this
because he did it from second one, before
roberto even threw his first punch.

listen, i'm all for debate and all, but this is
no subject for discussion, this is obvious.

Elmer, I have a mission for you, if you choose to accept it. I want you to watch one thing. Leonard's footwork. Nothing else. Not Duran, not either fighter's punches. And do it for just six minutes.

I want you to watch the first round of the second fight - remember, just watching Leonard's footwork.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_j4iFplHAE

Then watch the first round of the first fight - again, just Leonard's footwork.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuGZVkYuHM4

The last part of your mission is to report back here your findings on Leonard's footwork in an UNBIASED way. What is the difference in the two fights?

Please remember the mission is only about Leonard's footwork, so please don't mention Duran. If you are unbiased, then you can do this.

man wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:Come on, man, not again. Did you see Duran's foot and hand and head movements? How did he made Ray missed? Duran was in TOTAL CONTROL. It was a brilliant performance. The best performance after Smokin' Joe's FOTC.

1. i don't dispute that roberto fought a
great fight.
2. the defining factor of the fight was sugar
deciding to be flat footed. could it have got
differently had he boxed? maybe, we do not
know, but we do know that he was not forced
to this strategy, he chose it. and we know this
because he did it from second one, before
roberto even threw his first punch.

listen, i'm all for debate and all, but this is
no subject for discussion, this is obvious.

Leonard ALWAYS FOUGHT THAT WAY. He couldn't outbox Duran because Manos de Piedra had an answer in EVERYTHING LEONARD DID.

Give Roberto credit for his underrated boxing skills. I NEVER BOUGHT THAT THEORY that Leonard chose to fight Duran's fight. That's a statement from the Americanized media. And a BALONEY ONE.

Duran was in control and aware of his surroundings and terrific ring generalship. Am I the only one to see this in this forum?

Leonard GOT WHUPPED AND THAT'S ALL TO IT. I ONLY GAVE LEONARD 3 rounds. Give Duran credit for that.

elmersalsa wrote:Give Roberto credit for his underrated boxing skills. I NEVER BOUGHT THAT THEORY that Leonard chose to fight Duran's fight. That's a statement from the Americanized media. And a BALONEY ONE.

are we talking about the same fight here?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuGZVkYuHM4
even the commentator notes ray's unexpected
strategy in second 5. leonard was obviously
able to stay out of distance, which he did in the
second fight. in both bouts he behaved very
differently right after the bell, before anything
happend.

i respect you as a poster, but on this one you
really get carried away by your love for duran.