BoxRec

Anyone have a link to the 3 judges round by round scoring ?

IIRC, Emanuel Steward felt that Sugar Ray had beaten Roberto.

That's not surprising since it was a pretty competitive fight that was difficult to score.
Where do we start with golden oldie? Is is trying to win Kalan's title?
I loved the part where Duran only had 35 fights above 135!
That is more than Leonard had total fights in his career at that point!!

Love the idea that we are supposed to blow off the Hagler-Leonard fight because Leonard had the advantages? Leonard planned this all along? We are supposed to believe that in 1982, Leonard was planning for a 1987 fight with Hagler? So he just stopped his career in 1982 because of that? How did he know someone else wouldn't beat Hagler before than? Or Hagler would still be fighting? Or Hagler would not have moved up in weight class?
Oh and the best way to get yourself ready for Marvin Hagler is to take almost 5 years off? Mind boggling that someone would believe that.

What is with this weird idea that rematches don't count? Then he uses strange examples that people don't care about the rematch as much as the first fight.

Lewis-Rahman? Seriously? Nobody cared about the first fight. It wasn't even on Pay Per View. Guess what? The rematch was on Pay Per View, because more people were interested in the rematch.
Tyson-Holyfield? Guess what, there were more Pay Per Buys for the rematch than the original. The original was 1.6 million, but the rematch was just under 2 million.

He lists Schmeling-Louis? Huh? However, the rematch was one of the most anticipated fights of all time. There was much more interest in the rematch than the first fight. The gate for it was almost double for the rematch than for the first fight.

And what are we supposed to do now that we are ignoring rematches?
Louis' win over Schmeling doesn't count?
Lennox Lewis win over Rahman doesn't count?
How absurd can you get?

If the first fight is a stinker, then there usually isn't a lot of interest in a rematch. However, usually there is as much interest if the first fight was interesting.

More importantly, the fighters themselves take the rematches seriously. The idea that a rematch should be ignored is ludicrous.

I can accept anyone's opinion who say's Duran won narrowly in Montreal. It's the "he dominated, took Leonard to school, totally controlled the fight, gave him an ass whuppin'" that I find utterly ridiculous

Seamus wrote:I can accept anyone's opinion who say's Duran won narrowly in Montreal. It's the "he dominated, took Leonard to school, totally controlled the fight, gave him an ass whuppin'" that I find utterly ridiculous

Duran whupped that azz! End of story, Seamus!

This is an excerpt from a Washington Post article back in 1980. Does anyone know if this claim of holding back the cards is true? - It was a pro-Leonard article claiming he was robbed.

By Shirley Povich June 22, 1980

. . . That was inside the ring. Outside the ring, at the final bell, Duran found three valuable confederates, three myopic judges who said he had won that fight, and also had won Leonard's title Friday night in Olympic Stadium. It was one of boxing's biggest lies.

The judges were even more suspect as events developed after the fight. They refused to disclose their round-by-round scoring for several hours after the fight. One judge's verdict was announced as a draw, mistakenly, before being changed to give Duran a one-point edge. The same fellow, it was later learned, had scored 10 rounds even, breaking all known records for indecision in his profession. . . .

In regards to finding the round by round scoring of Leonard-Duran I, does anyone have access to the The Ring Record Book for 1981? - Each year The Ring would include an addendum with the round by round scoring for each championship fight from the previous year.

Yep Duran beat him so bad he called Leonard the toughest opponent he'd ever faced. Apparently even tougher than Esteban De Jesus, the only man ever to defeat the great hand's of stone in his prime.

golden oldie wrote:People have two options regarding this fight. They can either watch the fight again and trust what their eyes see, or they can act like retarded religious goons, and acknowledge only what they WANT to see.

It really is simple. Count the amount of times Padilla slaps Leonards arms / gloves down rather than call break for holding. Then do the same with Duran. Holding was instigated a minimum 65 - 35 by Leonard. He simply had no other answer than to grab when Duran got close working on the inside. Pretty effing pathetic by the bigger, stronger guy, when you think about it. That is why a lot of folks saw it as a Leonard ass whuppin. He was afraid to stand and trade with the naturally smaller, lighter, weaker guy. THIS AFTER HIM AND HIS RETARDED TRAINER CLAIMED THAT WAS EXACTLY WHAT THEY WOULD DO, AND KNOCK DURAN OUT.

NOT 5 MONTHS, 5 YEARS, OR 5 DECADES LATER, BUT THAT NIGHT IN MONTREAL.

He just couldn't make himself look a bigger LOSER than that if he tried.

You couldn't say it much better. I love this post.

The BIG LIE is that The American media was full of shiit saying that their Golden Boy Leonard fought Duran's fight. That he slugged it out with The Hands of Stone was A FABRICATED VIEW to convince the public that it was a close fight. What a whole bunch of HOGWASH. Leonard got his azz whupped and that's all to it. Never seen a so called great fighter holding, grabbing and clutching for survival like Sugar Ray did. He didn't slugged it out. That's a BIG LIE. Because if he did, Leonard would have been getting knocked the fucked out.

Esteban Dejesus slugged it out with Duran
Ray Lampkin slugged it out with Duran
Hector Thompson slugged it out with Duran
They all got knocked out.

Leonard got his ass whupped! End of story, folks!

Roberto Duran: "He is the best I have fought. http://boxrec.com/media/index.php?title=Fight:560

Roberto Duran: "He is the best I have fought. He hit me hard a couple of times, but I was never in bad shape. He was pretty good, but he had to be because he was fighting me."

Put that one in context and it comes out a little different, but the statement is still there.

People are allowed to spew out just about any content they wish to....as long as it's civil.

Misquoting seems to be the soup d' jour these days. About all we can do is look up credible references ourselves to determine who here provides "more credible" source material.

And against the great Sugar Ray Robinson, I'll put my money on the great Roberto Duran at welterweight. Especially, the Duran that fought magnificently in Montreal.

Important lessons to be learned:

If you score the fight with one guy winning by three points, it's an ass whupping.

If you landed a whopping three more punches in a round, you whipped a guy's ass for that round. Apparently it doesn't matter how clean the punches were. Why even have judges. Why not just count the number of punches landed?)

If you say that your opponent was the best you had ever fought (up to that point) you must have got your ass whipped.

If you "only" had 10 fights at a new weight class, you still aren't prepared at that weight class.

Though Leonard never weighed in as a middleweight going into his entire career going into the Hagler fight, we should not take that into consideration.

Angelo Dundee was just sad, whining excuse for a trainer. I mean what success did he ever have?

Criticizing a fighter for not fighting a smart fighter is using pitiful schoolgirl type excuse.

Rematches don't count is a perfectly valid excuse for losing. There is never as much interest in rematches. Schmeling-Louis is a great example. I mean, who cared about that fight?

This has been so illuminating.

golden oldie wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:And against the great Sugar Ray Robinson, I'll put my money on the great Roberto Duran at welterweight. Especially, the Duran that fought magnificently in Montreal.

Then I am very sorry Elmer, but you would lose. At 147 SRR was more representative of the 154 version of Tommy Hearns who splatted Roberto in easy fashion. If you doubt my observation just look at the weight discrepancies between him and a lot of the 108 guys he KO'd. It is frankly quite frightening.

Unlike Mr Leonard, SRR would have been more than happy to trade with Duran in Montreal ( given that he was a prime Welter in 1980 ) and I would bet good money it would all have been over inside 6 rounds, with the great Panamanian asleep, and Ray going off to do a cabaret show.

I got to disagree with you on that one. I will pick the great Sugar Ray Robinson over The Hands of Stone above welterweight. At welterweight and below, I'll pick the great Roberto Duran!

Duran was too smart of a fighter. He was a MORE COMPLETE FIGHTER than Robinson ever was, especially below welterweight. I have never seen Robinson fight well on the inside. He was faster than Duran and hit harder, but he wasn't a better boxer. Skill for skill, Duran was better.

Robinson accomplished more than Duran in the pound per pound rankings, but, to me, Duran was the more gifted fighter.

elmer, you are on the right track, but you are going to have to up your game. That isn't enough to beat out Golden Oldie for Kalan's title.
You should have mentioned that Duran was such a versatile fighter; that Duran was so fast on his feet. Maybe throw in that Duran had more heart than Robinson.

I like Robert at the catch weight of Super Light.


But other than that.....Duran rules the LW, and Ray has got to be favored in the WW....

golden oldie wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

golden oldie wrote:
Then I am very sorry Elmer, but you would lose. At 147 SRR was more representative of the 154 version of Tommy Hearns who splatted Roberto in easy fashion. If you doubt my observation just look at the weight discrepancies between him and a lot of the 108 guys he KO'd. It is frankly quite frightening.

Unlike Mr Leonard, SRR would have been more than happy to trade with Duran in Montreal ( given that he was a prime Welter in 1980 ) and I would bet good money it would all have been over inside 6 rounds, with the great Panamanian asleep, and Ray going off to do a cabaret show.

I got to disagree with you on that one. I will pick the great Sugar Ray Robinson over The Hands of Stone above welterweight. At welterweight and below, I'll pick the great Roberto Duran!

Duran was too smart of a fighter. He was a MORE COMPLETE FIGHTER than Robinson ever was, especially below welterweight. I have never seen Robinson fight well on the inside. He was faster than Duran and hit harder, but he wasn't a better boxer. Skill for skill, Duran was better.

Robinson accomplished more than Duran in the pound per pound rankings, but, to me, Duran was the more gifted fighter.

Elmer.

No one was a more complete fighter than Ray Robinson. As for power he could knock guys out moving backwards. If you think Tommy destroyed Duran with his power, you wouldn't even want to think about what Robinson would do, never mind witness it. 6 rounds if he is lucky for Roberto.

The fight with the great Thomas Hearns was at 154lbs. Duran was not as quick and had too much trouble at that weight. Plus, he was out of his prime at 33. Hearns was in FULL PRIME at 26 and was better at 154lbs than at welterweight.

The great Sugar Ray Robinson was not as complete as many people in here think. I can name at least 12 boxers that were more complete than he was. Robinson may had the punching power advantage over Duran. Also he had more speed. But, Duran was much more versatile and fought better inside. Duran AT HIS VERY BEST was a complete FIGHTING MACHINE. His most underrated asset was his speed and defense. He was a difficult target to cleanly hit. Robinson was not a difficult target. I think he was
more perfect for Duran than the other way around.

Ambling Alp II wrote:elmer, you are on the right track, but you are going to have to up your game. That isn't enough to beat out Golden Oldie for Kalan's title.
You should have mentioned that Duran was such a versatile fighter; that Duran was so fast on his feet. Maybe throw in that Duran had more heart than Robinson.

Duran was an INCREDIBLE BOXER. He was very versatile. He had fast feet in that Montreal fight. And also had a big heart. I can't say that Robinson had more heart than Duran. Nobody can say that. Duran was a lightweight fighting middleweights for crying out loud! That's heart!

golden oldie wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

golden oldie wrote:


Elmer.

No one was a more complete fighter than Ray Robinson. As for power he could knock guys out moving backwards. If you think Tommy destroyed Duran with his power, you wouldn't even want to think about what Robinson would do, never mind witness it. 6 rounds if he is lucky for Roberto.

The fight with the great Thomas Hearns was at 154lbs. Duran was not as quick and had too much trouble at that weight. Plus, he was out of his prime at 33. Hearns was in FULL PRIME at 26 and was better at 154lbs than at welterweight.

The great Sugar Ray Robinson was not as complete as many people in here think. I can name at least 12 boxers that were more complete than he was. Robinson may had the punching power advantage over Duran. Also he had more speed. But, Duran was much more versatile and fought better inside. Duran AT HIS VERY BEST was a complete FIGHTING MACHINE. His most underrated asset was his speed and defense. He was a difficult target to cleanly hit. Robinson was not a difficult target. I think he was
more perfect for Duran than the other way around.

How do you arrive at the conclusion that Tommy was a better Light Middle than Welter elmer?

SRR could fight on the outside or the inside, Roberto was pretty ineffective on the outside, relying on his cunning and strength to get close. That don't work against Robinson. Easy nights work for Ray, as he has the speed, power, and skills advantages over the great Panamanian, not to mention height and reach.

Tommy was stronger and hit harder at 154lbs. He was much more experienced and had sturdier legs. I have never seen a boxer so PERFECT at any weight class. The Hitman at 154lbs was a BEAST! At welterweight, Hearns was great, but those legs failed him when he needed them the most. He looked too frailed at welterweight.

The original Sugar Ray WAS NEVER A GREAT INSIDE FIGHTER. I haven't seen that he can fight well at close encounters. And that's where The Hands of Stone would have made a great work out of him. That Duran can't fight outside? Have you seen how he beautifully counterpunched Esteban De Jesus in the rubber match?

I don't think Robinson had better skills than Duran. That is an American media INFATUATION. I can name 12 boxers that were much better skilled than he. And Duran was one of them.

elmersalsa wrote:

Ambling Alp II wrote:elmer, you are on the right track, but you are going to have to up your game. That isn't enough to beat out Golden Oldie for Kalan's title.
You should have mentioned that Duran was such a versatile fighter; that Duran was so fast on his feet. Maybe throw in that Duran had more heart than Robinson.

Duran was an INCREDIBLE BOXER. He was very versatile. He had fast feet in that Montreal fight. And also had a big heart. I can't say that Robinson had more heart than Duran. Nobody can say that. Duran was a lightweight fighting middleweights for crying out loud! That's heart!

That's more like it! That is the kind of inane rambling that might be enough to overtake Golden Oldie. Robinson fought LaMotta several times when he was severely outweighed, something Duran never came close to doing. Duran never actually fought a middleweight when he was a lightweight but lets pretend he did! Just because he quit like a dog against Leonard simply because he was losing and had no plan B, he still must have had great heart! Fast on his feet? Love it. Keep this nonsense up, and Golden Oldie is going down!

Yeah that makes sense. Sheer cowardice.

I don't think it's a fair comparison because Duran turned pro as a bantamweight and Robinson turned pro as a lightweight... However, guys who could fight inside like Ralph Jones gave Robinson tons of trouble... Jones was pretty slick on the inside and drove SRR from ring post to ring post...

I don't think it was the layoff because Robinson was coming off a tune-up fight and Jones lost his 5 previous fights before being selected as a safe opponent for Robinson.. It was a matter of styles because Robinson continuously refused a rematch with Jones.. SRR was never comfortable with strong, tough men who could apply strong pressure with a slick inside game.. Robinson was a brawler more than a boxer and he never learned how to box those tough guys off like a Floyd Mayweather.. Duran would have to be at his best like he was for Leonard-Duran 1...

Duran would need to apply the kind of pressure Ralph Jones did while doing a good job of boxing -- much like he did in beating Iran Barkley at age 37... Barkley was taller than Robinson, but not as tall or long armed as Tommy Hearns -- so Duran was able to reach Barkley better than Hearns.. Duran was a little pudgy and overweight for both Barkley and Hagler, but he made his skills work well against the man who beat Tommy Hearns twice.. Duran would need to be in better physical condition and maybe a little stronger for Robinson than he was for Hagler or Barkley -- but he could get it done if he were as prepared as he was for the 1st Leonard fight. He'd need a great team and a great camp to pull it off, but he could do it because Robinson was so hittable.

Kalan wrote:I don't think it's a fair comparison because Duran turned pro as a bantamweight and Robinson turned pro as a lightweight... However, guys who could fight inside like Ralph Jones gave Robinson tons of trouble... Jones was pretty slick on the inside and drove SRR from ring post to ring post...

I don't think it was the layoff because Robinson was coming off a tune-up fight and Jones lost his 5 previous fights before being selected as a safe opponent for Robinson.. It was a matter of styles because Robinson continuously refused a rematch with Jones.. SRR was never comfortable with strong, tough men who could apply strong pressure with a slick inside game.. Robinson was a brawler more than a boxer and he never learned how to box those tough guys off like a Floyd Mayweather.. Duran would have to be at his best like he was for Leonard-Duran 1...

Duran would need to apply the kind of pressure Ralph Jones did while doing a good job of boxing -- much like he did in beating Iran Barkley at age 37... Barkley was taller than Robinson, but not as tall or long armed as Tommy Hearns -- so Duran was able to reach Barkley better than Hearns.. Duran was a little pudgy and overweight for both Barkley and Hagler, but he made his skills work well against the man who beat Tommy Hearns twice.. Duran would need to be in better physical condition and maybe a little stronger for Robinson than he was for Hagler or Barkley -- but he could get it done if he were as prepared as he was for the 1st Leonard fight. He'd need a great team and a great camp to pull it off, but he could do it because Robinson was so hittable.

You got a point, kalan.

It's not just Robinson's Middleweight Title Defense record of 3-3... I always thought he was the most overrated boxer in history since they started doing the P4P thing to promote him.. He was very charismatic and that always leads to people to rank you up in the quasars.. His shoe laces had to be tied just so and his trunks had to fit just so.. his hair had to be just right.. He wore stuff like lime green slacks.. and wanted his Cadillacs painted "Flamingo" he is said to have popularized the pink Cadillac. His tailored suits. That image building works for you. It's not bullshlt.