Page 8 of 11
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 10 Jul 2015, 18:26
by elmersalsa
147-144 in favor of Duran
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 10 Jul 2015, 18:38
by caldo2025
keithmoonhangover wrote:elmersalsa wrote:caldo2025 wrote:if IF's and BUT's were peanuts and nuts, we'd all have a plentiful Christmas. I love how people say IF this and IF that when it comes to SRL. The guy was one of the best ever, plain and simple. He made Duran quit in the ring and made Hagler retire. People say how Hagler was old when they fought, it was a year after Hagler knocked out the Beast Mugabi and under two years removed from the best 3 rounds in history vs. Tommy Hearns. GIve Sugar Ray Leonard the credit that he deserves.
Hagler fought SRL when he was 33 years old. GGG is 33 years old right now. Is he over the hill? The Facts are: Marvelous Marvin Hagler was a top P4P fighter at 33 years old and knocking everyone out. SRL, comes out of retirement and pulled one of the greatest upsets in the history of boxing. The fight was close but he clearly won the fight with the most clear and effective punches and better defense. Give the guy his due already because I've never seen a boxer with the heart like Sugar Ray Leonard.
You came too late for the conversation, mate. Nobody discrediting Leonard. I got him in the top 20 p4p all time.
The argument in here was, or, is, if he was better or superior like Alp said than Duran. My question is, how is he superior when both were at their A GAME, DURAN WHUPPED HIM.
One statement, one question.
Statement, Leonard was not on his A GAME in the first fight. If you asked 100 boxing experts, I'm sure the majority of them would agree with me.
Question. What is your scorecard of the first fight?
Well, I do think that you need to give Duran some credit for Ray not coming in 100% because Roberto was menacing and scary. He even scared me! His eyes were like Charles Manson and he was out for blood. Ray even admits to this day that he got psyched out in that first one and he was scared. He actually admitted to be scared. So for the same reason Mike Tyson won most of his bouts before the first bell, you have to give Duran credit for Ray not being on his A game.
With that said, I agreed completely with the decision and I think one round early was the difference in the fight. There were several close ones early that Ray just looked scared and Roberto chased him all around so I agree with the 1 point differential scoring.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 10 Jul 2015, 18:49
by keithmoonhangover
:x
elmersalsa wrote:147-144 in favor of Duran
So on your card, if Leonard had won two more rounds he would have won the fight. Interesting.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 10 Jul 2015, 20:13
by Scypion
elmersalsa wrote:keithmoonhangover wrote:elmersalsa wrote:
And Hagler had too many ring wars. It took a toll on him. He even was missing badly in that fight.
Why the fight did not happened in '82? Different story.
Leonard comes back in '84 and look what Kevin Howard did to him. Imagine a Marvelous, full in his prime in that same venue? It would've been a DISASTER. Or Thomas Hearns? Hearns would've blasted him.
Why can you not give Leonard credit for what he achieved?
I give him credit. He was the best of the 80s. You're the one that don't give Manos de Piedra credit at all
Leonard was one of the best of the 80's. There was also Holmes, Hagler, Sanchez, Tyson, etc. Michael Spinks was also very good right up to his fight with Tyson. Never lost before that beating Holmes twice, Qawi (Braxton), Cooney, etc.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 11 Jul 2015, 23:44
by elmersalsa
keithmoonhangover wrote::x
elmersalsa wrote:147-144 in favor of Duran
So on your card, if Leonard had won two more rounds he would have won the fight. Interesting.
Nah, bro. I only saw Leonard winning 3 rounds. Duran won 6, and 6 rounds were even. Why? Because of Leonard CLUTCHING AND GRABBING THE WHOLE FIGHT. It makes me laugh when folks believed the media that Sugar Ray "slugged it out with Duran". If he would've really slugged it out with Duran, he would've been knocked out.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 09:07
by keithmoonhangover
elmersalsa wrote:keithmoonhangover wrote::x
elmersalsa wrote:147-144 in favor of Duran
So on your card, if Leonard had won two more rounds he would have won the fight. Interesting.
Nah, bro. I only saw Leonard winning 3 rounds. Duran won 6, and 6 rounds were even. Why? Because of Leonard CLUTCHING AND GRABBING THE WHOLE FIGHT. It makes me laugh when folks believed the media that Sugar Ray "slugged it out with Duran". If he would've really slugged it out with Duran, he would've been knocked out.
So you only had Duran winning SIX rounds? Sorry, didn't you say it was a whupping?
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 09:24
by palooka
I've only watched the the bout 3 times or so but can't remember it being a maul not spoiled by excessive holding. It was a fantastic bout, closely contested, won by the right man who had a fantastic record, over 70 bouts and against top opposition. Leonard wasn't a spoiler and he wasn't a boxer afraid of putting himself in the line of fire. I far more enjoyed Duran's persona over Leonard's but Ray Leonard was not a soft touch, afraid of challenge and he learned from the bout and improved.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 12:44
by elmersalsa
keithmoonhangover wrote:
So you only had Duran winning SIX rounds? Sorry, didn't you say it was a whupping?
It was a WHUPPING. Duran won double of the three rounds that Leonard only won, ain't he?
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 13:16
by keithmoonhangover
elmersalsa wrote:keithmoonhangover wrote:
So you only had Duran winning SIX rounds? Sorry, didn't you say it was a whupping?
It was a WHUPPING. Duran won double of the three rounds that Leonard only won, ain't he?
Absolutely, Duran won the fight. It was a close fight.
You and just have a different opinion of what a whupping is.
To me, a whupping is a one sided fight where one fighter takes a beating and barely wins a round.
Yours idea of a whupping is a close fight, where one guy wins six rounds, draws six and loses three.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 14:42
by palooka
A whipping was Duran v DeJesus 3 or Leonard v Green.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 17:59
by elmersalsa
keithmoonhangover wrote:elmersalsa wrote:keithmoonhangover wrote:
So you only had Duran winning SIX rounds? Sorry, didn't you say it was a whupping?
It was a WHUPPING. Duran won double of the three rounds that Leonard only won, ain't he?
Absolutely, Duran won the fight. It was a close fight.
You and just have a different opinion of what a whupping is.
To me, a whupping is a one sided fight where one fighter takes a beating and barely wins a round.
Yours idea of a whupping is a close fight, where one guy wins six rounds, draws six and loses three.
Whatever, bro. The video showed different than the scorecards. Duran dominated the fight from start to finish. He was in COMPLETE CONTROL OF THE FIGHT. And that's with Leonard clutching and grabbing the whole fight.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 18:02
by keithmoonhangover
elmersalsa wrote:Whatever, bro. The video showed different than the scorecards. Duran dominated the fight from start to finish. He was in COMPLETE CONTROL OF THE FIGHT. And that's with Leonard clutching and grabbing the whole fight.
Complete control is Tyson-Biggs or Chavez-Rosario. Not winning by a three point margin.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 12 Jul 2015, 18:07
by elmersalsa
keithmoonhangover wrote:elmersalsa wrote:Whatever, bro. The video showed different than the scorecards. Duran dominated the fight from start to finish. He was in COMPLETE CONTROL OF THE FIGHT. And that's with Leonard clutching and grabbing the whole fight.
Complete control is Tyson-Biggs or Chavez-Rosario. Not winning by a three point margin.
Watch the fight again, without being biased, and the video itself proved that it was a complete control of the great Roberto Duran. If a fighter just wins 3 rounds in a 15 round fight, then, the other fighter dominated him.
Watch Duran's ring generalship and skills. He made him miss so many blows that it was UNBELIEVABLE. THAT FIGHT WAS NOT A CLOSE FIGHT IN MY ESTIMATION. DURAN WHUPPED HIM.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 13 Jul 2015, 14:53
by keithmoonhangover
elmersalsa wrote:keithmoonhangover wrote:elmersalsa wrote:Whatever, bro. The video showed different than the scorecards. Duran dominated the fight from start to finish. He was in COMPLETE CONTROL OF THE FIGHT. And that's with Leonard clutching and grabbing the whole fight.
Complete control is Tyson-Biggs or Chavez-Rosario. Not winning by a three point margin.
Watch the fight again, without being biased, and the video itself proved that it was a complete control of the great Roberto Duran. If a fighter just wins 3 rounds in a 15 round fight, then, the other fighter dominated him.
Watch Duran's ring generalship and skills. He made him miss so many blows that it was UNBELIEVABLE. THAT FIGHT WAS NOT A CLOSE FIGHT IN MY ESTIMATION. DURAN WHUPPED HIM.
How can it not be a close fight if you only have Duran by three rounds?
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 13 Jul 2015, 17:02
by elmersalsa
keithmoonhangover wrote:
How can it not be a close fight if you only have Duran by three rounds?
Duran won double the rounds Leonard won. See the fight again. It was a masterpiece by the great Roberto Duran
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 13 Jul 2015, 17:04
by keithmoonhangover
elmersalsa wrote:keithmoonhangover wrote:
How can it not be a close fight if you only have Duran by three rounds?
Duran won double the rounds Leonard won. See the fight again. It was a masterpiece by the great Roberto Duran
I've watched the fight again. It was a close fight. If it was a masterpiece or a whupping, Duran would have won nearly all the rounds.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 14 Jul 2015, 08:26
by palooka
If we agree Leonard won 3 rounds and Duran 6 then there are 6 rounds that are contentious and too close to give to either man - that is neither a masterpiece or a whopping. Duran v Palomino or Duran v Moore were shopping, Duran v Barckley was a masterpiece.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 14 Jul 2015, 09:10
by elmersalsa
keithmoonhangover wrote:elmersalsa wrote:keithmoonhangover wrote:
How can it not be a close fight if you only have Duran by three rounds?
Duran won double the rounds Leonard won. See the fight again. It was a masterpiece by the great Roberto Duran
I've watched the fight again. It was a close fight. If it was a masterpiece or a whupping, Duran would have won nearly all the rounds.
You don't have to win all the rounds for a whupping or masterpiece.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 14 Jul 2015, 09:11
by elmersalsa
palooka wrote:If we agree Leonard won 3 rounds and Duran 6 then there are 6 rounds that are contentious and too close to give to either man - that is neither a masterpiece or a whopping. Duran v Palomino or Duran v Moore were shopping, Duran v Barckley was a masterpiece.
It was a whupping. Look at Sugar Ray's pictures after the fight. He looked whipped to me
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 14 Jul 2015, 09:37
by palooka
elmersalsa wrote:palooka wrote:If we agree Leonard won 3 rounds and Duran 6 then there are 6 rounds that are contentious and too close to give to either man - that is neither a masterpiece or a whopping. Duran v Palomino or Duran v Moore were shopping, Duran v Barckley was a masterpiece.
It was a whupping. Look at Sugar Ray's pictures after the fight. He looked whipped to me
Look at Duran's picture in the fight in Duran v Leonard 2, he looked whopped and whipped to me.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 14 Jul 2015, 09:50
by keithmoonhangover
elmersalsa wrote:palooka wrote:If we agree Leonard won 3 rounds and Duran 6 then there are 6 rounds that are contentious and too close to give to either man - that is neither a masterpiece or a whopping. Duran v Palomino or Duran v Moore were shopping, Duran v Barckley was a masterpiece.
It was a whupping. Look at Sugar Ray's pictures after the fight. He looked whipped to me
Did Duran ever take a whupping in any of his fights? If so, which ones?
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 14 Jul 2015, 09:51
by palooka
keithmoonhangover wrote:elmersalsa wrote:palooka wrote:If we agree Leonard won 3 rounds and Duran 6 then there are 6 rounds that are contentious and too close to give to either man - that is neither a masterpiece or a whopping. Duran v Palomino or Duran v Moore were shopping, Duran v Barckley was a masterpiece.
It was a whupping. Look at Sugar Ray's pictures after the fight. He looked whipped to me
Did Duran ever take a whupping in any of his fights? If so, which ones?
He was doing well against Hearns.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 14 Jul 2015, 09:58
by keithmoonhangover
palooka wrote:He was doing well against Hearns.
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 14 Jul 2015, 11:31
by elmersalsa
keithmoonhangover wrote:palooka wrote:He was doing well against Hearns.
Everybody gets whuppped. Some at their very best like Leonard got with Duran, and some when they're not at their very best like many boxers had
Re: Duran vs Leonard I: 35 Years Later, Duran's Finest Hour
Posted: 14 Jul 2015, 12:06
by keithmoonhangover
elmersalsa wrote:keithmoonhangover wrote:palooka wrote:He was doing well against Hearns.
Everybody gets whuppped. Some at their very best like Leonard got with Duran, and some when they're not at their very best like many boxers had
The difference between Leonard and Duran is that Leonard would never quit in the middle of a fight, in his prime on not, Leonard would never do that, neither would Hearns or Hagler.