BoxRec

Posted: **02 Jan 2026, 12:04**

Tony1244 wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 11:41 Duran had to lose too much weight too fast. Whose fault was that? Duran's obviously. Leonard took advantage of Duran's lack of discipline.

That's the answer.

Leonard even said this himself.

Posted: **02 Jan 2026, 12:10**

Excuses, excuses. Boo hoo.

Posted: **02 Jan 2026, 12:14**

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 12:10 Excuses, excuses. Boo hoo.

I said it was Duran's fault.

Posted: **02 Jan 2026, 13:16**

Tony1244 wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 12:14
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 12:10 Excuses, excuses. Boo hoo.
I said it was Duran's fault.

It wasn't Roberto Duran's fault. It was his manager, Carlos Eleta's fault. He took the money and betrayed his fighter for $8 million dollars. Also Don King, Duran's promoter since 1975, betrayed him.

Posted: **02 Jan 2026, 13:28**

The Duran fans use excuses as "evidence" that he wasn't at his best; therefore Leonard's was legit Leonard's win in the second fight is not as legit as Duran's win in the first fight.

Tony, sorry if it looked like I was criticizing you, That was not my intention.

One thing that always cracked me up from Duran fans:
In the first fight, Leonard, fought Duran's fight. He did not move around nearly as much as he usually did. Still Duran barely won the fight. It was pretty close. (Not arguing that Leonard should got the decision, just saying it was close.) If Duran was supposedly the better fighter, and the fight was fought on his terms, then why didn't Duran win by a lot more than he did?

Yet when Leonard fought like he normally did in the rematch, Leonard won by a clearer margin.

Posted: **02 Jan 2026, 13:52**

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 13:28 The Duran fans use excuses as "evidence" that he wasn't at his best; therefore Leonard's was legit Leonard's win in the second fight is not as legit as Duran's win in the first fight.

Tony, sorry if it looked like I was criticizing you, That was not my intention.

One thing that always cracked me up from Duran fans:
In the first fight, Leonard, fought Duran's fight. He did not move around nearly as much as he usually did. Still Duran barely won the fight. It was pretty close. (Not arguing that Leonard should got the decision, just saying it was close.) If Duran was supposedly the better fighter, and the fight was fought on his terms, then why didn't Duran win by a lot more than he did?

Yet when Leonard fought like he normally did in the rematch, Leonard won by a clearer margin.

I thought the scoring in the first fight was generous to SRL and Duran won pretty clearly. The second fight Leonard was clearly winning and the margin would have been something like 9-6 or 10-5 if Duran hadn’t quit. Blaming it on Duran’s manager is just Elmo

Posted: **02 Jan 2026, 16:43**

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 13:28 Yet when Leonard fought like he normally did in the rematch, Leonard won by a clearer margin.

You have to entertain the notion that Duran didn't allow Leonard to fight like he "normally did" in the first fight. It wasn't just a case of Leonard picking the wrong tactics. Also lets be honest, he got beat up in that first fight.

Posted: **02 Jan 2026, 17:10**

Duran wasn't at his best in New Orleans but that was his fault. I don't agree it was all his manager's fault. He wasn't the first fighter to lose a fight due to lack of disciple and common sense and he won't be the last. He should have waited. He clearly needed more time to take off the weight.

Posted: **02 Jan 2026, 17:31**

I never really bought into the idea that Leonard wanted to prove a point or was pissed at Duran so he decided to fight Roberto’s fight either.
Duran in my opinion made Ray fight Durans fight.
Sometimes a great or even good fighter will stay on you , feint , roll with the punches you throw and counter all while cutting off the ring. At times, you have to dig in and bang.
But, the second time around, Duran didn’t have it in him to do that again. It was a great performance by Duran the first time around but he couldn’t do it again. It’s on him if he wasn’t in shape , there was chicanery, a full moon, a locust swarm , whatever.

Posted: **02 Jan 2026, 18:30**

hhaehre wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 16:43
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 13:28 Yet when Leonard fought like he normally did in the rematch, Leonard won by a clearer margin.
You have to entertain the notion that Duran didn't allow Leonard to fight like he "normally did" in the first fight. It wasn't just a case of Leonard picking the wrong tactics. Also lets be honest, he got beat up in that first fight.

Leonard did not even try to move around. It wasn't that Duran wouldn't let him. It's not like Duran was some master at cutting off the ring. Round after round, Leonard went right at Duran.
Leonard got beat up? Well he gave Duran hell. He took some shots kept coming back with his own.

Posted: **02 Jan 2026, 20:14**

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 18:30 Leonard got beat up?

Yes he got beat up, just like Ali in FOTC. Both fights reasonably close on the cards, and both Leonard and Ali got beat up. Not saying these fights were easy for Duran or Frazier, but they both were clear winners on the night.

Posted: **02 Jan 2026, 20:29**

That brings up an interesting topic.
What fans consider “ beat up”.
Leonard was probably hit in that fight more than all his fights previous.
He was swollen up but never in serious trouble.
Rocked once or twice for sure but hung tough. Real tough. He was puffy afterwards for sure.
It’s almost a topic for a separate thread / conversation on what is actually considered beat up.
I’ll say this , a couple times I was in the same dressing room with other fighters who came back after their fight and they were really beat up.
It’s good fun seeing a guy come back to the room with a rearranged profile knowing you’re fighting next. lol

Posted: **02 Jan 2026, 20:33**

Hell in a fight like Duran vs Leonard. They both got beat up by my definition of "beat up".

I would imagine both of those fellas were plenty sore for a solid week after that bout at minimum. Beatings definitely have degrees though. Some guys have taken absolutely horrendous punishment in Boxing matches.

Posted: **02 Jan 2026, 20:43**

gilgamesh wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 20:33 Hell in a fight like Duran vs Leonard. They both got beat up by my definition of "beat up".

I would imagine both of those fellas were plenty sore for a solid week after that bout at minimum. Beatings definitely have degrees though. Some guys have taken absolutely horrendous punishment in Boxing matches.

True. Randal Tex Cobb comes to mind.
But according to him, it was worth it. He got cosel to put down the microphone for good after he ate punches for 15 rounds vs Holmes.

Posted: **03 Jan 2026, 03:01**

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 13:28 The Duran fans use excuses as "evidence" that he wasn't at his best; therefore Leonard's was legit Leonard's win in the second fight is not as legit as Duran's win in the first fight.

Tony, sorry if it looked like I was criticizing you, That was not my intention.

One thing that always cracked me up from Duran fans:
In the first fight, Leonard, fought Duran's fight. He did not move around nearly as much as he usually did. Still Duran barely won the fight. It was pretty close. (Not arguing that Leonard should got the decision, just saying it was close.) If Duran was supposedly the better fighter, and the fight was fought on his terms, then why didn't Duran win by a lot more than he did?

Yet when Leonard fought like he normally did in the rematch, Leonard won by a clearer margin.

Having just revisited these 2 classic bouts tonight. Let me just say that

I had the 1st bout 10 rounds to 5 for Duran.

I had the 2nd bout 5 rounds to 2 for Leonard heading into the 8th, and Leonard was obviously winning the 8th as well.

After 7 rounds in the first fight I would've had it 5 rounds to 2 for Duran. So it had flipped.

Posted: **03 Jan 2026, 05:06**

It's a shame how people get so emotional about these two. Both sets of fans, as evidenced here, still squeal their mantras and yet the actual boxers got over it all years ago.

I love all the guys from that era and are so thankful for what these two gave us.

Posted: **03 Jan 2026, 10:22**

hhaehre wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 16:43
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 13:28 Yet when Leonard fought like he normally did in the rematch, Leonard won by a clearer margin.
You have to entertain the notion that Duran didn't allow Leonard to fight like he "normally did" in the first fight. It wasn't just a case of Leonard picking the wrong tactics. Also lets be honest, he got beat up in that first fight.

Duran kicked his azz!

Posted: **03 Jan 2026, 10:28**

Expug wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 17:31 I never really bought into the idea that Leonard wanted to prove a point or was pissed at Duran so he decided to fight Roberto’s fight either.
Duran in my opinion made Ray fight Durans fight.
Sometimes a great or even good fighter will stay on you , feint , roll with the punches you throw and counter all while cutting off the ring. At times, you have to dig in and bang.
But, the second time around, Duran didn’t have it in him to do that again. It was a great performance by Duran the first time around but he couldn’t do it again. It’s on him if he wasn’t in shape , there was chicanery, a full moon, a locust swarm , whatever.

Thanks to his manager, Carlos Eleta, for throwing him to the wolves for $8 million dollars. Roberto Duran didn't get no respect, and he was the champion.

If Sugar Ray Leonard asked for time, Don King would have given him time. Both, Eleta and King betrayed, disrespected, humiliated and sold Duran in one of boxing's greatest betrayals.

Posted: **03 Jan 2026, 10:51**

gilgamesh wrote: ↑03 Jan 2026, 03:01
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 13:28 The Duran fans use excuses as "evidence" that he wasn't at his best; therefore Leonard's was legit Leonard's win in the second fight is not as legit as Duran's win in the first fight.

Tony, sorry if it looked like I was criticizing you, That was not my intention.

One thing that always cracked me up from Duran fans:
In the first fight, Leonard, fought Duran's fight. He did not move around nearly as much as he usually did. Still Duran barely won the fight. It was pretty close. (Not arguing that Leonard should got the decision, just saying it was close.) If Duran was supposedly the better fighter, and the fight was fought on his terms, then why didn't Duran win by a lot more than he did?

Yet when Leonard fought like he normally did in the rematch, Leonard won by a clearer margin.
Having just revisited these 2 classic bouts tonight. Let me just say that

I had the 1st bout 10 rounds to 5 for Duran.

I had the 2nd bout 5 rounds to 2 for Leonard heading into the 8th, and Leonard was obviously winning the 8th as well.

After 7 rounds in the first fight I would've had it 5 rounds to 2 for Duran. So it had flipped.

That’s pretty how I saw it. SRL got the benefit of the doubt from judges in the first fight, Duran in the second (the scoring was closer than it should have been at the time he quit)

Posted: **03 Jan 2026, 15:48**

elmersalsa wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 13:16
Tony1244 wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 12:14
Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑02 Jan 2026, 12:10 Excuses, excuses. Boo hoo.
I said it was Duran's fault.
It wasn't Roberto Duran's fault. It was his manager, Carlos Eleta's fault. He took the money and betrayed his fighter for $8 million dollars.

How much of the $8 million dollars did Eleta get?

Posted: **03 Jan 2026, 18:08**

a 1980 newspaper profile said Eleta was worth 900 millions dollars. I just can't see him salivating over a few million dollars and betraying Duran. In December 1980,Eleta said-in a widely distributed newspaper interview- that 2 and a half months wasn't sufficient time for Duran to get in shape because he had gotten so heavy. . Eleta blamed Duran's lack of discipline for the defeat. He also said Duran had ballooned up to 183 pounds between the first 2 Leonard bouts. Eleta never went with the excuse that anyone pressured him to take the rematch by a certain date. He placed all the blame on Duran.

Posted: **03 Jan 2026, 19:13**

goose 5 wrote: ↑03 Jan 2026, 18:08 a 1980 newspaper profile said Eleta was worth 900 millions dollars. I just can't see him salivating over a few million dollars and betraying Duran. In December 1980,Eleta said-in a widely distributed newspaper interview- that 2 and a half months wasn't sufficient time for Duran to get in shape because he had gotten so heavy. . Eleta blamed Duran's lack of discipline for the defeat. He also said Duran had ballooned up to 183 pounds between the first 2 Leonard bouts. Eleta never went with the excuse that anyone pressured him to take the rematch by a certain date. He placed all the blame on Duran.

Christ, Ricky Hatton put that much weight on all the time. Plus, Duran said himself said he was never in bad shape against Leonard.

Posted: **04 Jan 2026, 13:53**

Nor his trainers. And had 5 months between the fights. Easily enough time to get in shape.

Imagine if we had these excuses for every fighter that we do Duran. There would be an excuse for every fight.

Posted: **04 Jan 2026, 14:26**

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑04 Jan 2026, 13:53 Nor his trainers. And had 5 months between the fights. Easily enough time to get in shape.

Imagine if we had these excuses for every fighter that we do Duran. There would be an excuse for every fight.

Roberto Duran was BETRAYED by money and greed. His manager took the money and agreed for the date. Not Duran. He never told Duran how much he was getting. Don King didn't postpone the date either. Duran was the champion, the best fighter in the world and the face of boxing and didn't get the respect that he deserves.

If Sugar Ray Leonard would have asked for more time, they would have given him time. Don't you agree?

Posted: **04 Jan 2026, 15:31**

And if Duran wanted the fight to be later than November, he should not have signed for it to happen in November. He did sign for it to happen then because that was a normal time for it to have happened.

5 months after the first one. More time than Leonard, Cuevas, Palomino, Benitez, Hearns, and Hagler had after they won the title.

Enough with the crybaby BS.

BoxRec

No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?

Re: No Mas: 45 Years Later. What Really Did Happened in New Orleans?