BoxRec

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:I imagine that is people who are still pissed off about the decision in Leonard/Hagler or they are swept up in the machismo of Duran's performance.

I thought Leonard won the fight. But Hearns was the number 1 contender and Leonard should not have been allowed to leapfrog like he did.

I also votes for Leonard in this poll.

It was a great achievement and I scored the fight for Leonard too. I just understand how someone could prefer Duran taking it to the bigger man in a great fight as opposed to Ray outsmarting Hagler in a somewhat negative performance. Like I said, Duran was more impressive but beating Hagler is the greater historical victory.

Ezzard wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:Yes Barkley beat Hearns. However you know darn well that Barkley's overall career was not that impressive.
Is it a big win for the other 18 guys that beat the great Iran Barkley?
If it was Leonard that beat Barkley nobody would think much of it.

Do you really want to get off track and compare the character of Duran and Leonard? We really have no idea what Leonard did or not do to his wife.
Duran said nasty things about her in front of many people at press conferences. We know he did that.

Leonard was no saint but he seems a good guy.

Duran was a quitter. Leonard was not.
Duran was a dirty fighter. Leonard was not.
Duran did not give credit to his opponents. Leonard did often.
Duran made excuses for his losses. Leonard did not.

Yes we all have guys like that we really like and others that we can't stand. We are all human and have our biases.
However, I do try to rate fighters on how good they were, not how I like them. There guys in the Hall of Fame that I like but don't think should be in there. There are guys that I don't like or (or don't have a strong opinion about) that I think are worthy and have said so many times.

I don't want this to be a popularity contest. I don't give credit guys that I like that I wouldn't to someone else in a similar situation. Nor do I rip guys that don't like for things that I wouldn't for someone else.
If you can find anytimes where I done that let me know.

Cleary there is a double standard with Leonard. Leonard probably gets ripped more on BOTP than anyone but Ali. Just look at the old posts.

My point was simply that you accuse everyone of the a double standard that you yourself practice.

You are not only unable to accept that some people think Duran's accomplishment was better, you're not even prepared to accept that many people think it's close.

Leonard's win was meteroric.

Duran beating Barkley was akin to the Leonard who fought Norris and/or Camacho beating a peak Marvin Johnson at 175.

That's quite something.

Not really. Leonard was a part time fighter when he fought Norris. Camacho? Seriously? Leonard had not fought in 5 years when he fought Camacho. Duran was still an active fighter fighting regularly when he fought Barkley.

And Iran Barkley is not in the same class as Terry Norris, or Camacho or Marvin Johnson for that matter.

Sugar Ray Robinson beat better fighters at Duran's age to win a real world title.
Sam Langford was beating top fighters in his late 30s and 40's
Archie Moore beat better fighters when he was older.

There are many examples of guys beating much better fighters than Barkley when they were older than Duran and they had to move up in weight as well. Roberto "Forever a Lightweight Duran" had been fighting at or above 160 for a long time by then.
Not to mention heavyweights like Foreman who was much older than Duran when he beat Moorer. Walcott was about the same age when he won the title against a real champion,Ezzard Charles.

Find me one other example of a fighter who was off for at least three years and beat a great fighter comparable to Marvin Hagler. I don't think there is a similar case in more than 100 years of boxing.

Ambling Alp wrote:

Ezzard wrote:

Ambling Alp wrote:Yes Barkley beat Hearns. However you know darn well that Barkley's overall career was not that impressive.
Is it a big win for the other 18 guys that beat the great Iran Barkley?
If it was Leonard that beat Barkley nobody would think much of it.

Do you really want to get off track and compare the character of Duran and Leonard? We really have no idea what Leonard did or not do to his wife.
Duran said nasty things about her in front of many people at press conferences. We know he did that.

Leonard was no saint but he seems a good guy.

Duran was a quitter. Leonard was not.
Duran was a dirty fighter. Leonard was not.
Duran did not give credit to his opponents. Leonard did often.
Duran made excuses for his losses. Leonard did not.

Yes we all have guys like that we really like and others that we can't stand. We are all human and have our biases.
However, I do try to rate fighters on how good they were, not how I like them. There guys in the Hall of Fame that I like but don't think should be in there. There are guys that I don't like or (or don't have a strong opinion about) that I think are worthy and have said so many times.

I don't want this to be a popularity contest. I don't give credit guys that I like that I wouldn't to someone else in a similar situation. Nor do I rip guys that don't like for things that I wouldn't for someone else.
If you can find anytimes where I done that let me know.

Cleary there is a double standard with Leonard. Leonard probably gets ripped more on BOTP than anyone but Ali. Just look at the old posts.

My point was simply that you accuse everyone of the a double standard that you yourself practice.

You are not only unable to accept that some people think Duran's accomplishment was better, you're not even prepared to accept that many people think it's close.

Leonard's win was meteroric.

Duran beating Barkley was akin to the Leonard who fought Norris and/or Camacho beating a peak Marvin Johnson at 175.

That's quite something.

Not really. Leonard was a part time fighter when he fought Norris. Camacho?

I love this. You're the first to complain about anyone saying Duran was out of shape for a fight (fair enough, it's his own choice) but if Ray wants to fight part-time that's different. Or if Ray wants to retire for 3 years, that's a special case.

Duran chose not to train properly (his fault). Leonard chose to be a part-time fighter (his fault). He chose to retire and make a comeback (his choice).

All I'm doing is being consistent and sticking to your "objective" criteria.

We always make allowances for fighters fighting when they are well past their best. Most fighters can't help themselves and fight when they no longer have it.

All I am saying is that Leonard was not close to his best when those fights happenend.

If you want to say that Duran being 37 (and active) when he fought Barkley is a wash with Leonard being 30 and inactive for 3 years is a wash, fine. However, it still goes down to Marvin Hagler being a much, much better fighter than Iran Hagler.

He didn't really choose to be off for 3 years. If it was not for his eye problems, he would have been fighting regularly from 1982-1987.
He probably missed atleast 10 fights that he would have had.
You have to factor in several factors, such as age, but inactivity as well. Leonard was 34 and had not fought in more than a year when he fought Norris. This was not the same fighter who fought Duran in 1980 and Heans in 1981.

Leonard's loss to Camacho? Come on. He was 40 and had not fought in 6 years.

I don't include Duran's losses to Camacho, Pazienza, Joppy,Lawlor, Sims when he was way past it. Nor his loss to Leonard in their 3rd fight.

If you are really going to count Leonard's fight with Camacho , then you certainly have to count Leonard Duran and Leonard's 3rd fight.
Duran was two years younger than Leonard was Leonard fought Camacho, and had been an active fighter.
Somehow I don't think you are willing to do that.

I'm not counting anything.

Leonard losing to Norris means nothing to me. Had he won it would have been a big, big deal.

Had Duran lost to Barkley it would have meant nothing to me. But he won it so it was a big deal.

You can't mock Duran for having a 'sore tummy' but wave through Ray because he had a 'sore eye'. You can't laugh at Duran for being fat and out of shape but pardon Leonard for being a part-time fighter.

You are saying that one man has 'excuses' but the other has 'factors'.

Ezz,

You are wasting your time. Alp is probably the most biased poster in this forum. It's rough because he is otherwise knowledgeable and objective. But when it comes to his favorites you may as well be dealing with a scorned woman. Double standards are abound and you can actually see in his writing that he is so love struck he doesn't even understand how insane he is.

Ezzard wrote:I'm not counting anything.

Leonard losing to Norris means nothing to me. Had he won it would have been a big, big deal.

Had Duran lost to Barkley it would have meant nothing to me. But he won it so it was a big deal.

You can't mock Duran for having a 'sore tummy' but wave through Ray because he had a 'sore eye'. You can't laugh at Duran for being fat and out of shape but pardon Leonard for being a part-time fighter.

You are saying that one man has 'excuses' but the other has 'factors'.

ezzard

Seriously, I love all the guys fom this era. Leonard without Duran, or Duran without Leonard (throw in Tommy too) it would not be the same.

If I was a billionaire...

I'd make an American cop show (like the ones from the 70s and 80s).

I'd have Marvin as the Chief, barking out his orders, always angry with them all...

I'd have Tommy and Wilfred working undercover vice (obviously this can't happen).

Ray and Roberto working homocide. I can see the scenes and hear the dialogue. It's the perfect partnership. Ray does it by the book and has to keep Roberto on a tight leash.

I'd start episode 1 with Marvin screaming down the phone to Leonard to get his ass down the station. Ray, always unruffled, kisses his wife goodbye and drops off his daughter at school. Says "hi" to everyone in the neighbourhood.

Swings by to pick up Duran. Durans' wife hasn't seen him in 3 days and their 14 kids are running riot. Ray goes ot a down-town bar where Duran has been drinking solid for 12 hours and is involved in a bar room brawl. Duran and Ray then go shoulder to shoulder against the bad guys etc...

Ahh, well, it's just the kind of nonsense that makes me smile...

Hearns would deliver the best episodes.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Hearns would deliver the best episodes.

Ezzard wrote:Seriously, I love all the guys fom this era. Leonard without Duran, or Duran without Leonard (throw in Tommy too) it would not be the same.

If I was a billionaire...

I'd make an American cop show (like the ones from the 70s and 80s).

I'd have Marvin as the Chief, barking out his orders, always angry with them all...

I'd have Tommy and Wilfred working undercover vice (obviously this can't happen).

Ray and Roberto working homocide. I can see the scenes and hear the dialogue. It's the perfect partnership. Ray does it by the book and has to keep Roberto on a tight leash.

I'd start episode 1 with Marvin screaming down the phone to Leonard to get his ass down the station. Ray, always unruffled, kisses his wife goodbye and drops off his daughter at school. Says "hi" to everyone in the neighbourhood.

Swings by to pick up Duran. Durans' wife hasn't seen him in 3 days and their 14 kids are running riot. Ray goes ot a down-town bar where Duran has been drinking solid for 12 hours and is involved in a bar room brawl. Duran and Ray then go shoulder to shoulder against the bad guys etc...

Ahh, well, it's just the kind of nonsense that makes me smile...

As hilarious as it is random. WTF-funny

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Seriously, I love all the guys fom this era. Leonard without Duran, or Duran without Leonard (throw in Tommy too) it would not be the same.

If I was a billionaire...

I'd make an American cop show (like the ones from the 70s and 80s).

I'd have Marvin as the Chief, barking out his orders, always angry with them all...

I'd have Tommy and Wilfred working undercover vice (obviously this can't happen).

Ray and Roberto working homocide. I can see the scenes and hear the dialogue. It's the perfect partnership. Ray does it by the book and has to keep Roberto on a tight leash.

I'd start episode 1 with Marvin screaming down the phone to Leonard to get his ass down the station. Ray, always unruffled, kisses his wife goodbye and drops off his daughter at school. Says "hi" to everyone in the neighbourhood.

Swings by to pick up Duran. Durans' wife hasn't seen him in 3 days and their 14 kids are running riot. Ray goes ot a down-town bar where Duran has been drinking solid for 12 hours and is involved in a bar room brawl. Duran and Ray then go shoulder to shoulder against the bad guys etc...

Ahh, well, it's just the kind of nonsense that makes me smile...

As hilarious as it is random. WTF-funny

You've no idea how long I've spent thinking all this up...

brilliant, Ezz

i couldn't help thinking about Benitez as the vice cop. his sergeant is always looking for him, but, where's Wilfred? Wilfred's snuck into the offtrack betting joint... Wilfred's just hanging at the bodega... Wilfred's getting tipsy in some off-Broadway dive..... Wilfred's having some banter with a hooker and you get the impression she's not just a casual acquaintance, you know...... The Sergeant, 'why Wilfred I oughtta....', longsuffering partner Hearns with arms and palms outstretched in that 'man it's Wilfred, what can i do?' gesture of longsufferers the world over.

Counter-puncher wrote:brilliant, Ezz

i couldn't help thinking about Benitez as the vice cop. his sergeant is always looking for him, but, where's Wilfred? Wilfred's snuck into the offtrack betting joint... Wilfred's just hanging at the bodega... Wilfred's getting tipsy in some off-Broadway dive..... Wilfred's having some banter with a hooker and you get the impression she's not just a casual acquaintance, you know...... The Sergeant, 'why Wilfred I oughtta....', longsuffering partner Hearns with arms and palms outstretched in that 'man it's Wilfred, what can i do?' gesture of longsufferers the world over.

We could co-write this...

We just need a backer...

Ezzard wrote:I'm not counting anything.

Leonard losing to Norris means nothing to me. Had he won it would have been a big, big deal.

Had Duran lost to Barkley it would have meant nothing to me. But he won it so it was a big deal.

You can't mock Duran for having a 'sore tummy' but wave through Ray because he had a 'sore eye'. You can't laugh at Duran for being fat and out of shape but pardon Leonard for being a part-time fighter.

You are saying that one man has 'excuses' but the other has 'factors'.

You did say in an earlier post that "Duran beating Barkley was akin to the Leonard who fought Norris and/or Camacho beating a peak Marvin Johnson at 175."
I was responding that no it was not. Had Leonard beat Norris it would have been a much bigger deal than Duran beating Barkley. Why? Becasue Norris was a lot better fighter than Barkley. Had Leonard somehow beaten Camacho (at the age of 40 and with 6 years off) you would rate that as even with Durans win over Barkley at the age of 37.
Leonard would have been 3 years older, off for 6 years, and beaten a much better opponent. But you would call Duran's win over Barkley as even. Priceless.

Ray Robinson beat Basilio when he was 36. He had a draw with Fullmer when he was 39. Thats is a big deal.
Many other fighters beat guys much better than Iran Barkley when they were older than Duran.

Find someone else that beat anyone near Hagler's ability that had been out as long as Leonard. There doesn't seem to be another case. Leonard's win over Hagler is much more unique and a much better achievement.

Yes Duran beat Barkley. That is a good sign that Duran was a lot better than Iran Barkley. No argument there.
However it is not the same as beating Marvin Hagler. Duran tried that and failed.
This may seem like a novel thought, but who you beat should be a factor.

I don't believe Duran had a "sore tummy" (Though that is one of his excuses.) Like most people (including his own trainers) I think he quit because he didn't think he was going to win.
I never said anything about Duran being out of shape.

A sore eye? Seriously? A detached retina is am awful lot more than a sore eye. It has almost always ended a fighter's career. Leonard quit the sport on Doctors advice. There was a very good chance that he could go blind in that eye. He went through many exams and surgury to help his eye. It was still against Doctor's orders that he came back. Very few people would have in his situation.

These were circumstances that were beyond Leonard's control. That is not just some lame excuse.
For you not to acknowledge that is absolutley unbelievable.

If you and Saad think I am so biased toward's Leonard, why don't you pull up some old post that I started praising Leonard? You would think there would be plenty. See if you can find one. I have been a member for more than 5 years.

Why would I bother with that? Your bias is on display in this thread and any thread that mentions Ali or Leonard. I can barely hold down my lunch reading your current offerings on the two. I wouldn't go back and read your nuthugging archives for anything less than money.

Ezzard wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

Ezzard wrote:Seriously, I love all the guys fom this era. Leonard without Duran, or Duran without Leonard (throw in Tommy too) it would not be the same.

If I was a billionaire...

I'd make an American cop show (like the ones from the 70s and 80s).

I'd have Marvin as the Chief, barking out his orders, always angry with them all...

I'd have Tommy and Wilfred working undercover vice (obviously this can't happen).

Ray and Roberto working homocide. I can see the scenes and hear the dialogue. It's the perfect partnership. Ray does it by the book and has to keep Roberto on a tight leash.

I'd start episode 1 with Marvin screaming down the phone to Leonard to get his ass down the station. Ray, always unruffled, kisses his wife goodbye and drops off his daughter at school. Says "hi" to everyone in the neighbourhood.

Swings by to pick up Duran. Durans' wife hasn't seen him in 3 days and their 14 kids are running riot. Ray goes ot a down-town bar where Duran has been drinking solid for 12 hours and is involved in a bar room brawl. Duran and Ray then go shoulder to shoulder against the bad guys etc...

Ahh, well, it's just the kind of nonsense that makes me smile...

As hilarious as it is random. WTF-funny

You've no idea how long I've spent thinking all this up...

Yet you've wrote homocide. Pun intended I think not.

SUGARRAYSMELEE wrote:Duran over Barkley, because Hagler beat Leonard.

Interesting... I actually scored Duran-Barkley to Barkley by a single point so the arguement could go either way. Regardless, Leonard over Hagler was the greater achievement and Hagler was FAR greater than Barkley.

Given the controversial nature of the Leonard - Hagler fight and the fact that Barkley was the 'hot' fighter, fighting the 'past his best' legend, then you have to go with Duran's win.

Thoroughly enjoyed both fights, with the deciding factor, for me, being that Hagler was very much on the downslide (although still dangerous and fit) and Duran was thought of as 'finished'.

They say every great fighter has one last great performance, we can all agree that this was Duran's.

I think Duran's fight and performance against camacho are overlooked. That was the last time he was in great shape and I thought he won the fight. Certainly not comparable to Barkley, but he looked real good.

I must admit, even I did not expect the voting to be so near.

I think, clearly, Leonard's accomplishment is greater.