BoxRec

keithmoonhangover wrote:A common opinion on here is that Tyson was still at his physical and mental peak going into the Douglas fight. Getting rid of Rooney, not training properly and all the distractions outside the ring made no difference and Tyson was still the spartan warrior that did Holmes on 4 and Spinks in 1.

I think it's bollocks.

Your opinion is the common one.

He was at his physical peak, but not his at his best mentally. That is his own fault. Everyone has distractions. You have to deal with them. Many fighters have different trainers. You have to deal with it.

The opinions I hold that will shock many posters.

1) Duran v Leonard I was a VERY close fight.
2) Hagler v Duran wasn't close, even though Marvin was disappointing.
3) Vito beat Hagler the first time.
4) Qawi beat Michael Spinks.
5) Rodrigo Valdes deserved at least one win against Monzon.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:A common opinion on here is that Tyson was still at his physical and mental peak going into the Douglas fight. Getting rid of Rooney, not training properly and all the distractions outside the ring made no difference and Tyson was still the spartan warrior that did Holmes on 4 and Spinks in 1.

I think it's bollocks.

Your opinion is the common one.

It should be. Tyson was never the same after Rooney.

Seamus wrote:The opinions I hold that will shock many posters.

1) Duran v Leonard I was a VERY close fight.
2) Hagler v Duran wasn't close, even though Marvin was disappointing.
3) Vito beat Hagler the first time.
4) Qawi beat Michael Spinks.
5) Rodrigo Valdes deserved at least one win against Monzon.

#1 was close.
#2 Depends on what you consider close. I had Hagler by 4 points, which is fairly close for a 15 round fight.
#3 I thought Hagler won by a point. Certainly debatable. He gave away too many rounds late which made it closer than it should have been.
#4 I thought Spinks did just enough.
#5 Which fight did you think Valdes won?

"at least one" Means he would have been happy to have either scored for him I guess.

Seamus wrote:The opinions I hold that will shock many posters.

1) Duran v Leonard I was a VERY close fight.
2) Hagler v Duran wasn't close, even though Marvin was disappointing.
3) Vito beat Hagler the first time.
4) Qawi beat Michael Spinks.
5) Rodrigo Valdes deserved at least one win against Monzon.

Agree with #1.
#3 is a stunner, because the common opinion is certainly that Hagler got robbed. I remember watching it live and thinking it could have gone either way because Hagler let Vito outwork him in several rounds. Hagler was one of my favorite fighters at the time and I was screaming at him the whole fight.
#5 I respectfully disagree. Thought Monzon won both, one by 3, the other by 2. Valdez is, however, underrated.

Cosell was all over Vito. When I watched it live I had Hagler by 3 or 5, I don't recall exactly. Years later when I watched it I had Marvin by 9 rounds. Huge robbery.

Seamus wrote:The opinions I hold that will shock many posters.

1) Duran v Leonard I was a VERY close fight.
2) Hagler v Duran wasn't close, even though Marvin was disappointing.
3) Vito beat Hagler the first time.
4) Qawi beat Michael Spinks.
5) Rodrigo Valdes deserved at least one win against Monzon.

Can see your point in 1, 2, and 5, but 3 and 4, your wrong, especially 4.When Spinks tagged Qawi, it broke his heart, and he didn't try to bully Michael anymore.

I have always disagreed with pundits over the 2nd Holyfield Bowe fight... everyone seems to believe that Bowe benefitted the most from Fan Man's interruption.. but I feel the tide of the fight was turning and that Bowe was starting to come on... still feel that without the interruption that Bowe starts to impose himself upon Evander and wins the fight...

Seamus wrote:The opinions I hold that will shock many posters.

1) Duran v Leonard I was a VERY close fight.
2) Hagler v Duran wasn't close, even though Marvin was disappointing.
3) Vito beat Hagler the first time.
4) Qawi beat Michael Spinks.
5) Rodrigo Valdes deserved at least one win against Monzon.

1) Close...but clear...and at the end one guy was all-out and the other was pacing himself...
2) Depends on what you mean by close? Had it about 4-5 round to Hagler...
3) Thought it was a close win for Marvin but not a robbery
4) Very close and if Qawi had got the decision not a robbery
5) Don't see this in their fights...

I'd be much more comfortable with a card that read 15-0 Hagler than one that was 8-7 Antuofermo.

jont wrote:I have always disagreed with pundits over the 2nd Holyfield Bowe fight... everyone seems to believe that Bowe benefitted the most from Fan Man's interruption.. but I feel the tide of the fight was turning and that Bowe was starting to come on... still feel that without the interruption that Bowe starts to impose himself upon Evander and wins the fight...

I agree. I think if fan man doesn't happen., Bowe wins the fight.

Another thread made me think of this: It was better when "title fights"were 15 rounds. I disagree. Yes there were some memorable turnarounds in major fights in those last three rounds. However, the vast majority of the time the fighter ahead after 12 won anyway.

There were countless boring fights that went 15. Now they mercifully end after 12.
If they went back to 15 fighter would pace themselves even more and many fights would be even more boring.

Sal Sanchez had yet to hit his peak and would've gone on to achieve much more. Never agreed with this line of thinking.

Seamus wrote: 4) Qawi beat Michael Spinks.

You also thought Vasquez was robbed against Whitaker, so I shouldn't be too surprised.

You're confusing me with someone else.

You're not the same Seamus from ESB?

No. Don't think I've ever even visited the site.

Oh.

Ambling Alp II wrote:Another thread made me think of this: It was better when "title fights"were 15 rounds. I disagree. Yes there were some memorable turnarounds in major fights in those last three rounds. However, the vast majority of the time the fighter ahead after 12 won anyway.

There were countless boring fights that went 15. Now they mercifully end after 12.
If they went back to 15 fighter would pace themselves even more and many fights would be even more boring.

I will always prefer 15. It made it special. Stamina and endurance played more of a part in it and it was harder for fighter to coast. 12 round swung the pendulum in favour of the sprinters...

SamWise72 wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

1. Duran won when it mattered the most. When BOTH were in the top of their games, at their very best and in shape for the bout. Give Duran credit for that. The second fight everybody knows that it was AN OFF NIGHT by Duran.

I think there's a lot of merit in all your other points, but not this one. That fight was incredibly close, even though Leonard chose to stand and trade and try to out-man Duran. That was brave, but stupid; I genuinely believe nobody could out-man Duran (imagine Duran Chavez at lightweight!). Given that it was that close in those circumstances, I have no doubt Leonard would have won if he'd fought his fight, as he did in the second. Perhaps Duran wouldn't have quit, but I can't see how he would have won.

Now, that doesn't detract from Duran's victory at all; he fought the SRL who was in front of him, and he won, but if we're comparing who was the greatest boxer, then what Leonard could have done has to be taken into account.

See, the problem of some people got is the misconception that Duran was nothing but a slugger, a brute, an animal that could not box. Duran outboxed Leonard in the first fight. Leonard was VERY SURPRISED at Duran's speed. Plus, he was the bigger guy, the faster guy and the so called "more intelligent" guy that got outsmart by the so called "slugger". Duran could box and counterpunch, too. And he did that.

In the second fight, if Leonard slug it out with Duran, he would have won anyway. Duran was in an OFF NIGHT. Leonard was FASTER on the INSIDE EXCHANGES, that was supposed to be Duran's territory and domain. Duran was SLOW on hands and feet. That was not the man in Montreal. No way.

In other words, no matter what, Leonard would have won the second fight, even by dancing around, trying to frustrate or slug it out. I am not saying that Duran is invincible, nobody is, BUT I THINK IN THE SECOND FIGHT, WITH DURAN ON SHAPE, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A BETTER FIGHT, NO MATTER THE OUTCOME.

BoxBuzz wrote:I would say that at their mutual best, Duran wins. Because it happened.

The second fight was a disaster for Roberto, but you can't say it was him at his best. He was so full of himself after beating Ray, that he just thought he could do it in his sleep. Not sure he ever totally recovered. He was never quite as good after that, though he remained damn good.

And for this, the mental aspect, I'm inclined to agree that Ray was better, Not because he was a better "fighter" but because he was a better "winner".

Not sure Ray EVER went into a fight over confident. And that is one major defining feature of a great winner...and a great fighter.

I LIKE this post. I also believe that Sugar Ray had better sportsmanship than Duran.

Ezzard wrote:This Duran-Leonard one will always rumble on.

Leonard was an aggressive fighter, who planted his feet and went looking for the other guy. He moved well, sure…

In the first fight they stand off one another early on. Duran wins the long range duel. He almost floors Leonard in round 2 and then beats him up for the next few rounds.

Leonard moved up close because he was safest there. Because on the outside he was losing. Watch the fight. Duran nails him early. The next 4-5 rounds are about survival. Duran was ahead on the cards. Leonard had to do two things (1) be more aggressive to try and close the gap on the scorecards and (2) avoid standing off because Duran was picking him off.

At this point Duran was a counter-punching swarmer…not some kind of crude swinging whirling dervish. Leonard was an exciting, come forward boxer puncher, not a dancer who looked to jab and clutch his way to points decisions.

Saying Ray fought the wrong fight is fine, if you also accept Duran fought the wrong fight in the rematch.

I love this post. To me, it is the truth.

Ezzard wrote:This Duran-Leonard one will always rumble on.

Leonard was an aggressive fighter, who planted his feet and went looking for the other guy. He moved well, sure…

In the first fight they stand off one another early on. Duran wins the long range duel. He almost floors Leonard in round 2 and then beats him up for the next few rounds.

Leonard moved up close because he was safest there. Because on the outside he was losing. Watch the fight. Duran nails him early. The next 4-5 rounds are about survival. Duran was ahead on the cards. Leonard had to do two things (1) be more aggressive to try and close the gap on the scorecards and (2) avoid standing off because Duran was picking him off.

At this point Duran was a counter-punching swarmer…not some kind of crude swinging whirling dervish. Leonard was an exciting, come forward boxer puncher, not a dancer who looked to jab and clutch his way to points decisions.

Saying Ray fought the wrong fight is fine, if you also accept Duran fought the wrong fight in the rematch.

I like Leonard and can't stand Duran, any you are vice versa, so we will seldom find common ground here.

I disagree with much of this. First, Leonard was much more effective fighting at long range. Sure, Duran will still have his moments when Leonard fought from the outside, and sure Leonard will occasionally have his fighting on the inside. However, generally Leonard is much better off fighting from long range. He could use his speed, reach, and clean punching advantages there.

I don't accept that Duran fought the "wrong" fight the 2nd time. He tried to do what he did in the first fight and what he tried to do in most of his fights. However, Leonard fought a completely different fight and more like he normally did. The result was that Leonard handled him much easier. Had they fought a 3rd time six months or a year later, the result would have been similar to the 2nd fight except Duran probably would not have quit again; he would have lost a lopsided decision.

There is a reason that Roberto "Forever a Lightweight" Duran never fought as a welterweight again and moved out of Leonard's weight class. He was not going to beat Leonard again and he knew it.