BoxRec

Hearns kicked Leonard ass...End of story!

I asked you two simple yes/no questions.

Ragarding the first knockdown:
1. Did the punch hit Leonard in the back of the head or not?
2. Did Hearns push or shove Leonard?

What is your answer?

Ambling Alp II wrote:I asked you two simple yes/no questions.

Ragarding the first knockdown:
1. Did the punch hit Leonard in the back of the head or not?
2. Did Hearns push or shove Leonard?

What is your answer?

It was a legitimate knockdown. Sugar Ray didn't complained. He looked dazed in the video.

The second knockdown was worse. Tommy kicked his ass!

Ambling Alp II wrote:I will ask you straight out as well.

Ragarding the first knockdown:
1. Did the punch hit Leonard in the back of the head or not?
2. Did Hearns push or shove Leonard?

Simple yes/no questions. Looking for an honest answer.

Yes to the back of the head, no he didn't push him down. Ray was off balance trying to slip the incoming. Doesn't make your stance that ray got screwed any less outlandish. Hopefully you're just screwing with Elmer. It was a very easy fight to score.

i haven't t seen it in years but wasn't Leonard shaken badly by walking into a right hand just before the KD? My memory was that he went down largely because of that right hand which kindof made it a legit kd, a bit like Marquez knocking Israel Vasquez down in the third fight

It was as Saad said, a punch form the back of the head. That alone is illegal (doesn't matter if it was intentional or not). That alone means that the the knockdown should not have counted.

Watch the video. After the rabbit punch, Hearns than clearly knocked Leonard to ground without punching him. If you want to call it a push or shove it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if it was unintentional or not.

For two reasons that is not a legitimate knockdown. The referee missed the call.

Counter-puncher wrote:i haven't t seen it in years but wasn't Leonard shaken badly by walking into a right hand just before the KD? My memory was that he went down largely because of that right hand which kindof made it a legit kd, a bit like Marquez knocking Israel Vasquez down in the third fight

He wasn't particularly hurt on either KD. I think he was most rocked at the start of the 12th. His furious rally leaves few remembering that.

Ambling Alp II wrote:It was as Saad said, a punch form the back of the head. That alone is illegal (doesn't matter if it was intentional or not). That alone means that the the knockdown should not have counted.

Watch the video. After the rabbit punch, Hearns than clearly knocked Leonard to ground without punching him. If you want to call it a push or shove it doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if it was unintentional or not.

For two reasons that is not a legitimate knockdown. The referee missed the call.

Leonard lost anyway.

I will give you credit for at least admitting that it was a punch to the back of the head. elmer has not been honest enough to admit that.
Leonard would have a decision had the knockdown not counted.
Imagine if a knockdown like that would have happened to Roberto Duran? You would never hear the end of it. Instead it usually gets brushed over.

Even if you think Hearns should have got the decision, this was close enough to argue. Leonard hurt Hearns several times. This was not some a$$ kicking like some people it out to be. This fight could have been scored either way or as it was a draw.

No, it wasn't arguable. Very good fight, hearns clearly won. Any other card is biased or incompetent. Hilarious you talk about someone else 'admitting' something when you would argue with Leonard about this fight. Yeah, yeah, hearns didn't complain. He never has. One of these days I'll learn not to get in the crossfire's of your Leonard lust.

Speaking about Duran vs Benitez. They were supposed to fight, first in November 1977 but, Duran pulled out because of a flu. Bruce Curry took Duran's place and kicked The Radar's ass. The judges were blind or got paid under the table. Curry only had 13 pro fights at the time.

Then, Benitez WON CLEARLY in the rematch. And the winner was supposed to fight The Hands of Stone in April 1978 for $100,000 dollars! Duran made his last fight in January of that year when he unified the lightweight crown against nemesis Esteban DeJesus rubber match. What happened that the fight didn't happened? I didn't know back then in '77 or '78 that they were at the crossroads of fighting each other? Interesting. The fight was planned by MSG matchmaker Teddy Brenner.

Also, Duran in June of '78 was supposed to defend his lightweight crown against the great WBC World Jr. Lightweight Champion, Alexis Arguello of Nicaragua for $300,000 dollars guaranteed money at MSG, too. What happened? Some people say that because Arguello lost to Vilomar Fernandez, a Duran victim, the fight was called off. Something that would not happened today. That fight would've been made, regardless of the outcomes. What happened?

He lost to Fernandez is what happened.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:He lost to Fernandez is what happened.

Some people claim that Arguello lost on purpose to Fernandez to avoid a clash with Duran. What is your take on that?

elmersalsa wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:He lost to Fernandez is what happened.

Some people claim that Arguello lost on purpose to Fernandez to avoid a clash with Duran. What is your take on that?

I know you're asking Saad, but I never heard that. Can't believe Arguello was afraid of fighting anyone. He went on an incredible four-year run of great fights after the Fernandez fight and was willing to take on a machine like Pryor. Sounds like BS

giacomino wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:He lost to Fernandez is what happened.

Some people claim that Arguello lost on purpose to Fernandez to avoid a clash with Duran. What is your take on that?

I know you're asking Saad, but I never heard that. Can't believe Arguello was afraid of fighting anyone. He went on an incredible four-year run of great fights after the Fernandez fight and was willing to take on a machine like Pryor. Sounds like BS

Well, a lot of guys didn't want to fight Roberto Duran, you know?

elmersalsa wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:He lost to Fernandez is what happened.

Some people claim that Arguello lost on purpose to Fernandez to avoid a clash with Duran. What is your take on that?

Crap, my take on that is pure, unadulterated crap.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:He lost to Fernandez is what happened.

Some people claim that Arguello lost on purpose to Fernandez to avoid a clash with Duran. What is your take on that?

Crap, my take on that is pure, unadulterated crap.

I got that. And how about The Greatest losing to Leon Spinks? Some claim that he didn't want to face Ken Norton a fourth time, and supposedly lost on purpose to become the first heavyweight champion to win the heavyweight crown 3 times. What is your take on that one?

elmersalsa wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:
Some people claim that Arguello lost on purpose to Fernandez to avoid a clash with Duran. What is your take on that?

Crap, my take on that is pure, unadulterated crap.

I got that. And how about The Greatest losing to Leon Spinks? Some claim that he didn't want to face Ken Norton a fourth time, and supposedly lost on purpose to become the first heavyweight champion to win the heavyweight crown 3 times. What is your take on that one?

More crap

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:No, it wasn't arguable. Very good fight, hearns clearly won. Any other card is biased or incompetent. Hilarious you talk about someone else 'admitting' something when you would argue with Leonard about this fight. Yeah, yeah, hearns didn't complain. He never has. One of these days I'll learn not to get in the crossfire's of your Leonard lust.

Oh please. Leonard hurt Hearns more times than Hearns hurt him. Leonard landed more punches than Hearns did. The only reason you are saying this is because you like Hearns and hate Leonard.
Yes Hearns wasn't a complainer. Neither was Leonard.

Ambling Alp II wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:No, it wasn't arguable. Very good fight, hearns clearly won. Any other card is biased or incompetent. Hilarious you talk about someone else 'admitting' something when you would argue with Leonard about this fight. Yeah, yeah, hearns didn't complain. He never has. One of these days I'll learn not to get in the crossfire's of your Leonard lust.

Oh please. Leonard hurt Hearns more times than Hearns hurt him. Leonard landed more punches than Hearns did. The only reason you are saying this is because you like Hearns and hate Leonard.
Yes Hearns wasn't a complainer. Neither was Leonard.

Can you tell what Leonard complained about?

Ambling Alp II wrote:Can you tell what Leonard complained about?

Your head up his ass.

elmersalsa wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

elmersalsa wrote:
Some people claim that Arguello lost on purpose to Fernandez to avoid a clash with Duran. What is your take on that?

Crap, my take on that is pure, unadulterated crap.

I got that. And how about The Greatest losing to Leon Spinks? Some claim that he didn't want to face Ken Norton a fourth time, and supposedly lost on purpose to become the first heavyweight champion to win the heavyweight crown 3 times. What is your take on that one?

My take is that Spinks flat out beat the crap out of Ali... and Ali tried like an MF to win in the 15th but couldn't do crap... And my take on the rematch is that Spinks didn't try to win... Leon was pulled over so many times by St. Louis cops and given tickets left and right... He got so much rash and sh!t from Ali fans... and was made fun of by comedians every time he turned on the TV... He just didn't go out after a while... Leon couldn't handle the haters and wanted to shed the title.

What if the Benitez vs Duran fight was in '78 as scheduled in New York City's MSG?

How in your own personal opinion see this fight happening at 140lbs, prime vs prime?

I believe that Duran couldn't have a day off in this fight even if Benitez is not at his very best. Bruce Curry beat The Radar the first fight. He only had 13 pro fights at the time.

I know one thing, it would not be the Duran of the No Mas funk at 154lbs.

elmersalsa wrote:What if the Benitez vs Duran fight was in '78 as scheduled in New York City's MSG?

How in your own personal opinion see this fight happening at 140lbs, prime vs prime?

I believe that Duran couldn't have a day off in this fight even if Benitez is not at his very best. Bruce Curry beat The Radar the first fight. He only had 13 pro fights at the time.

I know one thing, it would not be the Duran of the No Mas funk at 154lbs.

I see Duran beating Benitez with the jab---the way Leonard beat Benitez---and with crafty boxing like Leonard because Duran could be crafty... If RD had the same attitude and verve against Benitez at 154 as he had against Davey Moore -- he WOULD have beat Benitez -- and I thought that would happen.

But Duran was Duran... Which meant if he didn't feel like fighting on a given night -- he didn't.