PDA

View Full Version : Emile Griffith vs Ray Leonard



pendleton23
08-06-2005, 02:24 PM
I know Griffith was a great fighter but I think Leonard would have defeated him if they met in there primes.Leonard has the speed and enough power to present Griffith huge problems.Leonard by a wide decision.

GorDoom
08-06-2005, 06:22 PM
Emile Griffith is in my ALL TIME top five personal list of favorite fighters that I have seen in the 48 years I've been involved in boxing ...

BUT ... As much as I love & admire Emile personally, I've got to go with Leonard here. A close but clear decision for Ray.

GorDoom

gregbeyer
08-06-2005, 08:08 PM
do you consider leonard on his way to a WIDE decision over benitez? i can't recall griffith losing too many wide decisions at welterweight. this too me is a pick-em fight.

EXPERIENCE....emile had a much longer career and faced a wider range of fighters. i remember at the end when griffith came to LA to fight the rising mando muniz. at that time emile had fought more championship fights that muniz had pro bouts. the old man just schooled the kid. did it to top contender ernie lopez also.

who would you say fared better at middleweight? they were both great fighters and i see no wide decisions between the two.
greg

GorDoom
08-06-2005, 08:18 PM
Ya know, you're right, Greg. But as much of an old school guy as I am, I gotsta lean toward Sacarinne Ray.

By a C-hair is what we're talking about here.

If they fought 10 times, Griffith would have won a minimum of four.

Actually, I should recluse myself from this question. We are talking about two incomparable fighters that are also two of the greatest fighters I've seen in my life time...

SO ...My pick is, May The Best Man Win!

GorDoom

pendleton23
08-06-2005, 09:12 PM
Leonard would beat Griffith.He simply is to fast for Griffith.And not only that but Leonard hit harder as well.

Ronald Lipton
08-06-2005, 10:44 PM
Looks like Leonard on this one due to his height and hand speed. If this was at welterweight my heart goes with Griffith the iron man over flash. At middle I pick Leonard by decision.

Where much bigger Hagler just kept walking after Leonard and got tagged all night and over trained, Griffith would step with him. He was so fast on his feet and a good jabber, that everything he threw to the body and head came off his double and triple jabs the way it is supposed to. Griff could also really move his torso and head well and was a sharp strong puncher.

Don't sell him short at welter V Leonard.

But do not be surprised if Emile Griffith had the speed to get to him and make it a very rough night. Why?
Two 15 round wins over fleet footed master boxer Joey Archer who beat Carter, Tiger, Gonzalez and an old Robinson.

Great matchup

StingerKarl
08-06-2005, 11:18 PM
Emile wins here.
Griffith was an absolute machine.
Griffith W 15.
Karl

crold1
08-07-2005, 07:19 AM
Leonard and pretty big here. Griffith was an all time great but did nothing better than Leonard, another all time great. Ray had better power, speed, feet and variation in his game.

gregbeyer
08-07-2005, 05:56 PM
tough call to be sure....if we are talking about a pre-paret griffith at welter i still gotta give griff a good shot. he seemed to hold back after paret. when i saw him against lopez and muniz he seemed perfectly content to out box them. that would not get it done against leonard.

if i imagine the griffith from the nite he last fought benny paret against the welterweight leonard who fought benitez or even the duran fights....its still a pick-em war.
greg

walsh b
08-08-2005, 04:53 AM
Ray would have been too fast, busy and slightly stronger than Griffith. He wins by late TKO or decision. Nobody but a prime Robinson beats Leonard at Welter

gregbeyer
08-08-2005, 02:55 PM
nobody but a prime robinson????

ya know he did fight a guy named duran....
greg

rocky111
08-12-2005, 03:18 PM
Griffith easy. His era was much much tougher at welter. Duran was a pumped up lightweight and handled Ray AND Carlos Palamino. Benitez had no power and Hearns no chin. They were good but not welters in the class of Cuban Luis Rodriguez in any way. Griff fought much much better guys at welter and middle. I mean he beat Rodriguez three of four. Could Ray Leonard do that?
Leonard had speed? Yes he did, but Emile Griffith in his prime at welter had the much much faster jab and was a monster in close. Watch him at welter in his prime. You'll see. Leonard had flash, but Griff had the better hands. Those flashy hooks of Ray werent gonna do anything to Emile. Neither was the "shoeshine" stuff. Emile was solid man.
Not even a close fight. Emile handles Ray Leonard with ease. Ray had some sock, but he wasnt gonna do anything to Griff. A Rubin Carter he wasnt for power.

Hagler04
08-12-2005, 03:47 PM
At first glance I'd favor Leonard easy . . .he is faster, possibly stronger, and very flashy. But then when I see Griffith at welter he was just so damned steadfast . . .both had great stamina at welter but I see Emile having the edge in that area, and Griffith would be wearing Ray out with those HARD body punches even though he'd lose the wide majority of the first 9 or so rounds. Griffith would come on strong late and floor Leonard to lose a controversial split decision over 15.

robertk
08-15-2005, 10:10 AM
I'll take griffith in the upset in this one. If they fought 3 times I'd lean towards leonard to take the final 2 via decision.

I think good jabbers present problems stylistically to leonard. He just doesn't look his best and a jab seems to keep him off that comfy pitchers mound where he looked great. Griffith had an all-time great jab and a deceptive left hook off of it. But that jab is the key and it wasn't all that easy to slip or to counter and it sure wasn't telegraphed.
This is a decision bout all the way but overall, I like the way griffith held those hands up==a must against leonard==and that jab to squeek out the W.

JLP 6
12-04-2009, 11:19 AM
Good reads while the fantasy section is slow.

thewonderful134
12-04-2009, 10:09 PM
GRiffith, Griffith , Griffith. Ten out of ten times, Griffith.

I'm not saying that Leonard wasn't a top welterweight, he's just a tad overrated. The difference between Duran 1 and Duran 2 had much more to do with the difference in Durans preparation then in any adjustment that Leonard made. Every time I hear the story about how Ray fought the wrong fight the first time I believe it should start out with the term "once upon a time" because it's a fairy tale. Ray didn't box in the first fight because a trained and motivated Duran didn't allow him to. Ray fought the only type of fight that Duran allowed him to fight, and did a FANTASTIC job, it was almost good enough.

It is not Leonard's fault that Duran wasn't in top shape for the second fight. I think the blame can be placed firmly on Duran and his managerial and promotional team. Leonard's team so outmaneuvered Duran's people in setting the conditions for the fight that it was almost impossible for Duran to be in shape. Had Duran been in the same condition for the second fight as he was for the first, Leonard wouldn't have been able box and move anymore than he did in the first. Duran was just a better fighter. His negotiating team on the other hand wasn't in Leonard's teams class.

I could talk about Hearns 1 and 2 but I don't think the comparisons apply here.
Leonard was a good fighter, Griffith is just a better fighter.

Just for information, except for the Camacho fight I rooted against Leonard in every fight he fought.

134

wpink
12-05-2009, 03:11 AM
GRiffith, Griffith , Griffith. Ten out of ten times, Griffith.

I'm not saying that Leonard wasn't a top welterweight, he's just a tad overrated. The difference between Duran 1 and Duran 2 had much more to do with the difference in Durans preparation then in any adjustment that Leonard made. Every time I hear the story about how Ray fought the wrong fight the first time I believe it should start out with the term "once upon a time" because it's a fairy tale. Ray didn't box in the first fight because a trained and motivated Duran didn't allow him to. Ray fought the only type of fight that Duran allowed him to fight, and did a FANTASTIC job, it was almost good enough.

It is not Leonard's fault that Duran wasn't in top shape for the second fight. I think the blame can be placed firmly on Duran and his managerial and promotional team. Leonard's team so outmaneuvered Duran's people in setting the conditions for the fight that it was almost impossible for Duran to be in shape. Had Duran been in the same condition for the second fight as he was for the first, Leonard wouldn't have been able box and move anymore than he did in the first. Duran was just a better fighter. His negotiating team on the other hand wasn't in Leonard's teams class.

I could talk about Hearns 1 and 2 but I don't think the comparisons apply here.
Leonard was a good fighter, Griffith is just a better fighter.

Just for information, except for the Camacho fight I rooted against Leonard in every fight he fought.

134

Totally disagree. I ask,, so you point out the difference in Duran1-2 was only Duran prep and approach to the fight. Hmm was there not some minor issue in the 1st fight, like Leonard WILLINGLY chose to go toe to toe, and not box and not utilize his speed advqantages, angles, boxing, combinations etc. Funny again how many simply look at one person's adjustments or changes.
Looking at Durans auto Hands of Stone, he even mentioned his camp did not think the choice of referee suited them favorably and if Ray was allowed to box, that Duran chances of losing increased dramatically. Duran strategy was to get inside Ray's head and challenge his manhood to force him to fight. This Duran did, and also Padillo did not do what he normally did and seperate the fighters, only slapping of the gloves in the clenches.

I continue to ask get the video footage of the 1st Duran leonard fight, and show me anywhere, where he cut off the ring vs a leoanrd that ATTEMPTED TO MOVE BOX. He did not , because Ray chose not to utlize these skills. Thus to simply say Duran only lost the 2nd fight because he was not prepared, but ignore the obvious that Ray had a completley different mind set and style between the 2 fights,...Well shows a willingness to ignore certain facts.

The leonard THAT EMERGED FROM the Duran fight, IMO beats Emile Griffith. That leonard mentally was toughter than who entered the fight, or who fought benetiz. That leonard physicially became stronger. Lets not take anything from Duran in the 1st fight, that Duran in Montreal was a beast, but Leonard flatfooted style, allowed the Beast to explode, and I as I said Leonard the emerged from this fight showed the abillity to get his style or adjust moreso, and vs Griffith, I believe he mentally and physically would be stong enough to employ his skills to ensure a victory. The Leonard that fought Benetiz, IMO still could win, but IMO it would be COULD WIN, vs Would win.

Also so many false statments that surface from the Duran leonard fights. First off he was in good shape. Nobody said he was not in good shape until AFTER THE FIGHT. In fact weeks before the fight Duran was the Ali-Holmes fight and proclaimed himself now the greatest, since Ali had just lost, and stated he was in EVEN GREATER SHAPE THIS TIME, AND WOULD KO LEONARD. There is even youtube footage of Duran pre Leonard 2nd fight stating how much better his training camp was going. I know information has surfaced AFTER about how the things did not go right, too much partying. However, DURAN ALWAYS PARTIED BETWEEN FIGHTS, AND A COUPLE OF FACTS THAT ARE ALWAYS LEFT OUT...

1. Duran previously ballooned up between fights and had to get back to 135, this time he only had to get down to 147.
2. If you look at the average time between fights previously leading up to the Leonard Duran fights, it was around 3-4 months. The time between Duran 1 and duran2 was 5 months. How in the hell is this rushing him. The fight number two was agreed up 2 weeks after the 1st fight ended. I guess Pacquio is being taken advantage of, since he only has 3 months between Cotto and Mayweather.

Too many false excuses always given. Mighty funny for the 71 previous fights we never hear excuses or cry's out about Duran when he was winning. Also we never heard about Leonard almost having to cancel the 1st fight due coming down with the Flu the week before, thus he was late getting to montreal. No we only hear that because duran lost in the 2nd fight, and quit, and leonard boxed this time, it must have been because Duran was not himself.

Finally for overrated, can you help identify a Welter outside of Ray leonard out side of Robinson, who beat 4 fighters who were ranked p4p as high as they were ..all time lists. Duran top 10, hearns, Hagler, Benetiz all getting top 60 or so.

El Gato
12-05-2009, 12:29 PM
I certainly don't think Griffith's textbook standup style would allow him to better Leonard on the outside, expecially when considering his speed handicap (by comparison of course). Leonard had the speed and technical acumen to pretty much dominate Benitez at his own game, therefore I can't see Griffith getting the better of him, at least from a distance.

Griffith did have, if nothing else, a clear strength advantage though. If he were to try to press the fight and get rough with Ray, things could get a bit more interesting. However, even in these circumstances I think Leonard's power and combination punching would allow him to at least hold his own and get the fight back to neutral grounds.

Leonard wins this one on the cards pretty clearly in a competitive technical boxing match the way I see it.

sr71ko
12-05-2009, 02:08 PM
Wpink makes a lot of good points. Also, in the Leonard vs. Duran I, there are a lot of people including on this site that felt that Ray should have won. Ray fighting out of his element and it could still be argued that he won. Ray had speed, power, good movement, great chin, and defense. Griffith had huge strength and did fight in a tougher era. Napoles was able to beat Griffith and I see Ray beating Griffith in a similar fashion.

Michael Frank
12-05-2009, 04:38 PM
I would agree that Duran beat Leonard in the 1st fight, no argument.

But, some of the things I'm reading above...?? Benitez had no power? Duran would beat Leonard just the same in fight #2 had Duran been in the same shape as in #1 (anyone besides Cosell and yours truly notice that Leonard was noticeably bigger and stronger in fight #2)? Griffith fought in the tougher (welterweight) era??

Man, I disagree with those assertions. I'll take Leonard by a comfortable decision every time out. Griffith's style is all wrong against Leonard. This isn't going to be Benny Paret in there with him.

Griff was a strong man, an advantage he has over Leonard, and Griff had that hard jab... but I don't think either will much matter. Leonard didn't just have more flash, he had more talent, and the tools to frustrate Griff all night. Yes, he was faster.

And respectfully, Greg, I don't see where Mando Muniz belongs anywhere in this conversation. A wonderful man, a class act, but nowhere near this discussion in terms of ability, IMHO at least. Same with Ernie Lopez.

Elwill7847
12-05-2009, 05:40 PM
I'd make Luis Rodriquez even money vs Leonard and Griffith beat Luis 2 out of 3 I think. I think Emile would give Leonard hell and likely beat him.

walshb
12-05-2009, 07:02 PM
I'm confused as to why anyone would automatically think that Griffith
is stronger physically than Ray

El Gato
12-05-2009, 09:19 PM
I'd make Luis Rodriquez even money vs Leonard and Griffith beat Luis 2 out of 3 I think. I think Emile would give Leonard hell and likely beat him.He officially beat Rodriguez 3 out of 4, but by accounts of those who've seen all or at least most of the series, those wins are highly disputed and often ridiculed. Based on what I've seen and read I'd say the series going 3-1 the other way around would've been a lot closer to the truth. Then again the only man I know whose seen the entire series believes Rodriguez to have won all 4 bouts conclusively. The only bout available on Youtube is of their third fight, a bout which Griffith officially won despite Rodriguez seemingly getting the better of the fight throughout. Take a look for yourself.

I hold Rodriguez in much higher esteem than Griffith based on reports of their series and what I've seen of the two on film. He just seemed to be a more varied, awkward and overall more effective fighter. He's one of those rare fighters who'd be even money with pretty much any Welterweight in history on his best day. An awkward and unorthodox, but extremely skilled and experienced stylist.

El Gato
12-05-2009, 09:23 PM
I'm confused as to why anyone would automatically think that Griffith
is stronger physically than RayThey'd probably base that on the footage available of their fights, especially Griffith's at MW and against Dick Tiger. I'd certainly agree with those who stated as much.

thewonderful134
12-06-2009, 12:24 AM
wpink and others

Let me try to answer some of these opinions.
Yes , Duran did get into Leonards head and so in the beginning Leonard was more inclined to punch then he normally might have been, but when your under pressure you have a tendency to use the style that you know, as Teddy Atlas likes to say "If your born round you don't die square". Ray had been a boxer all his life, and I believe thats the style he tried to fall back on, I haven't seen this fight in many years, but if I recall right somewhere early in the fight, second or third round, Leonard tries to change the distance the fight was being fought at, Duran hurts him and forces the fight back to the inside. AS for Duran cutting off the ring on Leonard. You need to cut off the ring when you are trying to catch someone who is fighting at a distance, a boxer can't get or maintain that distance unless he is given a certain amount of respect. I don't remember Duran ever giving Leonard the type of respect he needed to establish the distance that he needed to box and move.

Before the second fight when Duran was being interveiwed and said he was in great shape, well that's called marketing. You really won't expect him to say that he was in comparatively bad shape. I don't think the promoters would have been pleased to hear this.Leonard himself said in an interview that he and his people knew how far out of shape Duran had allowed himself to get and had the goal of getting Duran back in the ring before Duran had a chance to get back in top shape. Duran was offered what at that time was an immense amount of money for the rematch. When Durans people asked for more time, they were told that if Roberto didn't sign for the fight that Leonard would go after the other champion, Pipeno Cuevas. It was a bluff, but there was to much money on the table for it to be called, Duran signed on. Now you can take this next part with a grain of salt because it was a long ago and second hand, but this is how I remember it. Sometime after the second fight I was at the westminster gym and the topic of what happened to Duran at that fight came up. Jackie McCoy told me that Monroe Brooks, who was Duran's main sparring partner for this fight, told him(see, very second hand) That Duran didn't really train, he just made weight. Roberto would be scheduled to spar x amount of rounds but instead would only do about half, then go sit in a sauna. He( Duran) was certain that he had Rays number, that all he had to do was show up. Personally, I think thats what Duran did, he made weight, but he was in nowhere near the mental, physical and emotional shape you would have to be in to fight a Ray leonard.

On the topic of this thread, I freely admit that Ray Leonard was faster than Griffith, but I don"t think that the difference was so overwhelming that it would be a deciding factor in this contest, I think that Griffiths jab makes the difference.

wpink
12-06-2009, 03:57 AM
wpink and others

Let me try to answer some of these opinions.
Yes , Duran did get into Leonards head and so in the beginning Leonard was more inclined to punch then he normally might have been, but when your under pressure you have a tendency to use the style that you know, as Teddy Atlas likes to say "If your born round you don't die square". Ray had been a boxer all his life, and I believe thats the style he tried to fall back on, I haven't seen this fight in many years, but if I recall right somewhere early in the fight, second or third round, Leonard tries to change the distance the fight was being fought at, Duran hurts him and forces the fight back to the inside. AS for Duran cutting off the ring on Leonard. You need to cut off the ring when you are trying to catch someone who is fighting at a distance, a boxer can't get or maintain that distance unless he is given a certain amount of respect. I don't remember Duran ever giving Leonard the type of respect he needed to establish the distance that he needed to box and move.

Before the second fight when Duran was being interveiwed and said he was in great shape, well that's called marketing. You really won't expect him to say that he was in comparatively bad shape. I don't think the promoters would have been pleased to hear this.Leonard himself said in an interview that he and his people knew how far out of shape Duran had allowed himself to get and had the goal of getting Duran back in the ring before Duran had a chance to get back in top shape. Duran was offered what at that time was an immense amount of money for the rematch. When Durans people asked for more time, they were told that if Roberto didn't sign for the fight that Leonard would go after the other champion, Pipeno Cuevas. It was a bluff, but there was to much money on the table for it to be called, Duran signed on. Now you can take this next part with a grain of salt because it was a long ago and second hand, but this is how I remember it. Sometime after the second fight I was at the westminster gym and the topic of what happened to Duran at that fight came up. Jackie McCoy told me that Monroe Brooks, who was Duran's main sparring partner for this fight, told him(see, very second hand) That Duran didn't really train, he just made weight. Roberto would be scheduled to spar x amount of rounds but instead would only do about half, then go sit in a sauna. He( Duran) was certain that he had Rays number, that all he had to do was show up. Personally, I think thats what Duran did, he made weight, but he was in nowhere near the mental, physical and emotional shape you would have to be in to fight a Ray leonard.

On the topic of this thread, I freely admit that Ray Leonard was faster than Griffith, but I don"t think that the difference was so overwhelming that it would be a deciding factor in this contest, I think that Griffiths jab makes the difference.

I have to say.. this post is an example of a person who wants to blatently say one fighter gets and excuse for their loss and another does not.

There are so many things factually and "general norms assumptively" wrong that I do not know where to start....

Lets identify your horrible account of the 1st fight. It was round 2 when Duran hurt Ray. It was early when they just both seemed to losen up and Ray through a couple of punched and Boom...he was caught but Duran. Then from rounds 2-4 Duran dominated a apprehensive Ray. There was no cutting off rings, forcing Ray to fight anything. Ray was simply getting his ass whipped... Then rounds 5-7 Ray started off each round with nice left hooks in the center of the ring, and Duran did not bull rush Ray back, and ray used a bit of side stepping (not all out lateral movement like he did vs hearns at first or hagler)..but enough to win the rounds. I point this out, because your saying or aluding that Duran forced ray to fight his fight. Mentally yes...Physically all you have to do is look at the fight, and go over each round and see where did ray try to move but could not? Ray simply instead of using lateral movement or dancing, to create angles etc.. he went to to toe and duran slipped his jab repeatedly and force ray to go straight back to the ropes. If you followed Ray since he was in the Olympics you know Ray knows how to avoid a person rushing him. Lets say Duran had to ability to make Ray fight his fight..Ray would have AT LEAST TRIED TO SIDE STEP DURAN..LIKE HMMM HE DID IN ROUND ONE OF THE 1ST FIGHT. Again you may want to go back and revisit the footage.

Now to be perfectly honest... Leonard in many big fights did not dance, etc. Benetiz fight he didnt, hearns he did at first, but then went flat footed. So it not like Leonard used a totally foreign boxing style. Not trying to say that at all. Duran simply whipped Ray's ass, at least in the 1st part of that fight. My point is Ray could have easily starting moving and made Duran try rather successfully or unsuccessfully to cut of the ring, but this never happened. Also get footage of Ray stating prefight that he wanted to KILL Duran.... he stated also he would not box he would slug and stop duran. Dundee stated several times Ray would stop Duran in 1. Thus leonard entire mind set was to make duran pay for the things he did outside of the ring.

As for the weak offer of a explanation for the Duran 2 fight. You should have really saved that one. Yes your correct Duran and all fighers market themselves pre fight and say they are in the best shape ever. Yes your correct. What you leave out is that ALL FIGHTER MARKET THEMSELVES AFTER A LOSS TO, AND MAKE EXCUSES FOR WHY THE LOST, INCLUDING THIS TIME DURAN.

If you really want to know visably the biggest reason why duran lost the 2nd fight...IMO..is this.

1. Duran tried his same old bullrushes in the 2nd fight that he did successfully in the 1st fight. This time Instead of Ray throwing a amateurish overhand looping right, or a jab that Duran easily ducked. Ray starting round 2, in then 2nd fight, caught duran repeatedly with hooks and uppercuts, when he rushed in, and he would have duran off balance (even falling through the ropes once) trying to get to SRL, but ray would counter with hooks and uppercuts, the laterlly step to side. Differnce Hooks uppersuts, movement.... vs jabs overhands rights, no movement.

2. Leonard much stronger upper body, so that he would not get thrown around by duran in close. Also SRL mentally was stronger, to ensure the fight went how Ray wanted it.

3. Funny how you say or refer to cutting of the ring, but do not reference when Duran tried to cut off a moving ray, and was totally unsuccessful. Duran didnt really train this, Duran had cramps that,
Duran had diarrhea....Simple fact we can only go on the results that actually happen in the fight. If we use your analogy..then we would never be able to accept the verdict of a fight as everyone would have an excuse. Duran simply lost the 2nd fight

walshb
12-07-2009, 12:39 PM
I have to say.. this post is an example of a person who wants to blatently say one fighter gets and excuse for their loss and another does not.

There are so many things factually and "general norms assumptively" wrong that I do not know where to start....

Lets identify your horrible account of the 1st fight. It was round 2 when
If you really want to know visably the biggest reason why duran lost the 2nd fight...IMO..is this.

Steady on pinky:rolleyes:

I do not think the account was at all horrible. And even if it was, you don't have to take such offence.

As for excuses as to why Duran lost the second fight. Can anyone honestly say that they believe Duran trained and prepared as
hard or tough as he did for fight 1? Even Ray admitted that he wanted to get Duran when Duran wasn't ready.
He said this, which actually is nothing to be proud of. He beat a less than prepared Duran. That is
not an excuse, it's a fact. And it is MORE true than the excuse that RAY fans have for why Ray lost
fight 1,(because he fought the wrong fight).

thewonderful134
12-07-2009, 11:23 PM
Wpink

I Just watched both fights, I hadn't seen them in many years and I wanted to see if my memory was was even remotely accurate. Please don't start sticking pins in your 134 doll ( that's my ex-girlfriends job and she will get jealous) but you are wrong. The main difference in the second fight from the first is Durans lack of being in proper shape, not Ray's adjustment. My own personal opinion is that the first fight is is much closer of how they fare against one another, top form vs top form, then the second fight. As I stated earlier, he(Duran) just made weight, thats huge difference, physicaly, mentaly and emotionally from training for a fight, especially against a Ray Leonard. This is what allowed Ray to do what he did.

134

wpink
12-08-2009, 02:49 AM
Steady on pinky:rolleyes:

I do not think the account was at all horrible. And even if it was, you don't have to take such offence.

As for excuses as to why Duran lost the second fight. Can anyone honestly say that they believe Duran trained and prepared as
hard or tough as he did for fight 1? Even Ray admitted that he wanted to get Duran when Duran wasn't ready.
He said this, which actually is nothing to be proud of. He beat a less than prepared Duran. That is
not an excuse, it's a fact. And it is MORE true than the excuse that RAY fans have for why Ray lost
fight 1,(because he fought the wrong fight).

Totally false. Leoanrd never ever said that. At least not on a documented record I heard, and I bet not one that you can produce. Dundee said that he knew that Duran had a notion of ballooning up between fights. Keep in mind Ray went on Vacation to hawaii, and upon returning told Trainer he wanted to make the fight. Then Mike Trainer contacted all parties including Dundee. The thing that still makes no sense my friend is that you say the following.

1. Duran was rushed back into the ring purposefully to take advantage of knack for ballooning up between fights. Help me understand how is it that this excuse was never made before in 72 fights before, and the their was a 5 month lay off between june and nov fights, they had. The average lenght of time even in his 8 fights at welter was 3 months. So why any difference.

2. Duran ALWAYS BALLOONED UP BETWEEN FIGHTS, so why now when he loses claim this as an excuse.
3. If you say Duran in the 2nd fight mentally or physcially was not the same, then anyone can see Ray was not as strong in the 2nd fight as he was the 1st fight, and he clearly did not willingly fight the correct fight. So they both lost in fights that they physically and mentally where not at their peak, according to your flawed, excuse filled logic
4. If we are to accept excuses for every lose a fighter has, then why declare a winner. These are professional fighters. His job is to come to the ring prepared, mentally, make weight, give 100%. You cant claim these weak lame excuses when your favorite loses. Duran simply was getting outboxed and was frusterated. In his own autobiography, HIS WORDS, he admits that there was not lack of being in shape, no cramps, no nothing other than the fact he was frusterated that Ray was not standiing in front of him fighting him as a man, he uttered, in his native language" i am not fighting this clown anymore" and quit. It was others, including Cossell that created the No mas, statment.
5. Again back to you all weak excuse for why Duran loss, then we ignore, Ali loss to Frazier, hell he was off several years, we can ignore Robinson loss to Lamotta, hell they where fighting every week then, we can clealry ignore leonards loss to Duran first time for reasons stated before, You all have already discounted Dejesus's win over Duran (any loss Duran ever has to some is not due to the efforts of the figher, only duran lack of effort. It, according to you and others, is wordly impossibe that Duran could lose. However, need I remind you of his record vs the best in his era. Do you really want me to show the factual truth, and not carry on the myth.

I tried not to go there. This excuses filled responses made me do it.

Again. If you all are willing to stop the weak excuse giving everytime Duran lost a fight, and just accept the fact HE LOST. Plain and simple.

I Just watched both fights, I hadn't seen them in many years and I wanted to see if my memory was was even remotely accurate. Please don't start sticking pins in your 134 doll ( that's my ex-girlfriends job and she will get jealous) but you are wrong. The main difference in the second fight from the first is Durans lack of being in proper shape, not Ray's adjustment. My own personal opinion is that the first fight is is much closer of how they fare against one another, top form vs top form, then the second fight. As I stated earlier, he(Duran) just made weight, thats huge difference, physicaly, mentaly and emotionally from training for a fight, especially against a Ray Leonard. This is what allowed Ray to do what he did.

That is your opinion Ok. I notice you chose not to address the issues about cutting off the ring, as I asked you to identify ANY spot in the first fight where Duran cut off the ring vs a Leonard. I stand behind my statment that you will not, and cant, because IT JUST AINT SO. So I guess according to you, Leonard either miraculously came down with a bit of dementia and simply forgot how to box, stick and move, OR AT LEAST TRY AND FORCE DURAN TO CUT OFF THE RING, MAKE A MOVING RAY STAND AND BOX (WHICH HE DID NOT DO AS AGAIN RAY NEVER DID THIS), or Ray chose to fight the wrong fight. Again choosing to fight the wrong fight, IMO, simply is a strategy mistake, he still lost. However, IF you all gonna whin and say Duran only lost to ray because he was ill prepared this time, WHEN THE FACTS, do not support this, THEN I WILL SAY RAY WAS ILL PREPARED FOR TH 1ST FIGHT. Same thing different fight....

If Ray fights Duran 10 times, the Ray that emerged from the 1st fight beats duran 10 times out of 10. Just to good, to fast, was just really getting into rythim in the 2nd fight, when Duran quit and robbed him of a worse beating.

walshb
12-08-2009, 07:15 AM
I heard Leonard in an interview say that his camp KNEW that Duran had a tendency to slack off during fights, and that he (Leonard) wanted to take advantage of this. I am certain that Ray admitted to WANTING to get Duran when he knew Duran wasn't up to it. I was shocked that Ray would admit this, as to me, it devalues Ray's win really.

Michael Frank
12-08-2009, 08:10 AM
The main difference in the second fight from the first is Durans lack of being in proper shape, not Ray's adjustment. My own personal opinion is that the first fight is is much closer of how they fare against one another, top form vs top form, then the second fight.
Hello, thewonderful 134--

I just can't agree.

1) Leonard was much bigger and stronger in fight #2. He won every single infighting exchange in the 2nd fight without being held, while he rarely won any of them in fight #1. How could that be due to Duran's being in less-than-peak shape? Duran should still have more or less the same strength he had previously.

2) Just look at the 1st round of fight #2. Leonard was circling, on his toes, unwilling to be tied up and pushed into the ropes, then held against the ropes, as in fight #1. So, in fight #2's 1st round, he moved a lot, landed only a little, but wasn't hit at all. That set the tone for fight #2, though Ray started to land more and more punches per round after rd. 1...and this was nothing like fight #1. Fight #2 made it obvious to me that Leonard would always beat Duran afterward (due to styles, not to a noticeable talent differential), and though they were both old men in 1989, Leonard owned Duran in that 3rd fight, which was a lop-sided joke. But I have no doubt Leonard would have owned him in 1981, too. Leonard just fought the wrong fight in #1; Duran came with a great battle plan then, but a Leonard on the move would have beaten that plan, I feel-- it was a fairly close fight, anyway.

I'd agree that Duran was not as fired up for fight #2, and maybe he trained less and dieted. But, what boxing is about is the result in the ring, not the excuses for a guy who came in in top shape, after 1975, maybe 30% of the time. Duran and his fans sure had a lot of excuses for his performances over the years, always pointing to those absolute peak performances (Buchanan, DeJesus III, Palomino, Leonard #1, Moore, Barkley) without acknowledging not just the losses, but the uninspiring wins, of which there were dozens.

We know a peak Duran was a tiger, with both brilliance and subtle skills, too. But the guy was truly hot & cold. And he won a lot of fights when "cold." Conversely, Leonard (and many proud champions--Hagler, Hearns, Whitaker, M. Spinks, Chavez, Tyson in his prime) always came into the ring tip-top, and every fight of Leonard's was brilliant until the Terry Norris fight, lost because of age, not conditioning.

wpink
12-08-2009, 10:08 AM
I heard Leonard in an interview say that his camp KNEW that Duran had a tendency to slack off during fights, and that he (Leonard) wanted to take advantage of this. I am certain that Ray admitted to WANTING to get Duran when he knew Duran wasn't up to it. I was shocked that Ray would admit this, as to me, it devalues Ray's win really.

Walsh I respect you and your opinions, we have debated several things before. However again, this simply makes no sense to me. First off, if a person comes into a situation with their mind made up regardless of the outcome, it was not going be credible if their hero lost anyway.

I know many on here are boxing historians, and I welcome footage, video print etc...that NOT A GENERALIZATION, but quote SRL saying that he wanted to take advantage of a slacking off Duran. I personally do not think you will find it, as many of you know and hate, I collect everything that is SRL, and even collect a lot of Duran information, as through the years, I have come to really like, respect and cherish the man, the boxer and as a person it seems that he has given back much more than my favorite SRL has.

That being said, lets examine this statment. You said SRL said he stated he wanted to take advantage of Duran slacking off. I did hear Dundee state he knew from previous experiences with Duran that he ballooned up and partied inbetween fights, BUT again nobody not you, the wonderful,, no one has even attempted to answer or justify if this is his tendncy and his recordod was 71-1 how is it that this is only used as excuse when he loses.

Also, you and others keep trying to suggest that Ray was a prophet and knew what Duran was going to do (even though facts suggest otherwise) regarding training. For example just looking at the Duran's Welterweight fights, his average time span between fights was roughly 3 months. Now many of those fights were low caliber opponents, lets look at time frame between fights preceeding his biggest two welterweight opponents (Palimino and SRL 1st fight) and the two biggest welterwight opponents, fights in which he won. First palimino fight there was only 2 months layoff between the previous fight and the Palimino fight (duran was 27 or 28 at the time), First SRL fight less than 4 months. If Durans tendency was to balloon up in weight in between fights, then it looks as if they in comparison to the second SRL fight, where it was a bit longer than 5 months, the SRL camp planned very poorly. It again is just another failed attempted excuse by Duran supporters to discredit the lose he had to SRL. They no matter if they have video footage of Duran training relentlessly for the SRL 2nd fight, will attempt at all cost to discredit this fight, when the actual facts of what happened inside the ring is right there for all to see.

Also, I remember and have video footage of ray, saying in the 1st fight he wanted to Kill Duran, and that he would come right after Duran. I also have video footage of SRL after the 2nd duran in the ABC interview stating he was angry that people were trying to take away from Duran to diminish his victory. That is was the same Duran, but he was stronger this time, and that made the difference. Duran was not able to toss him around this time, and he was upset Duran quit because he felt himself getting stronger and stronger in relative to Duran who was getting weaker. Not weak..but in comparison to Ray who VISABLY WAS BIGGER AND STRONGER IN THE 2ND FIGHT, Duran was not the bully.

Regardless, you will refuse to accept the verdict no matter what. I wonder why even have actual fights based on this analogy. We will pick who we want to win. If they win, we hype it up, and make our hero seem like the greatest thing since sliced bread. If they lose then we will discredit it, and identify issues to justify not making the outcome credible. So I guess to you Duran is up 3-0 vs Ray or only 1-0 since we cant credit the 2 losses that Ray had. I wonder should dejesus who beat duran the 1st time, should he and his followers state they actually never lost to duran, as they were not as motivated the 2nd time, or 3rd time, so the great fight that Duran had is tarnished by the fact that since Dejesus lost, we can simply invalidate this because as a Dejesus fan I believe he was not as focused.

10-8
12-08-2009, 10:16 AM
I know many on here are boxing historians, and I welcome footage, video print etc...that NOT A GENERALIZATION, but quote SRL saying that he wanted to take advantage of a slacking off Duran. I personally do not think you will find it, as many of you know and hate, I collect everything that is SRL, and even collect a lot of Duran information, as through the years, I have come to really like, respect and cherish the man, the boxer and as a person it seems that he has given back much more than my favorite SRL has. I'll tell you Pink exactly where to find it.

Ray Leonard gave an interview for Ring Magazine in 1983 (cover story I believe the September issue) in which Ray told of Janks Morton coming to Ray's house after the Duran loss and telling Ray to make the fight rematch ASAP because reports were that Duran was partying it up in Panama...had gained weight etc...Leonard admitted in the article that at that point he was unsure if he wanted to fight again at that time.

I have reprinted it in another thread but not sure which one. If I can find it I will.

hawk5ins
12-08-2009, 10:20 AM
I made a promise to you.

Get your passport, Drive to Vt.

I have the gun and it is loaded.

Be sure to say goodbye to your family before you leave.

Your pal,

Hawk

10-8
12-08-2009, 10:29 AM
I made a promise to you.

Get your passport, Drive to Vt.

I have the gun and it is loaded.

Be sure to say goodbye to your family before you leave.

Your pal,

HawkI know Lionel, I know!

I found it then I'm going to hang myself in the garage with the car engine running for good measure.

In a later interview Leonard would say he initially wanted a rematch.("Oh yes, I wanted him again") to take place closer to a year, "but the second guessing began to bother me." Trainer Janks Morton then began coming over and visiting Leonard to talk. "He would just come by and talk. You know, nothing specific, just things in general...He didn't say let's fight Duran now, he was cool about it. So after a month or two with nothing but time on my hands and the thought of the first fight continually playing and replaying in my mind, I called Janks who had planted the seed and said, Dammit Janks I want that fight. And he said, It's perfect timing Ray. He's going to parties, blowing up, gaining weight...It'll be perfect for you. " -Ring Magazine


Now Ray is always slick about things like this. He is careful to make it known that it was HIS decision for the quick rematch and not Janks pushing and he is also careful to say that Janks brought up Duran's partying and weight gaining AFTER Ray had already made the decision HIMSELF to fight Duran again ASAP. Read into it what you will.

hawk5ins
12-08-2009, 11:37 AM
is constantly trying to make himself sound in command of everything, regardless of how it looks.

In Four Kings Juanita Talks about how Ray came to her in Hawaii and said he still wanted to fight agian. Ray says this was indeed accurate, but that he already told Trainer he was going to do so BEFORE they had this talk. "I don't need to get my wife's approval on anything" he said.

Additionally, and more to the Sept 83 Ring interview you brought up Bill (Bill? Are you still with us? Are you getting sleepy?) in Kimball's book on page 88 Ray says very clearly that hurrying Duran back into the ring was calculated on HIS part:

"That was calculated on my part." admitted Leonard. I knew Duran was overweight and partying bigtime. I've done some partying myself, but I knew when ti cut it out. I said to Mike, 'Let's do it now, as soon as possible.' In retrospect, it was pretty clever on my part."

Ray doesnt' do himself any favors when he says stuff like this.

Ray would rather appear smarter than everyone else, than anything else, I honestly beleive. Whether it doesn't shine upon him in a favorable light or not.

Cocked and loaded, just in case 10-8.

Hawk

10-8
12-08-2009, 12:23 PM
Damn rope broke and the car stalled on me.

I agree that Ray too often likes to make himself sound smart, cunning and calculating. A brain fighter, master of psychology etc....In doing so he sometimes shoots himself in the foot and over shadows what he actually did in the ring.

Getting back to Leonard-Duran II I think Pink and 134 need to meet in the middle since we are getting polar opposite opinions. Duran was likely NEVER going to reach the same condition he had for their first fight so it's pretty easy to say "He wasn't as good" but just watching the fight you can clearly see Leonard was making a conscious effort to fight differently and was neutralizing Duran's bull rushes much more effectively. Duran for the record hardly looked like a shell of his former self in there. That's just wishful thinking from the Leonard detractors.

Duran pulled the all-time WORST 'in-the-ring" surrendering of a crown in the history of boxing then tried to explain it away with stories of diarrhea, stomach cramps, out of shape...etc. Unfortunately those that couldn't or didn't want to believe what their eyes saw bought up this bullshit because they WANTED it to be that way, fueled either by a dislike of Leonard or an idolization of Duran. Maybe a combination of both.

Why anyone would want to try and defend Duran for such a shameful and embarrassing move like giving up your title by quitting in the middle of the round has always puzzled me. This shouldn't even be open for debate.

wpink
12-08-2009, 02:12 PM
I'll tell you Pink exactly where to find it.

Ray Leonard gave an interview for Ring Magazine in 1983 (cover story I believe the September issue) in which Ray told of Janks Morton coming to Ray's house after the Duran loss and telling Ray to make the fight rematch ASAP because reports were that Duran was partying it up in Panama...had gained weight etc...Leonard admitted in the article that at that point he was unsure if he wanted to fight again at that time.

I have reprinted it in another thread but not sure which one. If I can find it I will.

Good post 10-8 both of them. Thanks for the quote..I'll just say I have video footage of Janks morton discussing why he was released from the Leonard camp, which was because he thought Leonard could not beat Duran. Leonard became upset and thus he was let go. Leonard stated in the video that he at first planned on retiring, then took his family to Hawaii thought about it, and decided he wanted a rematch on his own, not with the help of anyone, but on his on while walking across the beach and being repeatedly told, great fight, etc...he immediately contacted Mike Trainer to make the fight, who then reached out to Dundee, who advised he thought it was a good idea.

I have never heard anywhere where Ray said lets try to catch Duran when he was out of shape.

However again, you all are missing the point. So what If he wanted to try to catch Duran early. So what. Are not they both paid professionals and told the date of the fight at the same time. Help me understand who benefits from a contractual date established on a set day more or less. Duran was only 28-29 years of age and again was use to an average of 3-4 month period of rest between fights. So again, even if Ray said this, which I have to see it, to believe, what does this prove. Duran knew of the date for over 4 months. If Duran chose to party and not train, is that Ray's fault. Part of PROFESSIONAL BOXING IS ENSURING DAY OF WEIGHT IN YOU MAKE WEIGHT, DAY OF FIGHT YOU GIVE 100%. So again the Duran excuse mill is running.

Hmm now I am reviewing a post where you quoted in the Ring what Ray apparently said. I have video footage from Janks, Ray and Dundee that says different. I also have in Durans book Duran manager saying he made the fight early to minimize the amount of partying that Duran was up in New York doing. The point again is So what. Duran made weight, he came to the fight, no excuses. Again, I do not see anyone on hear suggesting leoanrd was weakened in the 1st fight because he had the flu roughly a week before. Is not the Flu known to weaken anyone, much less the fighter.

You all can make all the excuses you want, Ray beat duran fair and square, Duran quit. Period. Ray has a 2-1 record vs Duran. In the only fight Duran beat him, it was very very very close. If the 1st round was scored in Ray's favor on each of the judges scorecard, we have Ray winning. A round in which Duran did not land one clean shot to the head.

Oh also, Duran lost to Benetiz, Hearns, Hagler, and 1-2 vs Ray, all before the age of 33. Many of his fights were vs less just say the quality of opposition seems a bit lacking for the most part. Duran mostly had his career between 130-135, and moved up at the age of 27-28. You all slam Mayweather, who I target too, but Mayweather beat collectively better oppposition than Duran did, and moved up and has not lost yet. Leonard beat duran 2 out of 3 fights, and beat those mentioned above that Duran lost too. Again, this Duran Myth is simply laughable. While he was no doubt a great fighter, many on here refuse to look at FACTS, which govern all other fighters, like hmm THEIR RECORD. Instead we get excuses, reasons why we should not consider his record of 1-5 vs the big 4, while yet giving Mayweather no respect. It is just hilarious the great lenghts many on here go to taking a resume full of average at best fighters, and clealry many sparring partner at best opponents, and then a losing record vs the best fighters he faced, and somehow this guy is never able of losing.

Was he great yes, but do you all make every exception known to man when reviewing him, his record, his resume, his losses, his poor record when he moved up in weights and want to excuse it because he did move up, but hold others accountable for when they moved up. hmmmm I wonder why.

Hey Lionel. If you all recall I did not start this never ending issue. It was done by others.

walshb
12-08-2009, 02:48 PM
I don't see where anyone is saying Ray didn't beat him fair and square.

I just thought it odd that Ray would openly admit to wanting to get
Duran when he was possibly not as prepared as previous. Admitting this
doesn't really bolster Ray IMO.

Also, this stemmed from my simple analogy: Isn't it every bit as fair for some to say that Ray beat Duran in New Orleans because Duran wasn't as prepared physically and mentally as he was for the Montreal bout; as it is for others to say that Duran beat Ray in Montreal because Ray chose to fight
a bad style?

Both are legitimate excuses, and both can be used. pink, you seem to want to excuse Ray's loss in Montreal and put it down to "fighting the wrong fight," yet when someone suggests that Duran lost in New Orleans because he wasn't physically or mentally as prepared as he should have been, you say it's baloney?

I think both could be used, but if I were to say which excuse was the more credible, I would say the excuse for Duran's loss was.

10-8
12-08-2009, 03:00 PM
Good post 10-8 both of them. Thanks for the quote..I'll just say I have video footage of Janks morton discussing why he was released from the Leonard camp, which was because he thought Leonard could not beat Duran. Leonard became upset and thus he was let go. Pink you need to brush up on your Sugar Ray facts.

It was Dave Jacobs not Janks Morton who was released because he thought Leonard was fighting Duran again too soon after the loss.

wpink
12-08-2009, 04:19 PM
Pink you need to brush up on your Sugar Ray facts.

It was Dave Jacobs not Janks Morton who was released because he thought Leonard was fighting Duran again too soon after the loss.

your correct. I switched the names. I knew the video footage etc. But got the names mixed up.

10-8. I am not excusing ray's loss. I said he got his but kicked, fair & square. Yes the score was close, the late rounds, some I will admit appeared rounds Duran took off. It was clearly Durans night, he had the crowd, momentum, he was the aggressor. It's arau's fault he did not use or even try to use his foot speed, lateral movement, create space, etc. That isxarays fault. However, it's not as if this was a foreign style to him, or if he was not fighting back with all his might or heart. It simply was the wrong style for him to beat duran. What makes Ray that good, is that he had the ability to switch styles and still beat all time greats.

Ron Lipton
12-08-2009, 09:28 PM
Griffith takes him to school.

thewonderful134
12-08-2009, 10:05 PM
Gentlemen
Let me clear something up, first, I am not a big Duran fan. The fact that any fighter could allow himself to show up for fights in as bad of condition as Duran did, as often as he did, is ridiculous, It was insulting to the sport and it was insulting to the fans who paid good money to watch him. The only thing as ridiculous as Durans conditioning was how many times we still tuned in to watch him. But then, had we not, we would have missed the Cuevas, Moore, Barkly and Hagler fights. Second, I am not making excuses for Durans lack of professionalism. An excuse absolves someone of responsibility, and it was Durans responsibility to show up in condition, he didn't. I'm just stating the reason for his poor performance was his lack of proper training. Nor am I knocking Ray for having a good team working for him, it was their job to make sure their fighter has best landscape possible for the fight an that's what they did. But thus discussion is not about who was in better condition and when, it is about how they would do against each other best vs best. In my honest opinion Duran wins.


One last thing about my ability to pick winners, if anybody wants to make big money, contact me before any major bout, ask who I think is going to win, then bet the other way, you'll be living large.

134

thewonderful134
12-08-2009, 10:17 PM
Sorry, I forgot to mention as far as this thread goes I agree with Ron Lipton.


Hi Michael Frank

If everybody always agreed with each other, what a boring thread this would be. somebody would type in Ray Leonard, then everybody else would type in yeah yeah yeah, then someone else wiil type in Ali, then everyone else would type yeah yeah yeah. How boring. Thank you and everyone else for your disagreement, even though I think you are wrong.

134

Surf-Bat
12-09-2009, 04:42 AM
Griffith takes him to school.

Hmmm....I have no issue with you thinking Griffith wins, but "takes him to school"? I don't think you're giving Leonard his proper due here. Don't take this as an attack, but I've noticed that you tend to way OVERLY favor the fighters of your era to the battlers who came afterward. You've stated that Dick Tiger would "run Hagler out of the ring", Nino Benvenuti would "walk through" Thomas Hearns, Carlos Ortiz beats Duran and now Griffith "schools" Leonard. Isn't that all a bit much?

No welterweight in history "schools" Leonard. No middleweight in history "runs Hagler out of the ring". Beats them? Sure. But I feel like you're not giving these boys their proper due. They were better than that. ;)

walshb
12-09-2009, 08:01 AM
I tend to agree with Surf, we are talking about men who could compete in any era at any time. This would also apply to Floyd as a 130-140 lb fighter. He cpmpetes in an era, and nobody runs him out of the ring. Griffith may have some advantages, a little stronger perhaps; after this I see Ray having speed and power and footwork advantages. I see him being able to win this bout more ways than Emile

wpink
12-09-2009, 09:52 AM
Gentlemen
Let me clear something up, first, I am not a big Duran fan. The fact that any fighter could allow himself to show up for fights in as bad of condition as Duran did, as often as he did, is ridiculous, It was insulting to the sport and it was insulting to the fans who paid good money to watch him. The only thing as ridiculous as Durans conditioning was how many times we still tuned in to watch him. But then, had we not, we would have missed the Cuevas, Moore, Barkly and Hagler fights. Second, I am not making excuses for Durans lack of professionalism. An excuse absolves someone of responsibility, and it was Durans responsibility to show up in condition, he didn't. I'm just stating the reason for his poor performance was his lack of proper training. Nor am I knocking Ray for having a good team working for him, it was their job to make sure their fighter has best landscape possible for the fight an that's what they did. But thus discussion is not about who was in better condition and when, it is about how they would do against each other best vs best. In my honest opinion Duran wins.


One last thing about my ability to pick winners, if anybody wants to make big money, contact me before any major bout, ask who I think is going to win, then bet the other way, you'll be living large.

134

Your opinion accepted. My opinion Leonard that emerged from the 1st Duran fight "at welterweight and above" beats Duran 9 times out of 10.

I do have to point out you and others tap toe around the issue I point out. You repeatedly point to one performance and make excuses for it, or as you put it point out he was not at peak performance, when you have nothing to show that indicates this. However, that is your opinion fine, my question is why is it you make this claim when he was off for 5 months, only 28-29 years old, but in other fights hmm 72 of them including his first fight with SRL, he had less time off, and keep in mind if his normal knack was to party inbetween fights, which everyone repeatedly says, how is it any different for his fight with Ray. Do we only bring it up, when he loses, hmmm in a effort to ignore a loss of a favorite that we dont want to tarnish a unbeatable image.

Help me understand how if it is a known issue that Duran "normally" parties in between fights, but generally has less time to prepare and even get down to a weight 12 pounds less, how is this excuse (cause that is what it is) valid when in this case he had even longer to prepare for the 2nd fight than he did for the 1st fight. How is you can totally ignore what different strenghts, strategy, etc that Ray brought into the 2nd fight than the first.

I am almost in total agreement that we should meet somewhere in the middle, except I do not by the fact that Duran was not mentally as prepared as before. I do believe that the rhythm of the fight, the style of the fight, and crowd momentem that he seized on in montreal had changed. I do by the fact that Ray did not say things like he would kill him this time, etc. I do by the fact that Duran maybe thought this time he could beat him because he beat him before. However, that is part of boxing. These things effect how the fight goes. Duran tried to rush ray, it was a different ray. To totally neglect that Ray DID NOT MOVE THE FIRST FIGHT, BUT DID THE 2ND FIGHT IS...HMMM oh well, something Duran fans will do no matter what.

People get hyped up etc..all the time. I remember on here people criticising Roy because it appeared his heart was taken from him, when tarver said "gonna be any excuses this time roy" in the middle of the ring. Or how Tyson when someone faces back up to him after 3-4 rounds his dominance evaporates. Well how is that any different than how we judge Duran vs Leonard.

It is total excuses. Leave it be. Duran again all time great. Stepped in the ring 1st time beat ray. I can make all the excuses for Ray in the world, but the fact remains he beat him, and guess what else you and Duran fans around the world do not want to hear the excuses and your not buying it. Well same thing for the 2nd fight. Duran Stepped in the ring, but this time stepped out with a L. Same things goes for Ray leonard Fans.

walshb
12-09-2009, 10:29 AM
Watch Duran from fight 1 and from fight II and serioulsy try to tell me that they were the same, or very close. It's plain to see in every aspect of the Duran in fight II that he wasn't the same beast as previoulsy. It's in everything he does, he moves slower, punches slower, looks far less focused and interested and lacks desire and ferocity. Why? Only he knows this, but he's about at 70 percent of what he was in Montreal.

As much as Ray adapted and changed amnd moved and used his boxing skills, there was still an obvious lack of efficiency to Duran's work.
The chap was plain uninterested in this fight, didn't prpeare and didn't care either. Money indeed spoke!

Pit Duran from fight 1 vs. any Ray after fight 1, and still it's a tough and hard fought win. I used to think Ray would always beat him; but from reall looking at Durna in Montreal, I tend to think it's 50-50 now.

BTW, what does Duran's previous fights and TIME between fights have to do with the 4-5 month time frame
between his Leonard bouts? Maybe in the previous bouts, he did prepare better, but in the
June-Nov time frame in 1980, it damn well looked like he didn't.

wpink
12-09-2009, 01:43 PM
Watch Duran from fight 1 and from fight II and serioulsy try to tell me that they were the same, or very close. It's plain to see in every aspect of the Duran in fight II that he wasn't the same beast as previoulsy. It's in everything he does, he moves slower, punches slower, looks far less focused and interested and lacks desire and ferocity. Why? Only he knows this, but he's about at 70 percent of what he was in Montreal.

As much as Ray adapted and changed amnd moved and used his boxing skills, there was still an obvious lack of efficiency to Duran's work.
The chap was plain uninterested in this fight, didn't prpeare and didn't care either. Money indeed spoke!

Pit Duran from fight 1 vs. any Ray after fight 1, and still it's a tough and hard fought win. I used to think Ray would always beat him; but from reall looking at Durna in Montreal, I tend to think it's 50-50 now.

BTW, what does Duran's previous fights and TIME between fights have to do with the 4-5 month time frame
between his Leonard bouts? Maybe in the previous bouts, he did prepare better, but in the
June-Nov time frame in 1980, it damn well looked like he didn't.

Ok even though I have watched each fight over 200 times, I will do so at the end of this post, and document....I will not cover rounds 1 -7.

Maybe movement cause the lack of efficieny. Same way we talk about how the terror of hagler and his great efficient counterpunching style stopped 11 out of 13 opponents because they stood straight in front of him. Maybe leonard lateral movement caused Duran, instead of being able to duck the leonard jab and looping right hand he threw a lot in the 1st fight, and in just swarm and stationary leonard who only movement was directly back into the ropes.... and when they did break many times in the 1st fight Leonard did not step out into the center of the ring, something he did since he was a amateur, he simply stay on the ropes and position himself to either fire back and take more punishement. Thus Duran tenacity was provided a forum and and opponent who that night provided a style that allowed his tenacity and efficient to be on steriods.

2nd fight just like the first , starting the 2nd round Duran bull rushed Leonard but instead of leonard being right there, this time he was chasing a moving target, this time he caught counters via hooks and uppercuts and then Leonard spinned and moved off the ropes. I can point to at least 4-5 attempts one where leoanrd was rushed to the canvas, another where duran missed leonard completely and his body went through the ropes. No I am not buying that Duran did not try as hard, he simply had a different target. Major difference rushing a stationary target, vs a moving target. The great Chavez saw this trying to hit Sweat Pea, everyone finds this trying to hit Mayweather, When Roy had his foot speed he was never stopped, barely hit, Ray the night he was stationary was easily hit, the night he used lateral movement frusterated Duran. Seems easy to me to understand that difference.

Now pit the Duran from Montreal to the Leonard in New Orleans. I have Leonard winning as he did in New orleans. Maybe Duran does not quit, but the same issues would exist. Hell duran BARELY beat leonard fighting his style. Barely meaning the score was very close. I can clearly see why Duran fans would say it was not a barely win, I admit it was Durans night.

please I am looking right now Round 2, duran rushed in tryed several times to get in behind his jab, and leonard simply beat him to the puch, tied him up, pushed him, then when on the inside landed upper cuts, and caught him trying to rush in several times on the ropes with a great flurry one time.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Mul4r3gUFk

Round 3 he starts rushing in and catches a left hook..hell the entire 3rd round he tried to rush in or get set to rush Ray, and but either moved, tied him up, beat him to the jab, caught him rushing in...Was not a lack of effort,,he simply was getting beat. The entire 3rd round he tried to rush in.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKutNTYr8e8&feature=PlayList&p=4D5AC11AA5168A7D&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=25

4th round he is trying to rush in...if you look closely you see ray not only moved, and landed better hooks and tied him up, but duran would jab and follow up in the 1st fight with a nice overhand right. but Ray's jab a counter jab threw off duran's timing. Side to side lateral movment,Duran could nto get set to rush, then we does, he is pushed through the ropes.....

We could go on and on,,but you are clearly looking at a different fight..Starting round five Duran try's to rush in twice first time ray sides steps him and second time he ties him up and and pushed his head down..

Duran is trying just like he did in montreal..He simply cant deal with the movment speed..Rushes in again, ray slips, and falls.. as soon as Refer wips off rays gloves Duran rushes in again..and actually is more effective this time...but ray is tieing him up, throught the fight something he did not do in Montreal..........

Sorry Walsh. Duran tried just like he did in Montreal. I need not cover rounds 7 or 8, as those where horrible rounds for Duran. So from rounds 2-5, you cant tell me he was not trying with the same tenacity.

walshb
12-09-2009, 02:04 PM
Ok even though I have watched each fight over 200 times, I will do so at the end of this post, and document....I will not cover rounds 1 -7.
Jeez, you must have serious patience. I could barely watch a rd of it.

It's quite a dull and boring fight; no wonder Duran quit!

wpink
12-09-2009, 02:36 PM
Jeez, you must have serious patience. I could barely watch a rd of it.

It's quite a dull and boring fight; no wonder Duran quit!

Now i will be the first to tell you the 1st fight was a much better fight for the eyes, unless your juanita Leonard. I would not say boring, I would say not a lot of clear landed punches.

walshb
12-09-2009, 02:52 PM
Now i will be the first to tell you the 1st fight was a much better fight for the eyes, unless your juanita Leonard. I would not say boring, I would say not a lot of clear landed punches.
Yeah, a hell of a lot of shaping, threatening and posing; rather than action, scoring and excitement.

wpink
12-09-2009, 03:50 PM
It was not that bad. As you see Duran was trying and trying to get in, however Ray used lateral movement to keep the fight off the ropes. So I agree it was not the war the 1st fight was, but it was everybit as strategic as the 1st fight was, only Ray's strategy was working. Duran was trying no less than he did in montreal. It may appear he wasn't if your only focusing on the results. However go back and look and you will see he repeatedly kept trying to make it physical infight, and kept trying to bully ray to the ropes.

walshb
12-09-2009, 04:06 PM
Hey, I don't dispute that he wasn't trying, I dispute the ferocity of that trying. It seemed half hearted, and that's not taking into account Ray's
tactics and fight plan. Ray did what he had to, Duran showed up and seemed uninterested to be honest. It's all in te eyes and the body language;)

wpink
12-09-2009, 04:55 PM
The exchange in the 2nd round and then his rushing and falling throught the ropes in the 3rd round, make it clear that Duran came to fight in my opinion.

In the 2nd round when he rushed in and ray caught him with a two punch combination, Duran got visably angry and tried to force his will on him, and ray caught him again Duran again swung wildly trying to catch Ray, who ducked his punch and spun off the ropes. Honeslty I am not overhyping anything here. Look at the exchange, look closedly at how duran tried rushing in.... it was lateral movement that kept duran off balance and steping left then stepping right, following ray, everytime he seemed about ready to attack. Then Ray would follow it up with a jab, Not pretty, not the best looking fight for us fans, but it clearly was a tool that Ray used in the 2nd fight and could have used in the 1st fight.

thewonderful134
12-09-2009, 07:28 PM
Pink
I have stated earlier what I was told and admitted it was second hand,Post 25( If I could figure out how to make those green quote boxes it would save my poor typing finger) but I believe it. I have also explained the difference between an excuse and a reason, an excuse absolves, a reason explains . I would never absolve Duran for not being in proper shape, it was wrong.

I do agree with you that in the final analyses we can only go with what actually happened in the ring. Thats why I now believe Hector Camacho is one of the best p4p fighters that ever lived, heck he beat both Leonard and Duran

134

wpink
12-09-2009, 09:03 PM
Pink
I have stated earlier what I was told and admitted it was second hand,Post 25( If I could figure out how to make those green quote boxes it would save my poor typing finger) but I believe it. I have also explained the difference between an excuse and a reason, an excuse absolves, a reason explains . I would never absolve Duran for not being in proper shape, it was wrong.

I do agree with you that in the final analyses we can only go with what actually happened in the ring. Thats why I now believe Hector Camacho is one of the best p4p fighters that ever lived, heck he beat both Leonard and Duran

134

Haha... well If you want to consider both Leonard and Duran was over 40 and leonard had not been in the ring for 6 years...Ok

Still have seen no proof duran was not in proper shape, mentally or physically.