It's not what you say, it is what you do...

all you got to do is pay close attentiont to leonards career he always fights his oppoents when he thinks they arn't at 100% percent. You act as if after the 2nd leonard fight duran never fougth again or was never in a tough fight again. in the long run duran had a longer career then any of the fighters he faced. Oh yes, I'll admit as quickly as anybody that Duran belongs among the all time greats in the sport of boxing and is a first ballot hall-of-famer. But the bottom line is, there is no denying that in the night of the 2nd Leonard fight, a man known as one of the most ferocious fighters in boxing history who was supposed to have a never-say-die attitude bi+ched out simply because his opponent was clowning around in the ring and outboxing him. That's what the original title of this thread is all about. "it's not what you say, it's what you do"....and Duran is supposedly denying the fact that he said "no mas", right?

A pre-Hagler Leonard was a great fighter and close to Duran in accomplisments; but if you look at their careers in terms of who did more. Duran, ultimately, is a better p4p fighter. Duran beat Buchanan, Leonard, Moore, and Barkley for titles. Buchanan was a very tough lightweight champion, Leonard was one of the best ever at Welterweight, which means he was a great fighter who was naturally bigger than Duran; but Duran beat him in an extremely physical fight...and the 2nd fight was close, despite the "No Mas". Also, Duran damn near outboxed one of the greatest Middlweights ever....that's two whole divisions above his native Lightweight class...160-135 (and Duran began fighting below lightweight). Barkly had just put Thomas Hearns out in 3; and a 37 year old Duran dropped a man who went up to Heavweight at one point, after 10 grueling rounds. Leonard beat Benitez, Duran, and Hearns...and Kalule all in his first career. The Hagler he faced was no where near as close to his prime as the one Duran faced. Hagler was slower...much slower...against Leonard. Still, even though that win is debated to this day, it's an amazing achievement. After Hagler, though, Leonard was like Fat Elvis in Vegas. Everything was for the money and nothing for real credibility. He fought Donnie Lalonde, the weakest of the three Light-Heavyweight Titlists (the other two were Virgil Hill and Prince charles Williams); and he didn't even fight him at 175...he made Lalonde come down to a catch weight; and somehow the WBC mandated it not only a Light-Heavyweight titile bout, but a Super-Middlweight bout as well. You can't hold and defend multiple titles in mulitple divisions; but you can fight for two entirely separtate titles against one man. Hmmm. Tell me that's legitimate and I'll clean out your padded cell. Tommy Hearns had just escaped with a win against James Kinchen before Leonard signed the rematch. Everybody thought Tommy was shot; but Ray saw those dollar signs and instead of fighting Michael Nunn or Mike McCallum or some other ranking fighter, he fought what he thought was a shell of "The Hitman"....and should have lost. Tommy whooped his ass in that fight, yet Ray got a draw. Duran had just beaten Barkley; but part of the reason was styles. Duran was old at 37; but was a better boxer than Iran...and Iran was aggressive. Styles make fights and while the bigger boxer should have knocked a smaller Duran out, it was Barkley who was dropped and Duran who won the decision. Ray saw another golden opportunity to make some cash and capitalized by outboxing the slower 38 year old Duran to one of the most boring decisions I've ever witnessed. Duran made 12 defenses of his lightweight crown, when he was at his best. Ray made one defense of his Welterweight Crown, lost to Duran, regained it, and defened it 4 times before retiring due to his detached retina. Ray Leonard, ultimately, is more a case of "what might have been" than a case of what was. True, his wins over Benitez, Duran, Hearns, and Hagler are legendary performances; but his second career was indeed smoke and mirrors. Roberto Duran, while inconsistant at times due to his lifestyle, still took on the best. His wins over Buchanan, DeJesus, Lampkin at Lightweight, Palomino & Leonard at Welterweight, Cuevas & Moore at Jr. Middlweight, and Barkley aat Middlweight prove that he ducked no man. True, Moore was inexperienced; but everyone thought Duran was done by age 32...he showed otherwise. And Moore had good wins over Tadishi Mihara and the same Ayub Kalule that Ray Leonard had gotten praise for beating, so he was no push over until Duran did just that. Duran's losses to Leonard, Benitez, and Hearns like to be pointed out to discredit him; but remember he started out at 120 Lbs.....118 to be precise. To be a warior from 118 Lbs to 160 Lbs, take on and beat most of the best you've faced says something. Can Leonard say the same thing? Sure; but not to the same degree. So, Duran quit against Leonard in match #2...he still had Ray looking like a mugging victim after their first match. awsome post, lots of boxing knowledge :boxing:

A pre-Hagler Leonard was a great fighter and close to Duran in accomplisments; but if you look at their careers in terms of who did more. Duran, ultimately, is a better p4p fighter. Duran beat Buchanan, Leonard, Moore, and Barkley for titles. Buchanan was a very tough lightweight champion, Leonard was one of the best ever at Welterweight, which means he was a great fighter who was naturally bigger than Duran; but Duran beat him in an extremely physical fight...and the 2nd fight was close, despite the "No Mas". Also, Duran damn near outboxed one of the greatest Middlweights ever....that's two whole divisions above his native Lightweight class...160-135 (and Duran began fighting below lightweight). Barkly had just put Thomas Hearns out in 3; and a 37 year old Duran dropped a man who went up to Heavweight at one point, after 10 grueling rounds. Leonard beat Benitez, Duran, and Hearns...and Kalule all in his first career. The Hagler he faced was no where near as close to his prime as the one Duran faced. Hagler was slower...much slower...against Leonard. Still, even though that win is debated to this day, it's an amazing achievement. After Hagler, though, Leonard was like Fat Elvis in Vegas. Everything was for the money and nothing for real credibility. He fought Donnie Lalonde, the weakest of the three Light-Heavyweight Titlists (the other two were Virgil Hill and Prince charles Williams); and he didn't even fight him at 175...he made Lalonde come down to a catch weight; and somehow the WBC mandated it not only a Light-Heavyweight titile bout, but a Super-Middlweight bout as well. You can't hold and defend multiple titles in mulitple divisions; but you can fight for two entirely separtate titles against one man. Hmmm. Tell me that's legitimate and I'll clean out your padded cell. Tommy Hearns had just escaped with a win against James Kinchen before Leonard signed the rematch. Everybody thought Tommy was shot; but Ray saw those dollar signs and instead of fighting Michael Nunn or Mike McCallum or some other ranking fighter, he fought what he thought was a shell of "The Hitman"....and should have lost. Tommy whooped his ass in that fight, yet Ray got a draw. Duran had just beaten Barkley; but part of the reason was styles. Duran was old at 37; but was a better boxer than Iran...and Iran was aggressive. Styles make fights and while the bigger boxer should have knocked a smaller Duran out, it was Barkley who was dropped and Duran who won the decision. Ray saw another golden opportunity to make some cash and capitalized by outboxing the slower 38 year old Duran to one of the most boring decisions I've ever witnessed. Duran made 12 defenses of his lightweight crown, when he was at his best. Ray made one defense of his Welterweight Crown, lost to Duran, regained it, and defened it 4 times before retiring due to his detached retina. Ray Leonard, ultimately, is more a case of "what might have been" than a case of what was. True, his wins over Benitez, Duran, Hearns, and Hagler are legendary performances; but his second career was indeed smoke and mirrors. Roberto Duran, while inconsistant at times due to his lifestyle, still took on the best. His wins over Buchanan, DeJesus, Lampkin at Lightweight, Palomino & Leonard at Welterweight, Cuevas & Moore at Jr. Middlweight, and Barkley aat Middlweight prove that he ducked no man. True, Moore was inexperienced; but everyone thought Duran was done by age 32...he showed otherwise. And Moore had good wins over Tadishi Mihara and the same Ayub Kalule that Ray Leonard had gotten praise for beating, so he was no push over until Duran did just that. Duran's losses to Leonard, Benitez, and Hearns like to be pointed out to discredit him; but remember he started out at 120 Lbs.....118 to be precise. To be a warior from 118 Lbs to 160 Lbs, take on and beat most of the best you've faced says something. Can Leonard say the same thing? Sure; but not to the same degree. So, Duran quit against Leonard in match #2...he still had Ray looking like a mugging victim after their first match.

i can understand if he quit on his stool, a lot of great fighters have done that. but quitting right in the middle of the round, thats just wrong.

A rematch?!? To an opponent who quit?? I'm sorry, but a loser earns rematches by either a) losing a close fight b) giving a good losing effort c) putting up an exciting fight. Duran did none of the above in the second fight. Besides, in the Thomas Hearns fight a year later, Leonard suffered a detached retena and temporarily retired. And he did give Duran a third rematch eventually...and still, Duran couldn't defeat a torn-retena, past-his-prime Leonard. all you got to do is pay close attentiont to leonards career he always fights his oppoents when he thinks they arn't at 100% percent. You act as if after the 2nd leonard fight duran never fougth again or was never in a tough fight again. in the long run duran had a longer career then any of the fighters he faced.

You forget that Leanord wouldnt do what Duran did for him, and give him an immediate rematch. A rematch?!? To an opponent who quit?? I'm sorry, but a loser earns rematches by either a) losing a close fight b) giving a good losing effort c) putting up an exciting fight. Duran did none of the above in the second fight. Besides, in the Thomas Hearns fight a year later, Leonard suffered a detached retena and temporarily retired. And he did give Duran a third rematch eventually...and still, Duran couldn't defeat a torn-retena, past-his-prime Leonard.

so let me get this straight...Duran pulls a Mayorga and trashes Leonard verbally during the buildup for the first fight, which in turn con's Leonard into a flat-footed brawl. Leonard fights Duran's fight (as a fleet-footed boxer brawling with a natural brawler) and loses. Later that year, Leonard comes in with a different gameplan in mind....He uses his natuarl skills (boxing and moving) to frusterate the hell out of Duran and make him uncerimoniously quit. Duran not 100%?? Couldn't somebody tell Duran that he was in a championship bout against a (then) future hall-of-famer in his prime?? Classic case of a bully being made to look foolish and crying like a bi+ch about it. "No Mas?" hahahaha. Oh, and later in the decade...Leonard schooled him again. You forget that Leanord wouldnt do what Duran did for him, and give him an immediate rematch.

so let me get this straight...Duran pulls a Mayorga and trashes Leonard verbally during the buildup for the first fight, which in turn con's Leonard into a flat-footed brawl. Leonard fights Duran's fight (as a fleet-footed boxer brawling with a natural brawler) and loses. Later that year, Leonard comes in with a different gameplan in mind....He uses his natuarl skills (boxing and moving) to frusterate the hell out of Duran and make him uncerimoniously quit. Duran not 100%?? Couldn't somebody tell Duran that he was in a championship bout against a (then) future hall-of-famer in his prime?? Classic case of a bully being made to look foolish and crying like a bi+ch about it. "No Mas?" hahahaha. Oh, and later in the decade...Leonard schooled him again.

According to him he was having stomach pains, and he was having trouble breathing and moving. But i take it most people think thats bullshit? I think it's because most people see boxers as invincible. So, for something as little as a stomach problem (in our heads it's little) to stop a boxer from continuing, we just can't accept that as a valid reason. We think that there's more to it. Like the boxer being a coward or an asshole who robbed us of a good match or many other negative ideas. Who really wants to believe that their favorite boxer/favorite pick of the night was stopped due to a simple stomach ache?

According to him he was having stomach pains, and he was having trouble breathing and moving. But i take it most people think thats bullshit?

roberto duran is the best fight of the last 40 yrs, he was manipulated in to coming in out of shape, and had some clown sticking his toungue and a running, he wasnt getting schooled for nothing it was about to be an even fight b4 duran quit, lenord should of been a man and tried to beat 100 percent duran, oh he tried that and got schooled, his carreer is over if he loses the rematch, his team new they better not face a hugry duran

The point is he quit while he was in his prime. I can't forgive him for that. He wasn't even taken a beating, he was just getting schooled and didn't get to do what he wanted to do.

so what after the 2nd leonard fight, he gave hagler hell, tko'd moore, defeat barkley who ko'd hearns in 3, and even in older form was still better then any of the combacks hearns or learnard ever made. i agree...............................................

And Duran quit...whether he said it or not... sorry, have always wanted to say that... so what after the 2nd leonard fight, he gave hagler hell, tko'd moore, defeat barkley who ko'd hearns in 3, and even in older form was still better then any of the combacks hearns or learnard ever made.

Couldn't you have just made a post in the other Duran thread?