Duran Leonard Hearns Hagler

[Panamaniac]

** Mr. Pinky, I'm sure that you are a first rate fan, but alas, it appears that cheerleading suits you better than understanding how to follow the lineal passage of time in each man's career.

Duran abandoned his lightweight title after his last title fight in Jan78. He had repeatedly tried to get a title shot against Benitez at jrwelt to no avail. When Duran relinquished his title Palamino and Cuevas were the welt champs, not Leonard. Duran did not move up for his looks. He wanted a title shot at welt, having to skip the jrwelt division where Cervantes and a cast of Asians/Mambyheld the titles because he couldn't even make that limit anymore.

Palamino was an inactive WBC welt champ who lost to Benitez who was also inactive. Benitez was forced to fight Leonard or be stripped. Leonard was given the same option after his gimmee inaugural defense against Green, forced to face his mandatory Duran which Dundee did not want as he felt Duran was too experienced and dangerous. Dundee was no fool. Fairplay, Leonard had no experience of ducking Duran like Benitez did, but I got to tell you Mr. Pinky, Leonard's next fight after Duran relinquished his title was the great Rocky Ramon, so I doubt Duran knew Leonard from a fly in the dung heap when he moved up. His fight against Palamino seems to have been an informal WBC title eliminator. He can be found in interviews talking about fighting for the WBC title against Benitez which became Leonard.

The closed door session you gab about came about after Leonard was ordered to face Duran just like it happens all the time in boxing. Deal hammered out with promoter and fight made. Can't blame them for wanting title unification and an easier fight against Cuevas. You don't just abandon announced plans for unification to fight a guy who is probably going to take your title away from you.

I could go hunting around and find you the newsreleases to prove what I say, but it's a lost cause with you. Just like your claim Leonard never fought a guy with a losing record. Losing seems to have been branded on your backside at an impressionable age. Duran was not a pampered American amateur with a multi-million dollar pro debut contract. He was a scrawny kid much more poor and hardscrabble than Leonard could ever imagine and came up hard in one of the worlds great backwaters. So he fought some nontitle fights between very active lightweight title defenses, much more than Leonard had for his career? So what if 3 divisions above his natural weight after 75 fights he started to struggle against top class quality jr/mid/middles/supermids? Anyone with a brain were simply amazed to see him so active and come up with periodic brilliant performances and talk about his brilliant old days.

Forty fights for Leonard is one of the shorter careers, 33 actually as the rest just little encores Leonard like to have here and there that padded his bank account and ego. Already pointed out that Jim Jeffries packed more HOF fights in approx half as many fights as Leonard and was clearly the more formidable fighter in his day, but nobody bigging him up these days because of one single loss way beyond his best days and moderns always overrate their own eras.

I know Ray's record better than you it appears because I've actually spent some time breaking it down while you were hopping around with pompoms. You don't have to take my word for it. I gave you the IBRO rankins which show those who rank Duran over Leonard have some consensus rankings behind their preference. You can big up Leonard all you wish, but trying to drag Duran down with nonsense is sinking you faster than the setting sun's snuffed pink rays.

Cheers now, Mr. Pink. Beautiful time to be a boxing fan. You just take care you don't trip over Mr. Duran too much more before you get older as he's a mighty big load these days and you might hurt your hip!

Flawless post... worth repeating...

[Hearnsz]

With all respect to Duran's very long record. I personally feel like Leonard had the most impressive one though. He fought short as a pro but he fought the best and won.
vs Duran: 1loss 2wins
vs Hearns: 1win 1draw
vs Hagler: 1win

I know Duran was out of his prime by then probably but Leonard still beat Hagler who is considered the best middleweight of all time. (I'm not sure if Hagler was in his prime but I think he was)
Also let's not forget Leonard's gold medal in the olympics! I voted for Hearns in the poll but I think I'll change my vote to Leonard. Even though Hearns is one of the hardest p4p punchers (maybe even THE hardest) of all time, Leonard's skills were just superiour.

[Panamaniac]

With all respect to Duran's very long record. I personally feel like Leonard had the most impressive one though. He fought short as a pro but he fought the best and won.
vs Duran: 1loss 2wins
vs Hearns: 1win 1draw
vs Hagler: 1win

I know Duran was out of his prime by then probably but Leonard still beat Hagler who is considered the best middleweight of all time. (I'm not sure if Hagler was in his prime but I think he was)
Also let's not forget Leonard's gold medal in the olympics! I voted for Hearns in the poll but I think I'll change my vote to Leonard. Even though Hearns is one of the hardest p4p punchers (maybe even THE hardest) of all time, Leonard's skills were just superiour.

In fights among the fab four, Leonard clearly has the best record. But the issue here is how they stack-up p4p all-time, or which had the most outstanding career overall.

[SABBATH]

Duran is the only one of the four to lose to a journeyman like Kirkland Laing while still in his championship years and was thoroughly out-classed by Benitez and never avenged either loss. He also suffered the most one-sided loss of the four getting demolished by Hearns and disgraced himself and the championship by quitting like a dog in the second Leonard fight. That cowardly act alone disgraced the sport and gave it a black-eye.

That's alot of blackmarks to put him ahead of the other three guys.

[wpink1]

london Rules,,You are far off... very far off. Leonard was never ordered to fight duran. Your on here making stuff up.

First off. Get Hands of Stone, it details that Duran wanted Ray from the time he won the Gold medal. He hated that this guy whom he felt was given superstardom was making all this money. He moved up for the big shot vs Leonard. What you leave out is the fact that Pryor was looming large at Jr welter, and Durans camp met with Pryors camp and the decision was made to avoid Pryor, and move on up to face Leonard and the big money. Duran was not the mandotory challenger friend. At the time your talking about Cuevas was the champ and Palimino. Benitez fought and beat Palimino, then Hearns was the number one contender. Leoanrd was scheduled to fight Cuevas, but then at the last minute he backed out and willingly fought Duran. Duran was not the mandotory.

I also suggest you get the book title, A fist ful of sugar. Leonard autobiagraphy. He details in there the mindset he and Dundee had with setting the first Duran fight and why they chose Duran. They thought he would slow up, was easier to hit, and that he did not like to take good body shots. The plan was the take it directly to Duran and stop him inside of 4 rounds. They had generally pro boxing style referee Padilla whom Durans camp was very upset about. He generally did no allow inside fighting. One thing happened wrong...The bomb that Duran landed in round 2. Leonard did not wake up til round 5.

One thing never published....is that Ray had the flu for a entire week before the fight in montreal. He was in New York before the fight, and there was thoughts that the fight may be canceled. However, he was able to get over it, and showed up in montreal much to his dismay that Duran had won over the fans up there.

London you need to check your facts. Every single fighter wanted to fight ray because of MONEY. Pryor Duran Hagler Benitez Hearns Cuevas Kalule etc...all wanted Leoanrd from lightweight to Middleweight...because of Money. Duran was not the mandatory challenger, and Leonard did not have to regard that anyway, as he was fighting the Benitez, Hearns, then moved up to Jr middle and beat kalule....

[ksjb85]

london Rules,,You are far off... very far off. Leonard was never ordered to fight duran. Your on here making stuff up.

First off. Get Hands of Stone, it details that Duran wanted Ray from the time he won the Gold medal. He hated that this guy whom he felt was given superstardom was making all this money. He moved up for the big shot vs Leonard. What you leave out is the fact that Pryor was looming large at Jr welter, and Durans camp met with Pryors camp and the decision was made to avoid Pryor, and move on up to face Leonard and the big money. Duran was not the mandotory challenger friend. At the time your talking about Cuevas was the champ and Palimino. Benitez fought and beat Palimino, then Hearns was the number one contender. Leoanrd was scheduled to fight Cuevas, but then at the last minute he backed out and willingly fought Duran. Duran was not the mandotory.

I also suggest you get the book title, A fist ful of sugar. Leonard autobiagraphy. He details in there the mindset he and Dundee had with setting the first Duran fight and why they chose Duran. They thought he would slow up, was easier to hit, and that he did not like to take good body shots. The plan was the take it directly to Duran and stop him inside of 4 rounds. They had generally pro boxing style referee Padilla whom Durans camp was very upset about. He generally did no allow inside fighting. One thing happened wrong...The bomb that Duran landed in round 2. Leonard did not wake up til round 5.

One thing never published....is that Ray had the flu for a entire week before the fight in montreal. He was in New York before the fight, and there was thoughts that the fight may be canceled. However, he was able to get over it, and showed up in montreal much to his dismay that Duran had won over the fans up there.

London you need to check your facts. Every single fighter wanted to fight ray because of MONEY. Pryor Duran Hagler Benitez Hearns Cuevas Kalule etc...all wanted Leoanrd from lightweight to Middleweight...because of Money. Duran was not the mandatory challenger, and Leonard did not have to regard that anyway, as he was fighting the Benitez, Hearns, then moved up to Jr middle and beat kalule....

interesting post.
Let's be realistic here. Benitez and Cuevas were both tune-ups for Duran, who was a monster of a fighter around 1979-80...if Duran would've made the quick stop @ 140 he could've easily fought Cervantes and beaten him, and given benitez a great fight. Duran would've also easily beaten Cuevas and Palomino if they had their belts or not, just like he did later. The thing that people love to put on Duran are his losses at 154 and up. yet when any other lightweight fights above 147 they write it off. No other lightweight would've been able to pull off what Duran did in the era that he fought in is the point here. personally i have Duran behind Leonard, and slightly above Hagler, with hearns at the bottom. There's no way Duran beats Hagler,Hearns,Benitez above 147..it's just not gonna happen becuase of size, and how sluggish Duran became once he got to 154. but looking @ his record from 135-147 is pretty impressive. One he moved to 154 he was never the same and it showed. simply put, Duran was a 70's fighter who reached the peak of his skills in 1980. If Hearns/Benitez/Leonard fought the same caliber of opponents in the 90's that Duran did in the 80's back to back, they would've also lost.

[baddest]

With all respect to Duran's very long record. I personally feel like Leonard had the most impressive one though. He fought short as a pro but he fought the best and won.
vs Duran: 1loss 2wins
vs Hearns: 1win 1draw
vs Hagler: 1win

I know Duran was out of his prime by then probably but Leonard still beat Hagler who is considered the best middleweight of all time. (I'm not sure if Hagler was in his prime but I think he was)
Also let's not forget Leonard's gold medal in the olympics! I voted for Hearns in the poll but I think I'll change my vote to Leonard. Even though Hearns is one of the hardest p4p punchers (maybe even THE hardest) of all time, Leonard's skills were just superiour.

Its also worth mentioning that While Leonard easily had the most impressive resume, he also stipulated the conditions and the style that was favorable to win against most of them(with the exception of hearns). Every Leonard fight was always to his advantage as soon as he became champion, and I think had the board room talks been more equal he might not have had as stellar a career...maybe duran wouldn't have quit if he could've trained longer than three weeks and got back to his proper fighting shape, maybe hagler would've won if the ring wasn't so big, maybe Hearns would've beaten him if it was 12 rounds. These are big 'ifs' that will always be apart of his career.

[StarshipTrooper]

Its also worth mentioning that While Leonard easily had the most impressive resume, he also stipulated the conditions and the style that was favorable to win against most of them(with the exception of hearns). Every Leonard fight was always to his advantage as soon as he became champion, and I think had the board room talks been more equal he might not have had as stellar a career...maybe duran wouldn't have quit if he could've trained longer than three weeks and got back to his proper fighting shape, maybe hagler would've won if the ring wasn't so big, maybe Hearns would've beaten him if it was 12 rounds. These are big 'ifs' that will always be apart of his career.

15 rounds were standard for championship fights at the time: Hardly an unfair stipulation dictated by Leonard. You can go on and on with THAT kind of silliness ie. if Marciano - Walcott I had been 12 rounds Walcott would have easily out-pointed Marciano; same with Louis - Conn I ect ect ect. Bottom line: You fight under the conditions that are in play during the era in which you fought; not under some hypothetical what if scenario. If anything, the biggest mistakes made my the alphabet boys was doing away with 15 round fights and foisting 12 round "championship" fights on the public that lacked the championship rounds. If you were championship material you could go 15 rounds if you had to; if not, then you didn't deserve a belt. Bottom line.

Poet

[El Dominicano]

I can't rate these fighters. To me there all in the same level, People forgot who Thomas Hearns the boxer is. Thomas Hearns could have out box'd Leonard and Hagler and won those fights so don't even try to underate him. + Hearns beat Leonard 2nd fight as we all know. Hearns K.O'd Duran. Hearns was winning most of the rounds against Leonard untill Ref stopped fight (1st fight). Hearns fought Hagler toe to toe when he clearly wasn't suppose to. Duran was a JWW beating up on bigger guys. He beat Leonard 1st fight and quit the 2nd becuz Lenard was acting like a clown. Hagler couldn't be floor'd he got punch by some of the biggest punchers and still kept going toe to toe with them. Even when he wasn't in his prime he beat big punchers like Mugabi. Leonord manage to beat all 3 of them but listen. Many and I mean MANY feel that U.D's wen't wrong. They were all close fights and many feel that Hagler should have won that fight and that Hearns should have won 2nd fight. All in all. They are all equal to me. I just don't like how Hearns is extremely underated.

[BennyST]

Duran is the only one of the four to lose to a journeyman like Kirkland Laing while still in his championship years and was thoroughly out-classed by Benitez and never avenged either loss. He also suffered the most one-sided loss of the four getting demolished by Hearns and disgraced himself and the championship by quitting like a dog in the second Leonard fight. That cowardly act alone disgraced the sport and gave it a black-eye.

That's alot of blackmarks to put him ahead of the other three guys.

Do you really think it disgraced the sport? I very much doubt it. It most certainly disgraced Duran in every way as he basically went to **** after it. A fighter quitting in a fight doesn't disgrace the sport of boxing. It disgraces the fighter. The bureaucratic corruption and nonsense disgraces the sport of boxing, and the fixed fights or decisions and managers throwing fights for money and ruining their fighters careers disgraces the sport of boxing.

Mike Tyson disgraced the sport of boxing for raping his wife and for his complete insanity outside the ring. Did Chavez disgrace the sport of boxing when he quit? Did Liston disgrace the sport by quitting? Tszyu? All the other fighters?

Quitting doesn't disgrace the sport, only the fighter.