Ray Leonard Or Roberto Duran?

[Sugarj]

Just an interesting set of stats:

Ray Leonard won 36 fights between 1977 and 1989.

Roberto Duran won 103 fights between 1968 and 2000!!!!


Duran certainly showed more longevity!

And remember that Duran was a pro for 8 years before Ray even won the Olympic gold and he still beat him in their first match which is impressive.

If Roberto was born ten years later and was a natural welterweight rather than lightweight I'd fancy that the fights with Hagler, Leonard and Hearns may have gone differently in the 80s....

[The_Demon]

Leonard has wins over better fighters but duran has the better body of work overall

Take your pick

[carlos slim]

ray leonard is far superior....he actually showed up in all his big fights regardless of whatever shape he was in unlike duran who got his ass starched pressed and cleaned by tommy hearns....it looked like he died in midair when hearns hit him....whats hilarious is duran gets heaps of praise for beating barkley but got beat by leonard in his next fight...but duran fanboys dismiss it as boring...leonard>duran all day....

[Jim Jeffries]

Not counting the last two fights, which were disastrous, Leonard basically fought over 12 years, during which he had breaks of 3 years, 2 years 3 months and 19 months.

Duran had three times as many fights over 5 decades.




Without the eye and hand problems, Leonard probably would have outdone Duran. But it is what it is.

[bojangles1987]

Duran was incredible, and simply the better fighter.

[Rikeña]

I vote for Roberto Duran more exciting fighter.

[QueensburyRules]

Not counting the last two fights, which were disastrous, Leonard basically fought over 12 years, during which he had breaks of 3 years, 2 years 3 months and 19 months.

Duran had three times as many fights over 5 decades.

Without the eye and hand problems, Leonard probably would have outdone Duran. But it is what it is.

- - After Duran whooped the pantyhose off Sugar in the first fight, Sugar retired with zero eye and hand problems.

Sal Sanchez has a better title record at age 23 than Leonard in his career. Aaron Pryor also has a better title record, but none of them 3 fighters were US Olympic Gold Medalists with Big Flashy Smiles for the fashion show paparazzi cameras of that era.

[The Old LefHook]

Both were great fighters who may make the AT top 20.

Only one fight counted between them--the first. For the third fight Leonard waited for Duran to get well past it before he signed. For the second fight he simply tricked Duran, who was then tricked by his own management, resulting in Duran coming in well below his best. Leonard's trickery wounded his legacy a little in this case, because both his wins over Duran were fouled by Leonard's guile. The rematch with Hearns was very slow to come as well. No immediate rematches with Leonard, ever--unless he lost. Duran failed to rematch Buchannan, but the difference is Duran beat the Scotsman mercilessly and obviously.

Leonard was greater in some categories,e.g., ring generalship. But overall I give it to Duran because he was more of a fighter than the trickster. The last ten years of Duran's career were spent fighting men quite a bit larger than himself, and he did just fine.

[IronDanHamza]

I'll go with Ray Leonard on this one.

[Willie Pep 229]

Both were great fighters who may make the AT top 20.

Only one fight counted between them--the first. For the third fight Leonard waited for Duran to get well past it before he signed. For the second fight he simply tricked Duran, who was then tricked by his own management, resulting in Duran coming in well below his best. Leonard's trickery wounded his legacy a little in this case, because both his wins over Duran were fouled by Leonard's guile. The rematch with Hearns was very slow to come as well. No immediate rematches with Leonard, ever--unless he lost. Duran failed to rematch Buchannan, but the difference is Duran beat the Scotsman mercilessly and obviously.

Leonard was greater in some categories,e.g., ring generalship. But overall I give it to Duran because he was more of a fighter than the trickster. The last ten years of Duran's career were spent fighting men quite a bit larger than himself, and he did just fine.

Do you have an opinion why a few months later Duran fought de Jesus in a non-title fight instead? Then making his next actual defense against one Hector Thompson, who was unranked by The Ring?

It was a time when champions still took non-title fights between actual defenses, that I understand, but why Hector Thompson?

Was he a mandatory?

Not a challeging opinion, just curious about the decision making.