It was a close, but clear decision. Duran landed the cleaner shots, got hit less in return, and controlled the tenor of the fight. But it's competitiveness is my point, and kind of what sets it apart from Chavez-Taylor. Let's take away round 12 for a second. If the dramatic last round stoppage doesn't occur, is Chavez-Taylor a GOAT candidate? I thought it was before last night, and the reason I thought it was because I remembered Chavez being more competitive than he was. Chavez won 2 rounds going in the 12. AT BEST, 3. Without the stoppage, is a 9-3, 8-4 fight a candidate for greatest fight ever?
I dont think it was a clear win at all. Numerous persons scored it for leonard. As i said, duran won his rounds clearer, and impose his style on srl, but theres tons of rounds that were superclose and could have went either way. But yes, chavez taylor was a good fight, but it's really the ending that make it epic. Actions wasnt as good as in duran-srl
Yes, that last part is my entire point. And it wasn't the conclusion I was expecting to reach last night, as I truly remembered Chavez-Taylor as being better than it was. I'll never mention it along side Corrales-Castillo 1 again.
The other thing that jumped out about re-watching both is how much better Duran was compared to Chavez.
They are not similar at all. Duran was much more dynamic and agressive, while chavez was a bit more workmanlike, and fought more by the book. Sure Duran has to be the favorite in a fight between the two, but i dont think chavez is without a chance
I dont see what Chavez's chance would be, but my fault for kind of getting us off topic. They were both memorable fights, and there hasn't been a fight like them in a long time.
Duran looked exceptional in that fight. Sadly,the fame and money it gave him probably ''ruined'' him.
The man would go on to beat Iran Barkley 9 years later. Leonard 1 was simply the end of his prime. He still found much success post-prime.
No doubt, this is why I put ruined between quotation. Still, I don't think he ever fought again with the same passion and aggressiveness.
I have wondered how well Duran's approach would have worked against really big punchers. Leonard wasn't that, even though recently he has been described as such. Barkley was, but that's all he had. Duran was at his best when he could smother skillful boxers, but he didn't face too many Tito or Jackson level punchers
I guess you missed when he dismantled arguably the biggest puncher in welterweight history in under 5 rounds. Always looking for an angle to diminish Duran... I have no clue why you always try to paint Duran as simply a pressure fighter, when the man was the best counterpuncher the sport has ever had.
I think Duran the night be beat Leonard could beat Robinson. And Duran at his peak is not only the best fighter ever, but the most skilled.
Cuevas.wasnt a compact puncher though. I agree with ugbk that seeing him against tito would have been very interesting
Well, there's holding and there's holding. What the holding was in Duran-Leonard was about two fighters jockeying for position rather than falling into clinches as such. That's my view of it anyway.
Agreed. Duran was clinching a lot, but it was to bring leonard where he wanted, not to stop the action
Pbf of course Seriously, I don't really like to proclaim someone as the best ever, as i feel the difference between the top guys are pretty much insignificant. Duran was a great great fighter, but I don't think we should overlook some of his bad performances and only take the great one.
I would love to see a Duran vs Trinidad matchup at 147. Of course Tito is dangerous for Duran at midrange - Trinidad is dangerous for everyone at midrange. But Duran has a huge edge in infighting, offense footwork, and defense.