Re: 30 for 30: Duran - Leonard
The phrase "he beat himself" is one of my biggest pet peeves. Boxing comes down to a lot more than skill. You need heart, determination, durability, and DISCIPLINE to go with it. That all gets factored in.
Saying "ohh well he only lost because he wasn't in shape" is, to me, the same as saying "ohh he only lost because he has a glass jaw" or "he only lost because he doesn't have heart." Who cares? Showing up in shape is part of being a great fighter, the same way the ability to take/throw a punch is. If he never showed up in shape than that for sure detracts from him as a fighter.
And this notion that he peaked in the first fight and then was washed up 6 months later... pure nut huggery. He got outboxed by a better fighter. Was he washed up when De Jesus put him on his ass and beat him in New York?
He looked fined a few years later when he was fighting with benitez, or beating the hell out of Cuevas and Moore at higher weights, or fighting compeditively with Marvin Hagler.
He wasn't washed up. He got completely bitched out in his prime by a superior fighter.
Re: 30 for 30: Duran - Leonard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
By the time Duran fought Leonard in Montreal he had been fighting for 12 years and his record was 71-1. That is a lot of boxing for a man not yet 30 years old. It was the last time we ever saw Roberto Duran at his peak, he won a close decision, but he did win, he landed the harder punches and more often was the aggressor. He was great that night.
No Mas highlights a fighter who had achieved everything he ever needed to achieve in the ring, by New Orleans he was already half the fighter he was just 6 months earlier. Leonard knew about Duran's weight issues, he knew about his preparation problems, he knew about the partying, he also knew if he waited any longer for a rematch then those problems might just get solved. Leonard had his man the moment the 2nd fight was signed. Duran should've made Leonard sweat on a rematch for a year.
Duran's own temperament, partying, rapid weight loss and his total under- estimation of Leonard's abilities beat him that night. I'm not buying any of the Leonard in-ring wizardry that befuddled Duran in New Orleans. Leonard was very good, but he wasn't that good that he could humiliate Roberto Duran. Duran was a 12 year veteran, already a legend by 1980 and arguably the greatest Lightweight champion of all time, Duran beat himself before the first bell sounded and he has no one to blame but himself for that.
Sugar Ray Leonard won the fight and would've won a decision, the result was never in doubt before a single punch was thrown.
We never saw the greatness of Roberto Duran again. He fought on another 21 years when he should've retired after the Hearns disaster.
Well said. Even though part of the motivation for Duran to take the second fight so quickly was the huge payday...part of it was also who he was as a fighter/person. He was not the kind of fighter who was going to make an opponent wait a short while (Ray with Duran in second fight) or a long while (like Ray did with Hagler) to gain the advantage. Not excusing his lack of focus/preparation for the rematch against Leonard...but just saying.
Re: 30 for 30: Duran - Leonard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
By the time Duran fought Leonard in Montreal he had been fighting for 12 years and his record was 71-1. That is a lot of boxing for a man not yet 30 years old. It was the last time we ever saw Roberto Duran at his peak, he won a close decision, but he did win, he landed the harder punches and more often was the aggressor. He was great that night.
No Mas highlights a fighter who had achieved everything he ever needed to achieve in the ring, by New Orleans he was already half the fighter he was just 6 months earlier. Leonard knew about Duran's weight issues, he knew about his preparation problems, he knew about the partying, he also knew if he waited any longer for a rematch then those problems might just get solved. Leonard had his man the moment the 2nd fight was signed. Duran should've made Leonard sweat on a rematch for a year.
Duran's own temperament, partying, rapid weight loss and his total under- estimation of Leonard's abilities beat him that night. I'm not buying any of the Leonard in-ring wizardry that befuddled Duran in New Orleans. Leonard was very good, but he wasn't that good that he could humiliate Roberto Duran. Duran was a 12 year veteran, already a legend by 1980 and arguably the greatest Lightweight champion of all time, Duran beat himself before the first bell sounded and he has no one to blame but himself for that.
Sugar Ray Leonard won the fight and would've won a decision, the result was never in doubt before a single punch was thrown.
We never saw the greatness of Roberto Duran again. He fought on another 21 years when he should've retired after the Hearns disaster.
One of Duran's greatest nights against Barkley would have been missed.
Re: 30 for 30: Duran - Leonard
I think Duran accepted the rematch under conditions he probably wouldn't have chosen himself. Had this occurred in today's boxing, a lot more posturing and hemming and hawing would've happened. Five months always seemed like a short time, given the circumstances. Duran himself said he had let the first victory get to his head, and he ballooned up in weight. I can't believe he was close to 200 pounds, like it was said in the documentary. But I don't doubt he let the good life get to him inmensely. He was partying with the rest of Panama, and wasn't giving the rematch much of a thought.
None of this is to excuse Duran, however. Leonard made it his mission to get that thorn off his side. And he came in with a better gameplan than he had for the first fight, where he seemed overwhelmed by the event itself.
All this goes to show that boxing at its best is an extremely psychological, mental sport.
I still think the documentary was great. Not that it will win any Golden Globes.... but just seeing the old footage from the fights, hearing Howard Cossell calling the fights, hearing what people from both the U.S. and Panama had to say about the 2nd fight..... and seeing Leonard and Duran in the ring after getting old..... that was plenty for me. I'm not much into critiquing the technical aspects of sports documentaries, especially done on subjects rarely done before.
Re: 30 for 30: Duran - Leonard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
zhubin
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
By the time Duran fought Leonard in Montreal he had been fighting for 12 years and his record was 71-1. That is a lot of boxing for a man not yet 30 years old. It was the last time we ever saw Roberto Duran at his peak, he won a close decision, but he did win, he landed the harder punches and more often was the aggressor. He was great that night.
No Mas highlights a fighter who had achieved everything he ever needed to achieve in the ring, by New Orleans he was already half the fighter he was just 6 months earlier. Leonard knew about Duran's weight issues, he knew about his preparation problems, he knew about the partying, he also knew if he waited any longer for a rematch then those problems might just get solved. Leonard had his man the moment the 2nd fight was signed. Duran should've made Leonard sweat on a rematch for a year.
Duran's own temperament, partying, rapid weight loss and his total under- estimation of Leonard's abilities beat him that night. I'm not buying any of the Leonard in-ring wizardry that befuddled Duran in New Orleans. Leonard was very good, but he wasn't that good that he could humiliate Roberto Duran. Duran was a 12 year veteran, already a legend by 1980 and arguably the greatest Lightweight champion of all time, Duran beat himself before the first bell sounded and he has no one to blame but himself for that.
Sugar Ray Leonard won the fight and would've won a decision, the result was never in doubt before a single punch was thrown.
We never saw the greatness of Roberto Duran again. He fought on another 21 years when he should've retired after the Hearns disaster.
Well said. Even though part of the motivation for Duran to take the second fight so quickly was the huge payday...part of it was also who he was as a fighter/person. He was not the kind of fighter who was going to make an opponent wait a short while (Ray with Duran in second fight) or a long while (like Ray did with Hagler) to gain the advantage. Not excusing his lack of focus/preparation for the rematch against Leonard...but just saying.
Duran has no excuses in fight 2. He was not prepared and that was totally his fault, as was his underestimating Leonard. Look at Duran's eyes before the first fight and you will see a noticeable difference just 6 months later, even Leonard was shitting himself in fight 1, at the ref's instructions he was looking for a way out of this mess.
To his credit he learnt from the loss and like a great champion that Leonard was he took the lesson well. Duran was already a 12 year fight veteran by 1980, what did he have to prove really? He never beat Benitez, Hearns or Hagler at higher weights and he was past his peak in all of those fights. Leonard got the rematch and won, that's boxing. He did lose to De Jesus years earlier, but this drove him to greater heights, it probably made his career in retrospect. Duran was twice the fighter after he lost one and that is the sign of a true champion. Leonard was wise and did his homework after fight 1, all credit to him, but Duran certainly gave him a helping hand.
Duran wasn't washed up by the end of 1980, but his motivation and relentless drive was diminished to the point that he became a journeyman to the stars, a great payday for those on the rise or in contention. Some still paid the penalty for taking him on like Cuevas and Moore, but Benitez, Hearns and Hagler were in the Premier League and by the mid 80's Roberto Duran was heading for relegation.
We never saw the truly great Roberto Duran again after Montreal.
Re: 30 for 30: Duran - Leonard
In the end, he still quit like a bitch. I've seen tons of fighters fight passed their primes and get the shit beat out of them but not quit. Duran was losing, had a tummy ache, and quit.
Re: 30 for 30: Duran - Leonard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
In the end, he still quit like a bitch. I've seen tons of fighters fight passed their primes and get the shit beat out of them but not quit. Duran was losing, had a tummy ache, and quit.
Is he to be judged for this forever? Is this how we remember him? If so then Boxing is indeed a cruel game.
Re: 30 for 30: Duran - Leonard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
Quote:
Originally Posted by
zhubin
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
By the time Duran fought Leonard in Montreal he had been fighting for 12 years and his record was 71-1. That is a lot of boxing for a man not yet 30 years old. It was the last time we ever saw Roberto Duran at his peak, he won a close decision, but he did win, he landed the harder punches and more often was the aggressor. He was great that night.
No Mas highlights a fighter who had achieved everything he ever needed to achieve in the ring, by New Orleans he was already half the fighter he was just 6 months earlier. Leonard knew about Duran's weight issues, he knew about his preparation problems, he knew about the partying, he also knew if he waited any longer for a rematch then those problems might just get solved. Leonard had his man the moment the 2nd fight was signed. Duran should've made Leonard sweat on a rematch for a year.
Duran's own temperament, partying, rapid weight loss and his total under- estimation of Leonard's abilities beat him that night. I'm not buying any of the Leonard in-ring wizardry that befuddled Duran in New Orleans. Leonard was very good, but he wasn't that good that he could humiliate Roberto Duran. Duran was a 12 year veteran, already a legend by 1980 and arguably the greatest Lightweight champion of all time, Duran beat himself before the first bell sounded and he has no one to blame but himself for that.
Sugar Ray Leonard won the fight and would've won a decision, the result was never in doubt before a single punch was thrown.
We never saw the greatness of Roberto Duran again. He fought on another 21 years when he should've retired after the Hearns disaster.
Well said. Even though part of the motivation for Duran to take the second fight so quickly was the huge payday...part of it was also who he was as a fighter/person. He was not the kind of fighter who was going to make an opponent wait a short while (Ray with Duran in second fight) or a long while (like Ray did with Hagler) to gain the advantage. Not excusing his lack of focus/preparation for the rematch against Leonard...but just saying.
Duran has no excuses in fight 2. He was not prepared and that was totally his fault, as was his underestimating Leonard. Look at Duran's eyes before the first fight and you will see a noticeable difference just 6 months later, even Leonard was shitting himself in fight 1, at the ref's instructions he was looking for a way out of this mess.
To his credit he learnt from the loss and like a great champion that Leonard was he took the lesson well. Duran was already a 12 year fight veteran by 1980, what did he have to prove really? He never beat Benitez, Hearns or Hagler at higher weights and he was past his peak in all of those fights. Leonard got the rematch and won, that's boxing. He did lose to De Jesus years earlier, but this drove him to greater heights, it probably made his career in retrospect. Duran was twice the fighter after he lost one and that is the sign of a true champion. Leonard was wise and did his homework after fight 1, all credit to him, but Duran certainly gave him a helping hand.
Duran wasn't washed up by the end of 1980, but his motivation and relentless drive was diminished to the point that he became a journeyman to the stars, a great payday for those on the rise or in contention. Some still paid the penalty for taking him on like Cuevas and Moore, but Benitez, Hearns and Hagler were in the Premier League and by the mid 80's Roberto Duran was heading for relegation.
We never saw the truly great Roberto Duran again after Montreal.
There was six months in between the two fights. And Duran is the only real quit I have ever seen outside of a mob influenced Ali/Liston 2.
Re: 30 for 30: Duran - Leonard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TitoFan
I think Duran accepted the rematch under conditions he probably wouldn't have chosen himself. Had this occurred in today's boxing, a lot more posturing and hemming and hawing would've happened. Five months always seemed like a short time, given the circumstances. Duran himself said he had let the first victory get to his head, and he ballooned up in weight. I can't believe he was close to 200 pounds, like it was said in the documentary. But I don't doubt he let the good life get to him inmensely. He was partying with the rest of Panama, and wasn't giving the rematch much of a thought.
None of this is to excuse Duran, however. Leonard made it his mission to get that thorn off his side. And he came in with a better gameplan than he had for the first fight, where he seemed overwhelmed by the event itself.
All this goes to show that boxing at its best is an extremely psychological, mental sport.
I still think the documentary was great. Not that it will win any Golden Globes.... but just seeing the old footage from the fights, hearing Howard Cossell calling the fights, hearing what people from both the U.S. and Panama had to say about the 2nd fight..... and seeing Leonard and Duran in the ring after getting old..... that was plenty for me. I'm not much into critiquing the technical aspects of sports documentaries, especially done on subjects rarely done before.
In most sports, particularly a sport where you are the one and only competitor a lot of your preparation is mental. (see tennis players and golfers, they tighten up and even choke big time in matches or tournaments) You can train the house down, you do all the physical stuff, but if you are not right in the head come fight night then wham bam thank you maam, your lights can go out...no matter who you are!
Duran was far from being switched on come fight number 2, his ego and temperament got the better of him, what people must realise here is this. Throughout the 70's the most dominant fighters from 135lb to 160lb were not Americans.
Duran, Napoles and Monzon were the Kings of their divisions for most of the decade, nobody really knew who they were outside of boxing circles. They were not major draw cards in the USA. All of a sudden Duran beats Leonard in what is probably the biggest fight outside of a Heavyweight title fight in history at the time...he wins and it goes to his head.
Somebody once said The Latin temperament is “Hot,” wide eyed and accentuated with drama, which makes pouring a cup of coffee feel like a grand finale.
Duran would earn $1.5 million, by far his biggest payday ever, while Leonard stood to make between $7.5 million and $10 million. Now if i was Roberto Duran i would be mightily pissed off about that monetary difference considering he had been fighting for the previous 12 years! No wonder he was angry at Leonard going into the fight. He receives his biggest payday but still falls 5 times short of his opponent?
Leonard would receive the $3.5 million paid by the Olympic Installations Board to stage the fight, plus all the money for the delayed home television broadcast rights—between $500,000 and $800,000. Leonard would also get 80% of the $500,000 to $700,000 from the sale of foreign TV rights, with the promoters getting the rest. Finally, Leonard would receive 80% of the closed-circuit TV revenues—with the promoters getting the remaining 20%—after the first $2.5 million of those revenues came off the top. From that $2.5 million, Duran would get his $1.5 million, and the remaining $1 million would go to the promoters to cover expenses. All in all, the package virtually assured Leonard more than $7.5.
Money wise Leonard was the winner before a punch was thrown, Duran was angry that night, he was motivated beyond belief. As Duran was entering the ring, Joe Frazier, who was ringside for the fight, was asked by New York Times columnist Dave Anderson if Duran reminded him of anybody. It was a leading question, for Anderson thought that Duran's ferocity would remind Frazier of himself. "Yeah," Frazier replied. "He reminds me of Charles Manson." Check out Leonard at the ref's mid ring instructions, he looks uneasy, he looks tentative, he's looking for a way out of this mess he has gotten himself into. The only thing that saved Sugar Ray Leonard was his own extraordinary ability, what he didn't expect was the ferocity of what stood before him in Montreal.
With the monetary situation reveresd in New Orleans sadly that ferocity had dissipated.
The official weigh-in was at noon on the day of the fight. At 1:00 p.m., Duran ordered a whole cow and ate lunch: two large T bone steaks, French fries, four large glasses of orange juice, two glasses of water, and a cup of tea. At 5:00 p.m. Duran ate half a steak and drank tea. Leonard had a large breakfast on the day of the fight: two eggs and grits, two pieces of toast, peaches, and Kool-Aid. For dinner, at 4:00 p.m., Leonard had fried chicken, green peas, a glass of water, and Kool-Aid.
I reckon i would have stomach cramps too after all that.
Leonard was prepared for the 2nd fight, Duran was in "Maximum Homerdrive"
Re: 30 for 30: Duran - Leonard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
THE THIRD MAN
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
In the end, he still quit like a bitch. I've seen tons of fighters fight passed their primes and get the shit beat out of them but not quit. Duran was losing, had a tummy ache, and quit.
Is he to judged for this forever? Is this how we remember him? If so then Boxing is indeed a cruel game.
No he shouldn't. He's an all time great and arguably the best lightweight that ever lived or at least standing beside a guy named Benny. The other Leonard admitted that they knew he was having weight issues in between fights and what they did by getting a rematch actually 5 months later was keep Duran in a depleted condition. I think that physical strain effected Duran mentally.
Re: 30 for 30: Duran - Leonard
Durans over here for 2 weeks, look after Him Scrap. Anything He wants, I thought F=king Hell dont fancy that, bet He is a horrible C=t. Hank Caplin came over with Him, great Guy who was into the History of Jack the Ripper, so being in Wapping, I would have walk abouts with Him, enjoyed. Duran couldnt believe what a nice Guy He was, just one of the Lads. 6 days in I asked Him if He could visit an Amateur Gym, not far away. He said what young Fighters, I said yes, lets go He said. It was not to the liking to the Promoters. We set of just to be there for 10 minutes, but it turned out we were there for 2 Hours. He sparred with all the Kids some on His Knees lol. Everybody could not believe it. Anyway that 2 weeks I became a Big Fan of Roberto Duran the MAN.
Re: 30 for 30: Duran - Leonard
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Beanflicker
In the end, he still quit like a bitch. I've seen tons of fighters fight passed their primes and get the shit beat out of them but not quit. Duran was losing, had a tummy ache, and quit.
Quit like a bitch,my god you are obviously a boxing historian who knows how to sum up
a great fighter in one sentence.You thick cunt.
Re: 30 for 30: Duran - Leonard
anybody noticed that tyson looked to be in pretty good shape again?
Re: 30 for 30: Duran - Leonard
Druan not a bitch but he did kinda bitch out when Leonard clowned him he got mentally fucked. People also saying Duran was on the decline i dont think we ever saw Leonard's prime really. Reason being the Hearns fight took a lot of years out him and man could Leonard take a punch i tell you.
