Was Leonard the complete fighter?

[American_Ninja]

With Duran he fought the wrong fight. Not that thats an excuse, but Duran was never as good again. IMO that was Duran at his best post lightweight. And who else could of fought with Duran for 15 rounds non-stop like Leonard did?
Not too many.

I dont see how the Hearns victory was 'dicey'. He was outboxed but hurt him more than once and finished him off when he had to. Hearns was at his best and unbeaten. He is an all time great welter, and Leonard stopped him. Credit where credits due.

Against Hagler he came out of retirement to face the larger stronger fighter, who although slower and past his best was still a big favourite to win. Again, he deserves credit.
He was beaten by Duran who was smaller, but beat both Hagler and Hearns who were not only much bigger but were prolific KO fighters.

That was Roberto Duran at his pinnacle, his absolute best regardless of division.

[shortright]

duran beat leanord on leanord best day while giving up every physical advantage in the book it was so remarkable, in the rematch he took the money and ran, but duran is a far more skilled boxer then leanord all you got to do is watch the brawl in montreal, he took leanord to school, i went to school where the words out of leanords mouth, leanord was so great but the way he handled his carreer ****ed him

[The Noose]

duran beat leanord on leanord best day while giving up every physical advantage in the book it was so remarkable, in the rematch he took the money and ran, but duran is a far more skilled boxer then leanord all you got to do is watch the brawl in montreal, he took leanord to school, i went to school where the words out of leanords mouth, leanord was so great but the way he handled his carreer ****ed him

But Leonard was a boxer, with Duran in the first fight he chose not to box but outfight Duran which very few men ever could.
In the rematch he boxed and frustrated the **** outa Duran. Its true im sure Duran was not in great shape, but Leonard still made him quit.
He beat Duran 2/3. Yet people use their very close first fight to discredit Leonard wen hardly anyone could have fought for 15 rounds with Duran.

And as i said before, Leonard beat the much bigger Hearns who also had all the advantages

[lidsy]

Leonard one of the all time greats, no doubt. Beating Benetiz, Hearns, Duran and Hagler. Great resume. I can't see how knocking someone out can be deemed a 'dicey' victory. Leonard displayed great repertoire in that fight with Hearns. First boxer, then puncher. How many other guys stood in front of Hearns and forced him to be the counter-puncher?

He lost the first fight against the great Duran fighting Duran's style of fight, yet it was a narrow loss. He avenged this dramatically in their second fight. If you had said before that second fight that Leonard would completely dominate Duran and that Duran would quit i.e. technical KO, you would have been locked up.

Leonard could fight inside or outside. He had great power, great foot and body movement and very fast hands. Was he conniving, a tough negotiator, round stealer, media darling - yes. But he was also a superb fighter with a magnificent body of work.

[shortright]

But Leonard was a boxer, with Duran in the first fight he chose not to box but outfight Duran which very few men ever could.
In the rematch he boxed and frustrated the **** outa Duran. Its true im sure Duran was not in great shape, but Leonard still made him quit.
He beat Duran 2/3. Yet people use their very close first fight to discredit Leonard wen hardly anyone could have fought for 15 rounds with Duran.

And as i said before, Leonard beat the much bigger Hearns who also had all the advantages

2 out of three duran didnt prepare phyically of mentally for the second fight and the result speaks for itself, listen to how ****** its sounds duran beats leanord then in the rematch duran quits in the 8th duran threw the fight he just gave everything he has phyically and mentally to beat leanord, he let himself loose got involved in ******* and took the money and ran, max kellerman had duran leanord 1 as his most suggnificent fight of the past 30 years, dont beleive what i say check the leanord bio on coxs corner about a great a boxing site youll find


duran leanord 2 eas an embarrsment cause duran was heavily involed in ******* duran beat leanrd on his best night, leanord knew this and forced an immediate rematch, and duran threw the fight

the third fight was meanigless, duran jsut had his last great fight with barkley, neihter duran nor leanord won a a important fight after duran leanord three it tells you how important it was, the next fight leanord got crushed by terry norris

[wmute]

Was he conniving, a tough negotiator, round stealer, media darling - yes. But he was also a superb fighter with a magnificent body of work.

I agree 110%. this sums up my thoughts

[The Noose]

2 out of three duran didnt prepare phyically of mentally for the second fight and the result speaks for itself, listen to how ****** its sounds duran beats leanord then in the rematch duran quits in the 8th duran threw the fight he just gave everything he has phyically and mentally to beat leanord, he let himself loose got involved in ******* and took the money and ran, max kellerman had duran leanord 1 as his most suggnificent fight of the past 30 years, dont beleive what i say check the leanord bio on coxs corner about a great a boxing site youll find


duran leanord 2 eas an embarrsment cause duran was heavily involed in ******* duran beat leanrd on his best night, leanord knew this and forced an immediate rematch, and duran threw the fight

the third fight was meanigless, duran jsut had his last great fight with barkley, neihter duran nor leanord won a a important fight after duran leanord three it tells you how important it was, the next fight leanord got crushed by terry norris

Duran quit because he was being beaten, and humiliated by Leonards showboating. But Leonard obviously fought very well in that fight and he deserves credit for making Duran quit.

If Duran didnt prepare then thats his problem, it has no baring on Leonards acheivement.

[Shanus]

My favourite fighter of all time, he was the closest thing to a complete fighter outside of Ray Robinson.

He could box, he could brawl, he could make you look ******, there wasn't much that he couldn't do, he was also a terrific athlete, anybody who doesn't have him in their top 10 all time P4P list is crazy.

[shortright]

Duran quit because he was being beaten, and humiliated by Leonards showboating. But Leonard obviously fought very well in that fight and he deserves credit for making Duran quit.

If Duran didnt prepare then thats his problem, it has no baring on Leonards acheivement.

yes it does take away if somebody walks away from a competive bout the scorecards where 4 rounds to 2 and 4 rounds to 3 it was almost a draw, duran took the money and ran it was a fixed fight period duran took the money and ran look at this does this look like some great achevmant

[SABBATH]

Let's see. Two fisted power, blinding handspeed, excellent mobility, tight defence, solid chin, technically proficient, mixed attack to head and body, adaptable to the highest levels of swarmers (Duran), southpaws (Hagler, Kalule) punchers (Hearns) and boxers (Benitez). Leonard won going forward (Hearns), on the backfoot (Hagler) and the chess match (Benitez). Leonard also showed the ability to come from behind to win, get off the deck to win, win rematches and holds stoppage victories over 3 different triple weight champions. He also holds KO victories over two men who held the light-heavyweight title. I'd say he's pretty complete.