First off, I don't intend for this to be a hate thread.

I just wanna know why people consider Roberto Duran to be the greatest lightweight of all-time?

When I look at his record (as a lightweight) it doesn't really seem that amazing. Granted, he has victories over Ken Buchanan and Esteban De Jesus. But what else?

Please, enlighten me, on this matter.

First off, I don't intend for this to be a hate thread.

I just wanna know why people consider Roberto Duran to be the greatest lightweight of all-time?

When I look at his record (as a lightweight) it doesn't really seem that amazing. Granted, he has victories over Ken Buchanan and Esteban De Jesus. But what else?

Please, enlighten me, on this matter.

He's also got wins over Viruet, Kobiashi, Lampkin and Marcel. His competition was good, but its the ferocity of how he dispatched them that gets him rated as the greatest, in my opinion. Put Duran, Joe Gans and Benny Leonard at the top of any all time great lightweight list, in any order, and Im satisfied.

Because he would knock everybody out that he fought at LW

He's not the consensus greatest lightweight, but very close to it. He holds the record for title defenses, knocking out all but one (Viruet), has beaten Kobayashi, Ishimatsu, Buchanan, Mamby, Marcel, De Jesus all of whom are really great fighters and were long time champions with Buchanan being in the HOF, Marcel being nominated this year for the HOF and De Jesus will eventually get in probably too.

Saying that, lightweight is arguably the greatest division for talent of all time and there are many guys that you could have, and many that do have other fighters above Duran.

Benny Leonard, Joe Gans etc etc.

Simply put though, he dominated the division for a decade, beat HOF fighters in his lightweight reign, holds the record for most defenses and most KO's in a row at that weight in defenses, beat every fighter he fought at lightweight with a record of 72-1 (something like that anyway) with the lone loss being revenged twice by KO and beat six world champions at lightweight along with some very good other fighters and top contenders that couldn't win a title because he was the champ, but otherwise would have, such as Edwin Viruet, Ray Lampkin, and Hector Thompson.

Either way though, not everyone has him at the top. If you can find someone with a better reign at one weight though, they would be a very special fighter.

First off, I don't intend for this to be a hate thread.

I just wanna know why people consider Roberto Duran to be the greatest lightweight of all-time?

When I look at his record (as a lightweight) it doesn't really seem that amazing. Granted, he has victories over Ken Buchanan and Esteban De Jesus. But what else?

Please, enlighten me, on this matter.remove all of the ten round stay busy fights, and focus on the championship fights, and the devastating results. against the best fighters the division had to offer. added to the list above, hector thompson, guts ishimatsu, and vilomar fernandez, all very good fighters. only one man saw the end of round 15 during his reign.
he was the definition of a dominant champion.

his fights with de jesus were masterpieces

My personal choice would be the 'Old Master' Joe Gans, with Duran & Leonard a close second and 3rd.. I'd put Buchannon in the top 10 also..

I have no idea,but I'm not one for rankings so it really doesn't matter.I'm more impressed with his resume in the latter half of his career than I am his padded earlier career,stay busy fights or not,your typical modern age fighter would be criticised for such a track record.

Duran is a very overrated fighter any way you look at it.

Duran did have some good wins but Kobayashi, Marcel, Fernandez, Viruet, Buchanan, De Jesus are good wins rather than spectacular wins imo.

Viruet does have a win over Escalera & Fernandez does hold a win over Arguello, that said Kobayashi got destroyed by Wilfredo Gomez & Argullo beat him comfortably enough. Fernandez win over Arguello is a win but i cant help but think if the fight had been 15 rounds instead of 10 that Arguello would of been on the way to stopping him, he was all over him at the end.

The way Duran fought at LW tells me that if he was fighting top top! caliber opposition that he would not have been as effective doing what he used to do, De Jesus one of the best fighters he fought made him pay twice for his recklessness , it would of been interesting to see him fight someone like Mosley, Sweet Pea like that.


I think Pea & Mosley would beat Duran at LW, controversial but i do.

Finally some people are starting to understand that quality of resume not quantity of resume counts.

To say Duran was one of the best lightweights ever is underating him! It easy to look back at his incredible record now and say who did he beat? But at the time he was clearing the best guys over and over again for years. You have to remember he was the undisputed champ. So to fight him you had to really earn a shot unlike today. His run as the only champion was very long and for quite awhile he held a record for consecitive knockouts in title defences and did it by fighting the best over an amazing time period.

I think Pea & Mosley would beat Duran at LW, controversial but i do.

Sweetpea would be a good fight I think Duran has too much for Mosley

Every Elite or ATG has a good or very good chance to beat Duran....
- if he was fat, partying and celebrating is fame too much. Duran lost to Esteban De Jesus, and a simlarity was the second NoMas-Fight. Before he lost to Esteban he beat Buchanan, the same goes for SRL. Both wins were very memorable, and from what I have read, and I am a big Fan, Durans discipline and work ethic was gone and he needed to have a break up.

Duran was an extreme guy, with highs and lows. I really dont know much about Gans, Benny Leonard or Armstrong. All are great fightes. But a Mosley or Sweat Pea are no match for a prime Duran at Lw.

Every Elite or ATG has a good or very good chance to beat Duran....
- if he was fat, partying and celebrating is fame too much. Duran lost to Esteban De Jesus, and a simlarity was the second NoMas-Fight. Before he lost to Esteban he beat Buchanan, the same goes for SRL. Both wins were very memorable, and from what I have read, and I am a big Fan, Durans discipline and work ethic was gone and he needed to have a break up.

Duran was an extreme guy, with highs and lows. I really dont know much about Gans, Benny Leonard or Armstrong. All are great fightes. But a Mosley or Sweat Pea are no match for a prime Duran at Lw.

But a Mosley or Sweat Pea are no match for a prime Duran at Lw.
__________________

Whitaker is a match for anyone at LW, he did not just beat people he white washed them.

But a Mosley or Sweat Pea are no match for a prime Duran at Lw.
__________________

Whitaker is a match for anyone at LW, he did not just beat people he white washed them.



Of course Whitaker did, but I dont know, how long he will keep the intelligent bull away from him. Even Pernell scooled some good punchers, I dont think that any of them was a harder puncher than Duran, and a prime Duran wasnt just relentless and a hard hitter, but also fast and overwhelming. I hardly can think about Pernell make Duran look like a fool for 12 rounds and never in 15.
Duran could also adapt his style to a certain degree. Sometimes he was patient and waited to counterpunch or stalk you.

But if there is somebody who can win a decission than it is problaby Whitaker.

Of course Whitaker did, but I dont know, how long he will keep the intelligent bull away from him. Even Pernell scooled some good punchers, I dont think that any of them was a harder puncher than Duran, and a prime Duran wasnt just relentless and a hard hitter, but also fast and overwhelming. I hardly can think about Pernell make Duran look like a fool for 12 rounds and never in 15.
Duran could also adapt his style to a certain degree. Sometimes he was patient and waited to counterpunch or stalk you.

But if there is somebody who can win a decission than it is problaby Whitaker.

What about Vasquez a 154 pounder who hammered Winky Wright to the canvas multiple times or Pineda, McGirt, Nelson, DLH, Tito? Duran was not a devastating puncher imo.


Duran's would not be able overwhelm Whitaker, he (Whitaker) is too smart to allow that and he would pick holes in Duran's wreckless aggression imo.

Nelson, Chavez are just as relentless as Duran was.

What about Vasquez a 154 pounder who hammered Winky Wright to the canvas multiple times or Pineda, McGirt, Nelson, DLH, Tito? Duran was not a devastating puncher imo.


Duran's would not be able overwhelm Whitaker, he (Whitaker) is too smart to allow that and he would pick holes in Duran's wreckless aggression imo.

Nelson, Chavez are just as relentless as Duran was.

Vasquez was indeed a hard hitter, as the others. But I was talking about Lw. Otherwise I would have give the argument, that even a Marvin Hagler was respecting the right of (a fat) Duran. I do not think, that some of that above mentioned guys could rock an Iran Barlkey.

Concerning Winky, you also have to think about Winkys situation and that fight was his first real against a top fighter.

Duran didnt have so many spectacular Kos, but his shots were more than solid. SRL called them brick walls. If he was hitting, he was dealing damage. His bodywork was first class and he always found way to deal damage.

For me Durans Offense is nearly as good as Pernells Defense. Pernells Offense would be his super Jab ( I do think his power is very underrated but he cant heart Duran) and quickness. And Durans defense was very good as you know. Slipping, countering, putting pressure, a good left hook, bombing right hand, good and fast combinations and pressure.
I think he can win a decission against Pernell and maybe KO him late. The tools were their.

Duran does have one of the best KO highlight reels at 135.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/c0WVApXEbmE&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/c0WVApXEbmE&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/tHqEPGooZEU&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/tHqEPGooZEU&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/r06TgLrWVV0&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/r06TgLrWVV0&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_0eGiOxhjgM&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_0eGiOxhjgM&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/6-ZyyONF5vU&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/6-ZyyONF5vU&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/QbtKp-XP5b0&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/QbtKp-XP5b0&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/oKXvnCh3TQA&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/oKXvnCh3TQA&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Of course KO'ing Pernell Whitaker would be entirely different. I can't see that happening to be honest.

Vasquez was indeed a hard hitter, as the others. But I was talking about Lw. Otherwise I would have give the argument, that even a Marvin Hagler was respecting the right of (a fat) Duran. I do not think, that some of that above mentioned guys could rock an Iran Barlkey.

Concerning Winky, you also have to think about Winkys situation and that fight was his first real against a top fighter.

Duran didnt have so many spectacular Kos, but his shots were more than solid. SRL called them brick walls. If he was hitting, he was dealing damage. His bodywork was first class and he always found way to deal damage.

For me Durans Offense is nearly as good as Pernells Defense. Pernells Offense would be his super Jab ( I do think his power is very underrated but he cant heart Duran) and quickness. And Durans defense was very good as you know. Slipping, countering, putting pressure, a good left hook, bombing right hand, good and fast combinations and pressure.
I think he can win a decission against Pernell and maybe KO him late. The tools were their.

You were talking about LW's? but Vasquez was a LMW so why would you bring up that you were talking about a LW, if he can take Vasquez's shot whom whipped the canvas with Winky, then im pretty sure he can handle the power of a good if not spectacular punching power of a LW Duran.

McGirt, Trinidad, Nelson DLH, Pinda hit as hard as Duran and harder in Tito, DLH's case.

Thats irrelevant, Winky still had a great chin or he would not have survived, Whitaker is a LW and Vasquez could not hurt him, goes to show Pea dont need to worry about the fire power Duran brings.

Duran was punishing puncher rather a devastating puncher imo. You have to be able to land on Whitaker before you can even think about taking him out, bigger guys and bigger punchers than Duran have tried and failed. Even if you get Whitaker in trouble he is illusive enough to make it difficult for you to follow up.


Duran is no where near smart enough or hard hitting enough to pin Whitaker down and KO him, i would put my house on it. Duran could win a decision but id put my money on Pea personally, that said there is now way Duran is knocking him out.

You were talking about LW's? but Vasquez was a LMW so why would you bring up that you were talking about a LW, if he can take Vasquez's shot whom whipped the canvas with Winky, then im pretty sure he can handle the power of a good if not spectacular punching power of a LW Duran.

McGirt, Trinidad, Nelson DLH, Pinda hit as hard as Duran and harder in Tito, DLH's case.

Thats irrelevant, Winky still had a great chin or he would not have survived, Whitaker is a LW and Vasquez could not hurt him, goes to show Pea dont need to worry about the fire power Duran brings.

Duran was punishing puncher rather a devastating puncher imo. You have to be able to land on Whitaker before you can even think about taking him out, bigger guys and bigger punchers than Duran have tried and failed. Even if you get Whitaker in trouble he is illusive enough to make it difficult for you to follow up.


Duran is no where near smart enough or hard hitting enough to pin Whitaker down and KO him, i would put my house on it. Duran could win a decision but id put my money on Pea personally, that said there is now way Duran is knocking him out.


I do not have more arguments and of course I do not have more knowledge about boxing than you:) But I still favour a prime Duran at Lightweight over Pernel. Pernel has very good chances to beat Duran, but imo Duran could win more rounds with his aggressive style. If he would mix it up, beeing aggressive and stalking, he would have good chances to beat Pernel. I think I have some arguments and you too.

I do not have more arguments and of course I do not have more knowledge about boxing than you:) But I still favour a prime Duran at Lightweight over Pernel. Pernel has very good chances to beat Duran, but imo Duran could win more rounds with his aggressive style. If he would mix it up, beeing aggressive and stalking, he would have good chances to beat Pernel. I think I have some arguments and you too.


Mosley or Sweat Pea are no match for a prime Duran at Lw.

I wouldn't say that, it just i dont think you can right Whitaker off that easy. I think Whitaker was easily on Duran's level thats all.

Mosley or Sweat Pea are no match for a prime Duran at Lw.

I wouldn't say that, it just i dont think you can right Whitaker off that easy. I think Whitaker was easily on Duran's level thats all.

Definetly. I do really favor Duran in his prime. Maybe this "no match" was too stupid to say. But my english is from school and my 4th. language.
For me he has 60/40 chances to win against Sweat Pea.

You were talking about LW's? but Vasquez was a LMW so why would you bring up that you were talking about a LW, if he can take Vasquez's shot whom whipped the canvas with Winky, then im pretty sure he can handle the power of a good if not spectacular punching power of a LW Duran.

McGirt, Trinidad, Nelson DLH, Pinda hit as hard as Duran and harder in Tito, DLH's case.

Thats irrelevant, Winky still had a great chin or he would not have survived, Whitaker is a LW and Vasquez could not hurt him, goes to show Pea dont need to worry about the fire power Duran brings.

Duran was punishing puncher rather a devastating puncher imo. You have to be able to land on Whitaker before you can even think about taking him out, bigger guys and bigger punchers than Duran have tried and failed. Even if you get Whitaker in trouble he is illusive enough to make it difficult for you to follow up.


Duran is no where near smart enough or hard hitting enough to pin Whitaker down and KO him, i would put my house on it. Duran could win a decision but id put my money on Pea personally, that said there is now way Duran is knocking him out.

why did they call duran hands of stone then????? if he was not a devasting puncher

is left hook was awesome

he would stop whitaker because the fight would be 15 rnds and durans gas tank was huge, the guy was a beast and whitaker would not be able to dance for 45 mins!!! and durans body work would take its toll


but tbh one of my fav boxing moments was whitaker weaving about 6 shots going backwards against de la hoya, also whitaker did get a crap disputed draw against a poor mans duran (chavez)

Duran was not a devastating puncher imo.

Duran's would not be able overwhelm Whitaker, he (Whitaker) is too smart to allow that and he would pick holes in Duran's wreckless aggression imo.

Nelson, Chavez are just as relentless as Duran was.

Might nitpick your post a bit :)

He was a pretty devastating puncher at LW, maybe not one punch KO power but he hit hard.
I agree that Whitaker was a smart cookie and would cause Duran problems, I'd fancy Duran but it would be some fight and I can respect the arguments for Whitaker.
Wouldn't argue Nelson and Chavez were relentless but not as :)
Not sure I agree with "wreckless" agression think Duran was pretty controlled especially at LW, he was superb at getting in the eye of the storm so to speak and slipping punches.

why did they call duran hands of stone then????? if he was not a devasting puncher

is left hook was awesome

he would stop whitaker because the fight would be 15 rnds and durans gas tank was huge, the guy was a beast and whitaker would not be able to dance for 45 mins!!! and durans body work would take its toll


but tbh one of my fav boxing moments was whitaker weaving about 6 shots going backwards against de la hoya, also whitaker did get a crap disputed draw against a poor mans duran (chavez)

Errm because the media have a way of over exaggerating things? Hamed, Jackson, Tyson are devstating punchers, Duran was a respectable puncher but no where near as hard hitting as those guys. Its like saying why weren't they called hands if stone if they hit harder than him p4p.

Okay son he stops Whitaker.

Might nitpick your post a bit :)

He was a pretty devastating puncher at LW, maybe not one punch KO power but he hit hard.
I agree that Whitaker was a smart cookie and would cause Duran problems, I'd fancy Duran but it would be some fight and I can respect the arguments for Whitaker.
Wouldn't argue Nelson and Chavez were relentless but not as :)
Not sure I agree with "wreckless" agression think Duran was pretty controlled especially at LW, he was superb at getting in the eye of the storm so to speak and slipping punches.



He had a few of nice KO's there but not over stellar opposition imo. I dont think he is anymore of a puncher than Mosley TBH, and i dont consider Mosley a devastating puncher but a big puncher nonetheless less. Edwin Rosario is what i call a devastating puncher at Lightweight.

A couple of those Duran KO's came late in fights to.

Chavez put just about as much pressure as you can imo, Nelson not so much, i agree with that. I agree that Duran had quicker feet than Chavez though, he closed the distance faster but i think both put on a lot of pressure, Chavez was better at cutting the ring down so where he is not so good in the footspeed department he makes up for it there, at least in my eyes.

Duran was wreckless early in his LW career but i think he booked up his ideas a bit after being dropped and losing to De Jesus, he could still be a bit wreckless though imo when he got a bit excited.

Whitaker is also a Southpaw and i think that with the movement would cause Duran massive problems. Duran is great if he can pin you down but Whitaker is extremely hard to pin down and he is one of the best counter punchers the game has ever seen, he has a great jab, he is quicker, he has better footwork & ring craft to imo.

He had a few of nice KO's there but not over stellar opposition imo. I dont think he is anymore of a puncher than Mosley TBH, and i dont consider Mosley a devastating puncher but a big puncher nonetheless less. A couple of those Duran KO's came late in fights to.

Chavez put just about as much pressure as you can imo, Nelson not so much, i agree with that.

Duran was wreckless early in his LW career but i think he booked up his ideas a bit after being dropped and losing to De Jesus, he could still be a bit wreckless though imo when he got a bit excited.

Whitaker is also a Southpaw and i think that with the movement would cause Duran massive problems. Duran is great if he can pin you down but Whitaker is extremely hard to pin down and he is one of the best counter punchers the game has ever seen, he has a great jab, he is quicker, he has better footwork & ring craft to imo.

Re Duran's opposition he fought who was there and whilst it might not have been the deepest LW division it was by no means the weakest. Is a tendency to retrospectively nit pick over Duran's record at LW which you can pretty much do with any fighter. I too like Chavez as a fighter but his is a resume that often gets slaughtered. Don't know about wreckless I guess being head and shoulders above the opposition at that time he maybe didn't fight as controlled as he could.
Re Whitaker I have no doubt that he could beat Duran but in ten fights I reckon Duran will win more times than he loses, guess we'll have to agree to differ on that match up.
Re WhitakerMayweather

Sweetpea would be a good fight I think Duran has too much for Mosley


I actually think a LW Mosley would more than hold his own in a toe to toe exchange with Duran,Mosley at LW was ridiculous,anybody who has not seen Shane Mosley at LW then see the results of his vicious beatdown of Antonio Margarito,and even that version was a shadow of his true prime,but Duran was pretty much the complete package at 135 and had something Shane Mosley did not have at LW,and that is ring smarts,he had terrific footwork and Mosley has pretty akward balance and fighters that create angles against Mosley,he tends to struggle against them.

Re Duran's opposition he fought who was there and whilst it might not have been the deepest LW division it was by no means the weakest. Is a tendency to retrospectively nit pick over Duran's record at LW which you can pretty much do with any fighter. I too like Chavez as a fighter but his is a resume that often gets slaughtered. Don't know about wreckless I guess being head and shoulders above the opposition at that time he maybe didn't fight as controlled as he could.
Re Whitaker I have no doubt that he could beat Duran but in ten fights I reckon Duran will win more times than he loses, guess we'll have to agree to differ on that match up.
Re WhitakerMayweather

Don't know about wreckless I guess being head and shoulders above the opposition at that time he maybe didn't fight as controlled as he could.


Thats fair, that is pretty much where i was going with the wreckless thing.


I think Duran has a lot better record at LW than he gets credit for but by the same token Whitaker is one of the most skilled fighters ive ever seen, he put in some damn near flawless performances at LW, he schooled some good fighters, not just beat them.

I dont think Duran, Whitaker or Mosley were human at LW lol, they looked unstoppable at that weight, even though Mosley did not fight great! opposition there you know he could probably of reigned for a long time had he stayed there.

Yep a pick em fight GJC, but i gotta roll my man Whitaker on this one, respect your opinion though.
:boxing:

I actually think a LW Mosley would more than hold his own in a toe to toe exchange with Duran,Mosley at LW was ridiculous,anybody who has not seen Shane Mosley at LW then see the results of his vicious beatdown of Antonio Margarito,and even that version was a shadow of his true prime,but Duran was pretty much the complete package at 135 and had something Shane Mosley did not have at LW,and that is ring smarts,he had terrific footwork and Mosley has pretty akward balance and fighters that create angles against Mosley,he tends to struggle against them.
Kind of meant too much i.e. too much ring smarts etc etc as opposed to too much power.
The whole steroid thing puts me off Mosley to be honest, its a bit like trying to decide which of Ben Johnson's sprints were on the level if you know what I mean.

Duran did have some good wins but Kobayashi, Marcel, Fernandez, Viruet, Buchanan, De Jesus are good wins rather than spectacular wins imo.

Viruet does have a win over Escalera & Fernandez does hold a win over Arguello, that said Kobayashi got destroyed by Wilfredo Gomez & Argullo beat him comfortably enough. Fernandez win over Arguello is a win but i cant help but think if the fight had been 15 rounds instead of 10 that Arguello would of been on the way to stopping him, he was all over him at the end.

The way Duran fought at LW tells me that if he was fighting top top! caliber opposition that he would not have been as effective doing what he used to do, De Jesus one of the best fighters he fought made him pay twice for his recklessness , it would of been interesting to see him fight someone like Mosley, Sweet Pea like that.


I think Pea & Mosley would beat Duran at LW, controversial but i do.

Wrong Kobayashi mate.

Just out of curiosity, what is a spectacular win if these guys aren't? Does the fighter have to be famous and brilliant instead of just brilliant?

Marcel had an undefeated title reign beating Sammy Serrano (HOF), Alfredo Mercano, Bernado Caraballo, Antonio Gomez, Kuniaki Shibata (though he was brutally screwed over and only got the draw in Japan) and Arguello (HOF) in his last fight before retiring. He went undefeated from 1968 to 1974 with only Duran beating him in that time. But, there was also one decision that went against him in a non-title fight in which he fought in Venezuela against Leonel Hernandez in his hometown and was also robbed badly from the reports. Hernandez was a very fine fighter though nonetheless. Marcel was a super slick fighter, very quick, great lead right like Mayweather's.

Buchanan beat Ismael Laguna twice (HOF), Carlos Ortiz (HOF), Donato Paduano, Jim Watt, Carlos Hernandez (nominated for HOF this year), Ruben Navarro etc etc. That's about as good a fighter, and win, as you can get.

Then you have De Jesus.... Ahh, screw it, I can't be bothered.

Anyway.....He seems to be one of those fighters that some, like you and Wpink take an intense dislike to. Well, Wpink does only because Leonard lost to him.

Let me ask this? Where do you have Floyd Mayweather as a 130 in the history of that division?

I wouldn't say Dynamite Kid "intensely dislikes" Duran. I can see why one would think that Duran gets overrated, especially when some people put him in their top 5 p4p.

The Kobayashi Duran fought was indeed not the Kobayashi Gomez and Arguello fought. Hiroshi Kobayashi whom Duran fought was the two-time undisputed WBC & WBA super featherweight champion of the world, reigning for 3 years, while Royal Kobayashi was a decent 122/126 lb contender at best who held a belt for a month. I don't know if the two were related, flyweight champ Koji and Royal Kobayashi were brothers.

Here's Hiroshi Kobayashi fighting the WBA featherweight title holder Shozo Saijo in a non-title bout:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5x_dVx5nmJ4&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5x_dVx5nmJ4&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
Hiroshi in red.

Wrong Kobayashi mate.

Just out of curiosity, what is a spectacular win if these guys aren't? Does the fighter have to be famous and brilliant instead of just brilliant?

Marcel had an undefeated title reign beating Sammy Serrano (HOF), Alfredo Mercano, Bernado Caraballo, Antonio Gomez, Kuniaki Shibata (though he was brutally screwed over and only got the draw in Japan) and Arguello (HOF) in his last fight before retiring. He went undefeated from 1968 to 1974 with only Duran beating him in that time. But, there was also one decision that went against him in a non-title fight in which he fought in Venezuela against Leonel Hernandez in his hometown and was also robbed badly from the reports. Hernandez was a very fine fighter though nonetheless. Marcel was a super slick fighter, very quick, great lead right like Mayweather's.

Buchanan beat Ismael Laguna twice (HOF), Carlos Ortiz (HOF), Donato Paduano, Jim Watt, Carlos Hernandez (nominated for HOF this year), Ruben Navarro etc etc. That's about as good a fighter, and win, as you can get.

Then you have De Jesus.... Ahh, screw it, I can't be bothered.

Anyway.....He seems to be one of those fighters that some, like you and Wpink take an intense dislike to. Well, Wpink does only because Leonard lost to him.

Let me ask this? Where do you have Floyd Mayweather as a 130 in the history of that division?

Dude i have nothing against Duran at all, its just i think he gets overrated and when someone comes out and says he would KO Sweet Pea and that a fight with Pea would be no contest, then you can see why i would think he gets overrated, not to mention some people having him ranked number 4 ATG, now im one that thinks a lot of Duran's losses came because he was out of shape most of the time, or because he had 70+ fights (i think)by the time he fought Laing, Benitez, that said whether i can make legit excuses for those defeat, they still happened and must be take into consideration because its not like Duran was shot, albeit he probably was starting to slide!! and he was not particularly old, old!

If i intensly disliked Duran why would i sight Viuret's win over Escalera & Vilomar Fernandez's win over Arguello? I also said "I think Duran has a lot better record at LW than he gets credit for "


Im not a Mayweather fan, its not like im inclined to underated Duran because i like Mayweather. I actually like Duran and dislike Mayweather so....

I must admit head to head i dont think he would beat Mosley or Whitaker but im obviously willing to concede that Duran could very well beat both of them and i might be flat out wrong, that said me myself i would pick against him there, but for that guy to say Whitaker would be no contest or he would knock Pea out is crazy.

BTW Thanks Great A:boxing:

Wrong Kobayashi mate.

Just out of curiosity, what is a spectacular win if these guys aren't? Does the fighter have to be famous and brilliant instead of just brilliant?

Marcel had an undefeated title reign beating Sammy Serrano (HOF), Alfredo Mercano, Bernado Caraballo, Antonio Gomez, Kuniaki Shibata (though he was brutally screwed over and only got the draw in Japan) and Arguello (HOF) in his last fight before retiring. He went undefeated from 1968 to 1974 with only Duran beating him in that time. But, there was also one decision that went against him in a non-title fight in which he fought in Venezuela against Leonel Hernandez in his hometown and was also robbed badly from the reports. Hernandez was a very fine fighter though nonetheless. Marcel was a super slick fighter, very quick, great lead right like Mayweather's.

Buchanan beat Ismael Laguna twice (HOF), Carlos Ortiz (HOF), Donato Paduano, Jim Watt, Carlos Hernandez (nominated for HOF this year), Ruben Navarro etc etc. That's about as good a fighter, and win, as you can get.

Then you have De Jesus.... Ahh, screw it, I can't be bothered.

Anyway.....He seems to be one of those fighters that some, like you and Wpink take an intense dislike to. Well, Wpink does only because Leonard lost to him.

Let me ask this? Where do you have Floyd Mayweather as a 130 in the history of that division?
Well said mate.;) TDK likes to talk out of his ass sometimes. But you gotta forgive him, he's still learning.:lol1:

I wouldn't say Dynamite Kid "intensely dislikes" Duran. I can see why one would think that Duran gets overrated, especially when some people put him in their top 5 p4p.

The Kobayashi Duran fought was indeed not the Kobayashi Gomez and Arguello fought. Hiroshi Kobayashi whom Duran fought was the two-time undisputed WBC & WBA super featherweight champion of the world, reigning for 3 years, while Royal Kobayashi was a decent 122/126 lb contender at best who held a belt for a month. I don't know if the two were related, flyweight champ Koji and Royal Kobayashi were brothers.

Here's Hiroshi Kobayashi fighting the WBA featherweight title holder Shozo Saijo in a non-title bout:

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5x_dVx5nmJ4&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5x_dVx5nmJ4&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>
Hiroshi in red.

No, you're right, he doesn't. I apologise DK, that was a general overreaction to some others that come on here and bang out the ol' "Most overrated fighter ever. He got 20 losses and got beat by Robbie Simms and Kirkland Laing. Mayweather would own dat ass! Haterz. LAMO. pwn!" or some others that can't get over certain issues.

He's not a top five ATG. Somewhat undisciplined for that sadly. Could have been quite easily but lost fights he should have won due to his excessive appetite for partying. I have him inside the top ten in general but then again, I don't really have a specific list.

However, when you have a fighter that beat the great champions Ernesto Marcel in 1970 at 130 pounds and then Jorge Castro in 1997 at 168 pounds, as well as the many, many others in between, it's pretty hard to say he's overrated. Look overall at his wins, accomplishments and resume and you'll be hard pressed to find another fighter that tops it. I know you already know all this.

On his LW record. It isn't the greatest record you can find, however, when you actually know who he's fought there and have seen them fight, as I'm quite sure you do and have GA and DK, you understand why he's so highly regarded. The fighters he beat there were not just good, they were great. No, he didn't have a famous name fighter like an Ali, or Leonard because during the seventies the names were basically shadowed by Ali and the HW division and the best fighters at LW were mostly not American. Doesn't mean they weren't as good. Go watch their fights. As has already been said a few times, it doesn't get much better than beating a top ten LW in Buchanan. Most experts will have Buchanan around the top ten ATG's at LW.

I think most people though, because of the time and HW division, forget that Duran/De Jesus III was one of the most hyped, lightweight title, unification fights of all time. People forget that because everything was about Ali and his fights with Frazier, Shavers, Norton etc.

Watch Ishimatsu take apart Rodolfo Gonzalez. Watch Kobayashi take apart Numata. Watch Buchanan beat Laguna and Marcel beat Arguello, or Thompson KO Carlos Gimenez etc etc. You realise these guys were as good as any champion fighting today not named Mayweather or Pac. Despite that though, if you compare his record to anyone else it is quite easily better the the very large majority of most fighters in history, bar a small few. For a guy that did what would be considered a legendary run at LW alone to then go and do what he did after, it surprises me that people would call him overrated. That's just me though.

I find it laughable that someone would say "He didn't beat a single great fighter at LW" then go on to call Mayweather the greatest fighter at 130, or name Pea a better fighter at LW or Hopkins the best at MW.

There is no difference in quality of opposition, in fact quite the opposite. The only difference is in the name value of opposition. Always the way really though.

Hey DK, I agree that Whitaker has a great chance to beat Duran. I don't really agree on Mosley TBH, but you know....

:fing02:

Well said mate.;) TDK likes to talk out of his ass sometimes. But you gotta forgive him, he's still learning.:lol1:

Oh god!!

This cunt does not even watch Boxing yet comes in here to speak about fights he has never ever seen!!!

How lame can you get? what is the point in talking about fights you have never seen, kinda defeats the object of coming to post in here doesn't it Benncollinsaad?

No, you're right, he doesn't. I apologise DK, that was a general overreaction to some others that come on here and bang out the ol' "Most overrated fighter ever. He got 20 losses and got beat by Robbie Simms and Kirkland Laing. Mayweather would own dat ass! Haterz. LAMO. pwn!" or some others that can't get over certain issues.

He's not a top five ATG. Somewhat undisciplined for that sadly. Could have been quite easily but lost fights he should have won due to his excessive appetite for partying. I have him inside the top ten in general but then again, I don't really have a specific list.

However, when you have a fighter that beat the great champions Ernesto Marcel in 1970 at 130 pounds and then Jorge Castro in 1997 at 168 pounds, as well as the many, many others in between, it's pretty hard to say he's overrated. Look overall at his wins, accomplishments and resume and you'll be hard pressed to find another fighter that tops it. I know you already know all this.

On his LW record. It isn't the greatest record you can find, however, when you actually know who he's fought there and have seen them fight, as I'm quite sure you do and have GA, you understand why he's so highly regarded. The fighters he beat there were not just good, they were great. No, he didn't have a famous name fighter because during the seventies the names were basically shadowed by Ali and the HW division.

I think most people though, because of the time and HW division, forget that Duran/De Jesus III was one of the most hyped, lightweight title, unification fights of all time. People forget that because everything was about Ali and his fights with Frazier, Shavers, Norton etc.

Watch Ishimatsu take apart Rodolfo Gonzalez. Watch Kobayashi take apart Numata. Watch Buchanan beat Laguna and Marcel beat Arguello, or Thompson KO Carlos Gimenez etc etc. You realise these guys were as good as any champion fighting today not named Mayweather or Pac. Despite that though, if you compare his record to anyone else it is quite easily better the the very large majority of most fighters in history, bar a small few. For a guy that did what would be considered a legendary run at LW alone to then go and do what he did after, it surprises me that people would call him overrated. That's just me though.

I find it laughable that someone would say "He didn't beat a single great fighter at LW" then go on to call Mayweather the greatest fighter at 130, or name Pea a better fighter at LW or Hopkins the best at MW.

There is no difference in quality of opposition, in fact quite the opposite. The only difference is in the name value of opposition. Always the way really though.

Hey DK, I agree that Whitaker has a great chance to beat Duran. I don't really agree on Mosley TBH, but you know....

:fing02:


Great post and very informative, thanks for that.

Oh god!!

This cunt does not even watch Boxing yet comes in here to speak about fights he has never ever seen!!!

How lame can you get? what is the point in talking about fights you have never seen, kinda defeats the object of coming to post in here doesn't it Benncollinsaad?

Shut up bitch, I don't even spend much time here anymore. I go to a forum where they REALLY know something about boxing and appreciate true boxers! And I watch fights all the time, you poor pathetic fuq.

Shut up bitch, I don't even spend much time here anymore. I go to a forum where they REALLY know something about boxing and appreciate true boxers! And I watch fights all the time, you poor pathetic fuq.


Well then you will have added to the quality of the discussion in here by staying out, its probably the most productive thing you have done since first coming in here.

Well then you will have added to the quality of the discussion in here by staying out, its probably the most productive thing you have done since first coming in here.

Yep. It suits us both fine!;) :D

Anyway.....He seems to be one of those fighters that some, like you and Wpink take an intense dislike to. Well, Wpink does only because Leonard lost to him.


Whooah Benny I think intense dislike is a bit strong my friend.
He acknowledges Duran is a great fighter just favours Whitaker in a match up. Thats fair enough Whitaker was a fantastic fighter no way Duran is going to KO him in a round as some say. I personally think Duran would beat Whitaker but I wouldn't put my savings on it and I'm sure that Dynamite would put his on Whotaker. When you get 2 fighters as good as these it has a hard call and all we have is opinion.
Apart from that top post and keep them coming and Dynamite will see the light :)

The Duran apologists are out again I see,of course Duran never lost a legitimate fight,he only lost when Don King told to him to go party.Duran has no excuses for losing to such mediocre opponents in Robbie Sims and Kirkland Laing.You can bring Mayweather into an argument where his name doesn't really need to be brought up(common tactic used to discredit more modern fighter) but imagine how badly Mayweather would be ripped for losing to these jokers,hell he get's ripped for winning a close decision over Jose Luis Castillo,Castillo was a better fighter than the vast majority of Duran's opponents at lightweight.


Duran never wanted to unify the lightweight title when Gonzalez was champion either.

The Duran apologists are out again I see,of course Duran never lost a legitimate fight,he only lost when Don King told to him to go party.Duran has no excuses for losing to such mediocre opponents in Robbie Sims and Kirkland Laing.You can bring Mayweather into an argument where his name doesn't really need to be brought up(common tactic used to discredit more modern fighter) but imagine how badly Mayweather would be ripped for losing to these jokers,hell he get's ripped for winning a close decision over Jose Luis Castillo,Castillo was a better fighter than the vast majority of Duran's opponents at lightweight.


Duran never wanted to unify the lightweight title when Gonzalez was champion either.

Your sorry ass opinions mean nothing around here, Mr. Red. You don't think its relevant that Duran was in his 14th and 18th years as a pro for those losses? You don't think its relevant that Simms was a big durable middleweight who had been in with and beaten some good fighters? Of course you wouldn't, your bias won't let you.

I think the good karma thread is calling you now. Run along.

Duran didn't fight nobodies, he made them look like nobodies.

Duran was hardly shopworn Gabby.Sure, I won't hold the losses he suffered against the likes of Williams Joppy or the losses he suffered in the last ten years of his career against him but if you fail to aknowledge those losses he suffered against average,mediocre opponents in Robbie Sims and Kirkland Laing,then you are an apologist.


You can accuse me of many things,but being biased surely isn't one of them Gabby.

Duran was hardly shopworn Gabby.Sure, I won't hold the losses he suffered against the likes of Williams Joppy or the losses he suffered in the last ten years of his career against him but if you fail to aknowledge those losses he suffered against average,mediocre opponents in Robbie Sims and Kirkland Laing,then you are an apologist.


You can accuse me of many things,but being biased surely isn't one of them Gabby.

Ok, than explain to me how you can ridicule a fighter who lost to fighters in his 14th and 18th years as a pro? Im sure I can find plenty of examples of this happening to other fighters at that stage of their careers. Should they all be ridiculed too?

Seems to me you want to pick and choose what sopts to judge a fighter on instead of judging the career as a whole.

Whooah Benny I think intense dislike is a bit strong my friend.


Yeah man, a bit of an overreaction. :lol1:

:fing02:

The Duran apologists are out again I see,of course Duran never lost a legitimate fight,he only lost when Don King told to him to go party.Duran has no excuses for losing to such mediocre opponents in Robbie Sims and Kirkland Laing.You can bring Mayweather into an argument where his name doesn't really need to be brought up(common tactic used to discredit more modern fighter) but imagine how badly Mayweather would be ripped for losing to these jokers,hell he get's ripped for winning a close decision over Jose Luis Castillo,Castillo was a better fighter than the vast majority of Duran's opponents at lightweight.


Duran never wanted to unify the lightweight title when Gonzalez was champion either.

Interesting turnaround. I'm guessing this is directed at me since I brought up Mayweather. I don't understand this though. Who says he didn't lose? Of course he lost. He lost 16 times. They were all legitimate. I don't get this. You lose a fight and that's it. The only thing that does get brought up is that, apart from two losses against fighters he had also beaten, the rest were all after thirty years old and at 154 or above. For a guy that started at 118 and had had about 80 fights, and was going to retire after the first Ray Leonard fight, it makes sense why he lost but it doesn't change that he lost.

Mayweather was brought up because he is often said to be the best 130 pounder by many of his fans who then rag on Duran for his supposed 'weak' LW run. Comparatively, their runs don't compare nor does their competition.

Mayweather won't move up to 154 to prove himself. He won't move up to 160 or 168. You know why? Because he wants to keep fighting people he knows he can beat and that won't be a threat. That's the difference. You can say "He hasn't lost and wouldn't lose to a Robbie Simms or Kirkland Laing" but he won't ever prove it.

Castillo would have been just another fighter on Duran's LW resume in that era. Just as Buchanan and De Jesus etc are.

Oh yeah, the old Gonzalez argument. Go watch Gonzalez get knocked out twice by Guts Ishimatsu and nearly lose to Jimmy Robertson, both of whom Duran fought and knocked out in seven and five brutal rounds respectively. You might realise why they didn't bother with Gonzalez.

Duran won his title against the main champion Buchanan at the same time Gonzalez did, then he lost to De Jesus, which set up the title shot down the road. Duran destroyed Ishimatsu who then went and knocked out Gonzalez twice for his title and in the rematch. De Jesus then beat Ishimatsu, and Duran unified with him in the biggest LW title fight of the past few decades. Gonzalez was never even an issue.

There always some fighter on the periphery of great fighter's careers that can be looked at and criticized. Why didn't Mike Tyson fight Tim Witherspoon? Why didn't DLH fight James Page? Why didn't Juan Manuel Marquez fight Eric Morales? Why didn't Duran fight Antonio Cervantes? Just because they didn't fight doesn't mean anyone ducked anyone. For me it's only relevant when it becomes a consistent characteristic of a fighter's resume. It just isn't with Duran.
But ask yourself this. Why would Duran duck Rodolfo Gonzalez and not duck the Viruet brothers?

I prefer to focus on the big wins more than the losses. The great fighters someone beat as opposed to the mediocre ones.

Mayweather won't move up to 154 to prove himself. He won't move up to 160 or 168. You know why? Because he wants to keep fighting people he knows he can beat and that won't be a threat. That's the difference. You can say "He hasn't lost and wouldn't lose to a Robbie Simms or Kirkland Laing" but he won't ever prove it.


You argue that Mayweather isn't willing to prove himself and would rather sit back and fight men that he knows that he could beat(a criticism often used,which does hold value) and yet you claim he would never step up and fight a Kirkland Laing or a Robbie Sims.Now according to your logic then Mayweather would have no problem fighting either of the two as he knows neither of the two are actually a threat.Mayweather would be ripped for ever making a fight with a Laing or a Sims at this stage in his career.



Castillo would have been just another fighter on Duran's LW resume in that era. Just as Buchanan and De Jesus etc are.


Um,Buchanan and De Jesus are by far the two greatest names on Duran's lightweight resume.If a Jose Luis Castillo had fought in that era and had Duran beaten a man of his calibre,then it would have been regarded as nothing less than a great win.

Oh yeah, the old Gonzalez argument. Go watch Gonzalez get knocked out twice by Guts Ishimatsu and nearly lose to Jimmy Robertson, both of whom Duran fought and knocked out in seven and five brutal rounds respectively. You might realise why they didn't bother with Gonzalez.Duran won his title against the main champion Buchanan at the same time Gonzalez did, then he lost to De Jesus, which set up the title shot down the road. Duran destroyed Ishimatsu who then went and knocked out Gonzalez twice for his title and in the rematch. De Jesus then beat Ishimatsu, and Duran unified with him in the biggest LW title fight of the past few decades. Gonzalez was never even an issue


How does this flawed logic apply when Gonzalez was a champion? Gonzalez lost his title to Ishimatsu in April of 1974,Gonzalez had been a champion for a year and a half at that point.Both men fought on the same card in March of 1973,whole both were champions and this is what Gonzalez has to say on the matter -

"After the fight, in my dressing room, Jacky and I discussed the possibility of me and Duran fighting for the title so Jacky went outside my dressing room and Duran's manager was passing by so he asked him the question. Without hesitation, his manager said, "No, you keep your title and we'll keep ours." I know this for a fact because I heard the conversation"


To claim that Gonzalez was never even an issue is just being ridiculous.



There always some fighter on the periphery of great fighter's careers that can be looked at and criticized. Why didn't Mike Tyson fight Tim Witherspoon? Why didn't DLH fight James Page? Why didn't Juan Manuel Marquez fight Eric Morales?


Neither Morales or Barrera wanted anything to do with Marquez at 126.Tim Witherspoon had the offer to fight Mike Tyson but turned it down as he wasn't satisfied with the money he was being offered.

Yeah man, a bit of an overreaction. :lol1:

:fing02:



Interesting turnaround. I'm guessing this is directed at me since I brought up Mayweather. I don't understand this though. Who says he didn't lose? Of course he lost. He lost 16 times. They were all legitimate. I don't get this. You lose a fight and that's it. The only thing that does get brought up is that, apart from two losses against fighters he had also beaten, the rest were all after thirty years old and at 154 or above. For a guy that started at 118 and had had about 80 fights, and was going to retire after the first Ray Leonard fight, it makes sense why he lost but it doesn't change that he lost.

Mayweather was brought up because he is often said to be the best 130 pounder by many of his fans who then rag on Duran for his supposed 'weak' LW run. Comparatively, their runs don't compare nor does their competition.

Mayweather won't move up to 154 to prove himself. He won't move up to 160 or 168. You know why? Because he wants to keep fighting people he knows he can beat and that won't be a threat. That's the difference. You can say "He hasn't lost and wouldn't lose to a Robbie Simms or Kirkland Laing" but he won't ever prove it.

Castillo would have been just another fighter on Duran's LW resume in that era. Just as Buchanan and De Jesus etc are.

Oh yeah, the old Gonzalez argument. Go watch Gonzalez get knocked out twice by Guts Ishimatsu and nearly lose to Jimmy Robertson, both of whom Duran fought and knocked out in seven and five brutal rounds respectively. You might realise why they didn't bother with Gonzalez.

Duran won his title against the main champion Buchanan at the same time Gonzalez did, then he lost to De Jesus, which set up the title shot down the road. Duran destroyed Ishimatsu who then went and knocked out Gonzalez twice for his title and in the rematch. De Jesus then beat Ishimatsu, and Duran unified with him in the biggest LW title fight of the past few decades. Gonzalez was never even an issue.

I'd say this post just ended the discussion, and with a thudding knockout at that. Keep dropping knowledge Benny, your posts are always topnotch.:fing02:

You argue that Mayweather isn't willing to prove himself and would rather sit back and fight men that he knows that he could beat(a criticism often used,which does hold value) and yet you claim he would never step up and fight a Kirkland Laing or a Robbie Sims.Now according to your logic then Mayweather would have no problem fighting either of the two as he knows neither of the two are actually a threat.Mayweather would be ripped for ever making a fight with a Laing or a Sims at this stage in his career.

Floyd hasn't shown a willingness to fight anybody since moving to 147 unless they bring top dollar. If he was a stay busy fighter who had already established that he was willing to fight anybody, anytime....he wouldn't be criticized for taking any fight. If he was it surely wouldn't reflect on the bulk of his career as you seem to want to do with Duran.

Um,Buchanan and De Jesus are by far the two greatest names on Duran's lightweight resume.If a Jose Luis Castillo had fought in that era and had Duran beaten a man of his calibre,then it would have been regarded as nothing less than a great win.

Probably. But thats assuming he would have been a top fighter then. I'm pretty sure he would have, but its still n assumption.
[QUOTE]
How does this flawed logic apply when Gonzalez was a champion? Gonzalez lost his title to Ishimatsu in April of 1974,Gonzalez had been a champion for a year and a half at that point.Both men fought on the same card in March of 1973,whole both were champions and this is what Gonzalez has to say on the matter -

"After the fight, in my dressing room, Jacky and I discussed the possibility of me and Duran fighting for the title so Jacky went outside my dressing room and Duran's manager was passing by so he asked him the question. Without hesitation, his manager said, "No, you keep your title and we'll keep ours." I know this for a fact because I heard the conversation"


To claim that Gonzalez was never even an issue is just being ridiculous.

If nobody else is saying this but the party who felt shunned, how much credibility does it really hold?

Don't ask questions, just believe it.

I think something else people forget is that Duran had dropped off the map in terms of credibility, and to an extent deservedly so after the "No mas" and Benitez fight. Taking the Kirkland Lang fight was appropriate at the time. It's a bad loss, but remember that unlike many other ATGs he fought himself back up to championship level and credibility again with Cuevas and Moore, and then had the competative and better than expected performance with Hagler. The he got starched by Hearns, and dropped down to the level of Robbie Sims. Then he beat Barkley, which in my opinion, all things considered, is the biggest win of his career.
Most ATGs get knocked from their perch and never return to form, or recapture former greatness. Trinidad, Roy Jones, Ray Leonard, just to name a few. Maybe this makes me an apologist, but to me the Lang and Simms losses just don't mean as much considering how he followed them up.

I think something else people forget is that Duran had dropped off the map in terms of credibility, and to an extent deservedly so after the "No mas" and Benitez fight. Taking the Kirkland Lang fight was appropriate at the time. It's a bad loss, but remember that unlike many other ATGs he fought himself back up to championship level and credibility again with Cuevas and Moore, and then had the competative and better than expected performance with Hagler. The he got starched by Hearns, and dropped down to the level of Robbie Sims. Then he beat Barkley, which in my opinion, all things considered, is the biggest win of his career.
Most ATGs get knocked from their perch and never return to form, or recapture former greatness. Trinidad, Roy Jones, Ray Leonard, just to name a few. Maybe this makes me an apologist, but to me the Lang and Simms losses just don't mean as much considering how he followed them up.

Good post.

Floyd hasn't shown a willingness to fight anybody since moving to 147 unless they bring top dollar. If he was a stay busy fighter who had already established that he was willing to fight anybody, anytime....he wouldn't be criticized for taking any fight. If he was it surely wouldn't reflect on the bulk of his career as you seem to want to do with Duran.

I was using his logic.Mayweather isn't criticized for not fighting on an active basis,he's criticized for not fighting the top fighters in his own weight class



If nobody else is saying this but the party who felt shunned, how much credibility does it really hold?

Gonzalez never actually claimed Duran ducked him,but that his manager wasn't interested in having Duran fight Gonzalez.

He gave Duran credit and claims that Duran "would fight anybody anywhere" and that it would have been a tough fight,while Duran went as far to say that Gonzalez wanted nothing to do with him and that he would have beaten Gonzalez quite easily.

Duran's response was quite defensive while Gonzalez was more level headed on the topic.

To be honest the stripping of Buchanan's title was very controversial and it's difficult to call any WBC champ during that time much of a champ. The title changed hands several times, from Pedro Carrasco to Mando Ramos, Chango Carmona, Rodolfo Gonzales, Suzuki Ishimatsu, Esteban DeJesus and finally Roberto Duran.

http://usproxy.bbc.com/sport2/low/boxing/1374044.stm

Gonzalez was actually never considered the number 1 contender to Duran's title. His reign began the month DeJesus defeated Duran in an over-the-weight non-title bout.

Duran fought Jimmy Robertson two months after, who years previously had been considered one of the best contenders in the division but was no longer much of a threat, which made for a solid comeback fight for Duran. It didn't end up being much of a contest with Duran pummeling him in just 5 rounds.

A few months later Duran fought Hector Thompson who was a leading contender in the 140 pound division. Duran won by a hard-fought 8 round TKO.

3 months later Duran fought Suzuki Ishimatsu. Ishimatsu probably spent more time on the canvas than he did upright against Duran but he showed a lot of heart and was impressive enough that Gonzalez gave him a shot a couple of months later. Ishimatsu KO'd him and repeated the feat in a rematch.

Gonzalez had lost his title and the WBC belt was now in the hands of Ishimatsu whom Duran had beaten previously. Instead of unifying the titles, Duran fought DeJesus, the leading 135 lb contender at the time. DeJesus went onto beat Ishimatsu, and the two fought for a third time to unify the WBC & WBA belts.

Duran was hardly shopworn Gabby.Sure, I won't hold the losses he suffered against the likes of Williams Joppy or the losses he suffered in the last ten years of his career against him but if you fail to aknowledge those losses he suffered against average,mediocre opponents in Robbie Sims and Kirkland Laing,then you are an apologist.


You can accuse me of many things,but being biased surely isn't one of them Gabby.
Just to focus we are talking about Duran at LW?

[QUOTE]

Floyd hasn't shown a willingness to fight anybody since moving to 147 unless they bring top dollar. If he was a stay busy fighter who had already established that he was willing to fight anybody, anytime....he wouldn't be criticized for taking any fight. If he was it surely wouldn't reflect on the bulk of his career as you seem to want to do with Duran.



Probably. But thats assuming he would have been a top fighter then. I'm pretty sure he would have, but its still n assumption.


If nobody else is saying this but the party who felt shunned, how much credibility does it really hold?
Exposed! Popper must have been Gonzalez's make up lady for the post fight interview..

Just to focus we are talking about Duran at LW?

I think the fact that a debate about Duran at LW decends into his post-LW career shows that there isn't too much to dispute about Duran at LW.

You argue that Mayweather isn't willing to prove himself and would rather sit back and fight men that he knows that he could beat(a criticism often used,which does hold value) and yet you claim he would never step up and fight a Kirkland Laing or a Robbie Sims.Now according to your logic then Mayweather would have no problem fighting either of the two as he knows neither of the two are actually a threat.Mayweather would be ripped for ever making a fight with a Laing or a Sims at this stage in his career.

Sure. Really? You think he would be ripped for moving up to fight a top ranked JMW or MW as a tune up instead of fighting a 36 year old 130/135 pounder at 147 after screwing him over at the weigh in too?

I would just like to ask something too. You always hear guys like you bring up the Simms and Laing losses, so, I would like to know if you have ever seen either guy fight? Which fights of theirs have you actually seen to know that they were these supposed bums? Name the fights of their you've seen and give us a brief rundown on what you think about them and their styles?

For such a bum, Laing beat some very good fighters. He was a classic inconsistent fighter that had great talent but could never keep it all together for long stretches of time. He was also much bigger than Duran and started his career at 160 pounds. Laing was actually meant to go very far and be a great fighter and at times throughout his career, much like Buster Douglas, he showed real glimpses of amazing talent.

Honestly though mate, have you actually seen the fight between him and Laing? It was Laing's version of Tyson vs Douglas. He trained hard and fought better than he ever had and ever would again. But, the big difference was that he was massive compared to Duran who looked fat and out of shape. It would be like watching Hatton get in there with a big MW. Laing towered over him literally.

Simms was a good fighter who gave everyone he fought a lot of trouble. He was skilled and fast, could brawl, counter, box, fight inside or outside. He was a good fighter that just never got over the line, and was also quite screwed against Doug DeWitt. He had a better career than Laing certainly and beat a lot of very good, top fighters. Again though, he started his career at MW and fought there and at 168 his whole career. He was six foot compared to a lightweight framed, fat Duran.

With fighters on his resume like Doug DeWitt (he won their first fight but got screwed on the decision in their rematch title fight and I think lost it on a SD which he should have won), Iran Barkley (albeit with only six pro fights or something. BTW, whoever hasn't seen that fight must do so, it is incredible, a war!), John Collins, Tony Chiaverini, Murray Sutherland etc. he was anything but a shit fighter and was a top ranked guy for his whole career.

None of this is an excuse or apology, as you put it, he was simply beaten by guys that were a hell of a lot bigger, much younger and that were very good fighters. Its enough of an accomplishment that even during LW most of his opposition was bigger than him, and from there on up everyone was, and often by very large margins. Like I said earlier, it makes sense that he lost but it still doesn't change it.

As with all great, true champions too, it is not always just that they do lose but it is how well they can come back after losing and win against the odds. All great champions have done so from Duran to Robinson to Pep to Ali to Leonard.

For such a bum, Laing beat some very good fighters. He was a classic inconsistent fighter that had great talent but could never keep it all together for long stretches of time. He was also much bigger than Duran and started his career at 160 pounds. Laing was actually meant to go very far and be a great fighter and at times throughout his career, much like Buster Douglas, he showed real glimpses of amazing talent.

Honestly though mate, have you actually seen the fight between him and Laing? It was Laing's version of Tyson vs Douglas. He trained hard and fought better than he ever had and ever would again. But, the big difference was that he was massive compared to Duran who looked fat and out of shape. It would be like watching Hatton get in there with a big MW. Laing towered over him literally.




Benny you're on fire in this thread :)
Glad someone has championed Laing a bit I always feel a little embarassed to as I don't think he is that well known over the pond.
A fantastic talent with marvelous reflexes but it all came a bit easy to him and he was a terrible trainer. Didn't help that he signed with Terry Lawless who was notoriously cautious with his fighters so it was all to easy for Laing no need to train. He gave Colin Jones a boxing lesson for 8 rounds and gassed/lost concentration and got caught in the 9th twice.
Lawless gave up on him so he signed with Micky Duff and Don King was shopping around for a tune up for Duran after the Benetiz defeat and looks at Laing, 2 losses in his last 4 fights against nobodies, perfect!
Laing then decides to train like a monster which coupled with his talent against an unfocussed Duran the rest is history. I would say though that a focussed conditioned Laing would give any fighter problems.
As a postscript Laing now had a good win against Duran and doors were opening so what does he do? He goes missing, Duff couldn't get hold of him for 6 months :). Laing then fights 1 fight in 2 years.
Laing was an accident waiting to happen for a fighter and Duran run into him and lost a split decision thats the story. Your Douglas comparison nails it really in far less words than i've used lol