PDA

View Full Version : Why do people like Roberto Duran


Winky
05-31-2006, 11:50 AM
I honestly thought he sucked....just look at his fight with Hearns.He was too slow and why does everyone think he was good?

RAESAAD
05-31-2006, 11:54 AM
Man your **** is endless. :D

Winky
05-31-2006, 11:58 AM
No dude im actually being serious with this one...I mean he lost to the main guys he fought.I know he was a beast at lightweight but seriously he got destroyed by Hearns and even lost to Ray Leonard by embarrasment.

RAESAAD
05-31-2006, 12:00 PM
I really don't have much opinion on him.He was from what I have seen of him a relentless beast and you are right did come up short against his top opponents.......Vargas like.

Winky
05-31-2006, 12:02 PM
Exactly!! thats my whole point,i realize hes considered the greatest Lightweight ever even though i would take Pernell Whitaker everyday of the week.I also believe he lost to Hagler as well.

K-DOGG
05-31-2006, 12:17 PM
I honestly thought he sucked....just look at his fight with Hearns.He was too slow and why does everyone think he was good?

Dude, have you EVER seen any of his lightweight fights or the first Leonard fight....or even the Barkley fight?

Brockton Lip
05-31-2006, 12:23 PM
first Leonard fight

Leonard was even more impressive actually in that fight. He used a different style and went toe to toe with a harder hitter and almost won! But yes Duran is very good.

RastaSmoker
05-31-2006, 12:24 PM
Roberto Durán is a famous boxer from Panama, and is generally regarded as not only one of the greatest pound-for-pound fighters of all time, but arguably the most pure fighting animal to ever step into the ring. He held world titles at four different weights - lightweight (1972-79), welterweight (1980), junior middleweight (1983-84) and middleweight (1989). He was also the only boxer to have fought in five different decades. He finally retired in January 2002 at age 52 (having previously retired in 1998) following a bad car crash in October 2001, with a professional record of 120 fights, 104 wins with 69 KOs. He was nicknamed Manos de Piedra (Hands of Stone) when at age 14 he allegedly knocked out a horse with one punch.

+= El Jefe=+
05-31-2006, 12:26 PM
here is a question why do you like Winky????

K-DOGG
05-31-2006, 12:38 PM
Leonard was even more impressive actually in that fight. He used a different style and went toe to toe with a harder hitter and almost won! But yes Duran is very good.

Well, that depends on how you look at it. I don't think Leonard wanted to fight Duran in that style....I think Duran made him fight in that style. Leonard himself has said he got sucked into the macho-thing with Duran and fought his fight.

I do agree he did very well though; but still think Duran was better in that fight and deserved the win.

Brockton Lip
05-31-2006, 12:42 PM
Well, that depends on how you look at it. I don't think Leonard wanted to fight Duran in that style....I think Duran made him fight in that style. Leonard himself has said he got sucked into the macho-thing with Duran and fought his fight.

I do agree he did very well though; but still think Duran was better in that fight and deserved the win.

Yeah that sounds true. I agree with that.

Winky
05-31-2006, 12:56 PM
here is a question why do you like Winky????

Cause i can.

Frazier's 15th round
05-31-2006, 12:57 PM
When Duran fought Hagler, you do realize that he was fighting at about 25 pounds above his normal weight? He went the distance with Hagler and beat Ray Leonard once.

+= El Jefe=+
05-31-2006, 12:58 PM
Cause i can.
does that answer your question??

K-DOGG
05-31-2006, 01:00 PM
When Duran fought Hagler, you do realize that he was fighting at about 25 pounds above his normal weight? He went the distance with Hagler and beat Ray Leonard once.

Very True....and the Hagler fight was a thing of beauty. Technical boxing at it's best on both ends. To see a man who held the Lightweight Championship fighting that competitively with one of the greatest middleweights of all time was something else. Duran was something else...one of a kind, truly.

rocco1252
05-31-2006, 01:53 PM
How can you take away from Duran, I mean that guy was an animal who would fight anyone, he wasnt scared of anyone and stepped up to all opposition. He fought hard no matter what the situation and sure he had some faults and never really beat the toughest opponents but thats like taking away from Patterson saying he wasnt great because he lost to the toughest opponents as well when he fought them. But **** man seriously the guy had to be great, he fough over 100 battles, was champion in 4 weight classes and fought for nearly 30 years I mean **** what else more do you need to be considered great?

SABBATH
05-31-2006, 02:04 PM
Very True....and the Hagler fight was a thing of beauty. Technical boxing at it's best on both ends. To see a man who held the Lightweight Championship fighting that competitively with one of the greatest middleweights of all time was something else. Duran was something else...one of a kind, truly.
Pound for pound Duran was likely the best fighter of his generation. Duran could fight as an aggressive swarmer (Leonard I),or as a patient counterpuncher as the Hagler fight showed. He could also mix it up like he did against Pipino Cuevas a masterful dismantling as was his next fight against Davey Moore.

Duran's best opponents came later in his career when he was older and at a weight above his prime fighting weight. Duran also always gave away height reach and youth to later opponents Leonard, Benitez, Hagler, Hearns, Moore, Barkley etc...

At his peak Duran was a defensive master, in-fighter, body puncher, and sharp puncher with KO power in both hands. As a lightweight champion Duran has few peers.

Azteca
05-31-2006, 03:24 PM
I really don't have much opinion on him.He was from what I have seen of him a relentless beast and you are right did come up short against his top opponents.......Vargas like.

sorry, but that is a very misinformed opinion right there.

lefthooklacy11
05-31-2006, 05:20 PM
He was nicknamed Manos de Piedra (Hands of Stone) when at age 14 he allegedly knocked out a horse with one punch.

Knocked out a horse, dayummm

machotime
05-31-2006, 05:32 PM
WOW,

Winky, if you are actually implying that Duran was overrated, you should be smacked by your father or grandfather, because they probably did actually see his fights, while you didn't.....

Duran lost to Hagler and Hearns due to the fact that he started his career at 118!!!!! They were naturally 160 :eek: , the man is a legend for fighting like a man, for so long, being relentless, having obtained world titles in 4weight classes, and jumping from 118-168..... that is 9 weight classes. You have probably never seen him fight....if you did , you would have never started this thread.

lefthooklacy11
05-31-2006, 05:39 PM
Duran's great, there's really no sense in arguing that.

trinidadpr87
05-31-2006, 05:52 PM
No dude im actually being serious with this one...I mean he lost to the main guys he fought.I know he was a beast at lightweight but seriously he got destroyed by Hearns and even lost to Ray Leonard by embarrasment.
He also beat Leonard too.He was a natural lightweight with devastating power, imagine if Kostya Tszyu moved up to 160 how do you think he would do?

oldgringo
05-31-2006, 06:15 PM
exactly....imagine winky wright moving up to cruiserweight...then imagine him beating o'neil bell to capture the title there. okay well that's more or less what duran did when he beat iran barkley for the recognized title.

BAREKNUCKLES
05-31-2006, 07:22 PM
Roberto Duran was a marquis fighter of the last century. He was also a polarizing figure in and out of the ring. Many of his tactics in and out of the ring made him someone to be revered or reviled.


His fighting style wasn't particularly pleasing to watch. No Sugar Ray or Ali like moves in there, his style definitely followed suit to the latino style. In many respects, you could compare him to Julio Caesar Chavez. A matador with incredible power, skill, endurance and the ever intangible will to win. Duran was much nastier than Chavez, able to demoralize an opponent before he ever climbed into the ring.

What made Duran great was his huge fighting heart. His ability to fight and beat some of boxing's elite fighters, even when he was vastly outsized not only reflected his skill but his will to win.

Iran Barkley was a beastly middleweight, yet Duran stretched him in the opine position. That was truly a great fight.

Although he lost the fight, I always felt that he had beaten vinnie Pazienza in the twilight of his career.

The man loved to fight. If he were a dog, he would be a pit bull.

hellfire508
06-01-2006, 03:44 AM
Duran was a brilliant fighter. I think that is the best word to describe him. I would probably pick him over any lightweight in history. He was such a complete fighter in his prime.

Heckler
06-01-2006, 07:45 PM
Duran was a brilliant fighter. I think that is the best word to describe him. I would probably pick him over any lightweight in history. He was such a complete fighter in his prime.

Please tell me this thread is some kind of stupid joke? Roberto Duran in terms of greatness has to be ranked over Sugar Ray leonard, Tommy Hearns, Marvin Hagler etc... He was beaten by these men because he was a natural lightweight and dominated this division for a decade. Watch Duran vs Leonard I, Duran was amazing. He wasn't just the rough and tumble slugger he is percieved to be by the younger generations, he could really box... Duran was very skilled and old school. We can't discredit him for getting knocked out by Hearns, Hearns was a freak at 6'1 - 140 pounds with devestating punching power. Even Duran with his supurb defense could not overcome such an obstacle.

tommyhearns804
06-01-2006, 08:05 PM
You know why people love Duran or De La Hoya in this country?Because the people herer are afraid to say anything about non american people period.You see how mexicans run across the border and take our jobs right and nobody says a thing.Just run aross the border and pop out a child and the child is a so called citizen and has all the rights of people who were here for 100's of years.It is the same reason why De La Hoya can get title shots and is a millionare and a white fighter like Bronco Mckart is a unknown even though he is alot more skilled than De La Hoya.Whitaker beat De La Hoya but gets robbed because De La Hoya is mexican.
To be honest virtually all hispanic and latino fighters suck.They are great at beating their own race but when ever they fight a good white or black fighter they lose.But the way this country is you will always hear more about them than you will our own white and black fighters.

machotime
06-01-2006, 08:29 PM
You know why people love Duran or De La Hoya in this country?Because the people herer are afraid to say anything about non american people period.You see how mexicans run across the border and take our jobs right and nobody says a thing.Just run aross the border and pop out a child and the child is a so called citizen and has all the rights of people who were here for 100's of years.It is the same reason why De La Hoya can get title shots and is a millionare and a white fighter like Bronco Mckart is a unknown even though he is alot more skilled than De La Hoya.Whitaker beat De La Hoya but gets robbed because De La Hoya is mexican.
To be honest virtually all hispanic and latino fighters suck.They are great at beating their own race but when ever they fight a good white or black fighter they lose.But the way this country is you will always hear more about them than you will our own white and black fighters.

I smell a BAN coming :eek: LOL

lefthooklacy11
06-01-2006, 08:49 PM
You know why people love Duran or De La Hoya in this country?Because the people herer are afraid to say anything about non american people period.You see how mexicans run across the border and take our jobs right and nobody says a thing.Just run aross the border and pop out a child and the child is a so called citizen and has all the rights of people who were here for 100's of years.It is the same reason why De La Hoya can get title shots and is a millionare and a white fighter like Bronco Mckart is a unknown even though he is alot more skilled than De La Hoya.Whitaker beat De La Hoya but gets robbed because De La Hoya is mexican.
To be honest virtually all hispanic and latino fighters suck.They are great at beating their own race but when ever they fight a good white or black fighter they lose.But the way this country is you will always hear more about them than you will our own white and black fighters.

But how does this make you feel? :rolleyes:

Kid Achilles
06-01-2006, 09:16 PM
Hearns really outdid himself this time. LOL!

Brockton Lip
06-01-2006, 09:20 PM
Hell yeah. banned finally. He blocks me out of his threads and is a moron.

butterfly1964
06-01-2006, 11:44 PM
Hell yeah. banned finally. He blocks me out of his threads and is a moron.

Yeah, he blocked me too because I said that Jack Dempsey wasn't a coward.

butterfly1964
06-01-2006, 11:45 PM
Yeah, he blocked me too because I said that Jack Dempsey wasn't a coward.

Either that, or it was because I said that Sonny Liston would beat George Foreman.

sleazyfellow
06-02-2006, 12:33 AM
he blocked me cause of his stupid marciano vs god thread, i think hes quite funny actually, but his threads used to b just plain black vs. white, and this one he jumps all over spanish speaking dudes, well it was good while it lasted mr. tommy hearns, oh and ur a disgrace to the real motor city hitman, if u should come back just call urself arayanblacksupremcist, not after any boxers

hellfire508
06-02-2006, 01:12 AM
Please tell me this thread is some kind of stupid joke? Roberto Duran in terms of greatness has to be ranked over Sugar Ray leonard, Tommy Hearns, Marvin Hagler etc... He was beaten by these men because he was a natural lightweight and dominated this division for a decade. Watch Duran vs Leonard I, Duran was amazing. He wasn't just the rough and tumble slugger he is percieved to be by the younger generations, he could really box... Duran was very skilled and old school. We can't discredit him for getting knocked out by Hearns, Hearns was a freak at 6'1 - 140 pounds with devestating punching power. Even Duran with his supurb defense could not overcome such an obstacle.

I hope this thread is a joke. Either that, or the only fights the author has seen of Duran are the those post 82ish (he was still great after then too, just too high up in weight). Duran was a BEAST in the 70s, an unbelievable fighter.

I love his fights with Dejesus and Palomino in particular.

Despite being at welter, Montreal will always be his signature victory.

Yogi
06-02-2006, 01:40 AM
Duran's fight with Palomino was probably my favourite fight of his, as well, Hellfire, and I don't think anybody could find too many more impressive performances against top flight opposition than that one put forth by Roberto...

Fairly cautious first round by both fighters, but after that...a completely one-sided ****kicking was handed out in that fight, as Duran completely beat Palomino up from the outside with the left hooks and especially the right hands, before quickly coming inside to do the same with the hooks & uppercuts.

Domination at it's best.

SABBATH
06-02-2006, 01:54 PM
Domination at it's best.Duran schooled alot of bigger guys that tried to fight the inside game. Palomino, Leonard, Cuevas, Moore, Barkley all were outfought against Duran at close quarters.

At a distance however Duran could be beaten. His jab while effective against shorter guys as a lightweight was usually just a rangfinder against taller opponents and wasn't a real effective weapon for him once he moved up in weight. Lateral mobility also troubled Duran who liked to get his feet set before attacking.

Now, in addition to the second Leonard fight, Duran was truly taken to school against Wilfred Benitez both on the outside and inside. A masterful performance by Benitez an underrated and overlooked great fighter.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=vSGaEawyLQk&search=roberto%20duran

Here's a pretty good first round KO by a prime Duran. He mixes his attack well to both body and head, makes his opponent Rojas miss, is very aggressive, busy and applies effective punching pressure.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Emy4Ktup7Y8&search=roberto%20duran

Yogi
06-02-2006, 02:49 PM
At a distance however Duran could be beaten. His jab while effective against shorter guys as a lightweight was usually just a rangfinder against taller opponents and wasn't a real effective weapon for him once he moved up in weight. Lateral mobility also troubled Duran who liked to get his feet set before attacking.

That's all true, and even at lightweight he showed that he wasn't as unbeatable at that weight as some think he was...Everybody has a stylistic weakness that others could take advantage of, and with Duran he was shown to have trouble at times with tricky & fairly quick outboxers (who relied on their jabs), who used mobility on their feet to avoid the inside exchanges with Duran...

You've given a couple of examples with Leonard & Benitez, but we also saw that when he fought the talented, but underachieving Kirkland Laing, who pulled off the big upset by using his quick mobility, long range jabbing, and quick hands against him. And we also saw some hints of that in his lightweight tenure, as well, against the likes of Ray Lampkin (who had some sucess with side-to-side movement, and the use of his jab) or Edwin Viruet...Haven't seen the Viruet fight, but from what I read/hear from a couple of different sources, Viruet might have been unlikely to got get the decision the first time he faced Duran in their non-title fight, and it was said that Viruet also used some quick mobility and smart outside boxing behind the jab with great success against Duran.

SABBATH
06-02-2006, 03:05 PM
That's all true, and even at lightweight he showed that he wasn't as unbeatable at that weight as some think he was...Everybody has a stylistic weakness that others could take advantage of, and with Duran he was shown to have trouble at times with tricky & fairly quick outboxers (who relied on their jabs), who used mobility on their feet to avoid the inside exchanges with Duran...

You've given a couple of examples with Leonard & Benitez, but we also saw that when he fought the talented, but underachieving Kirkland Laing, who pulled off the big upset by using his quick mobility, long range jabbing, and quick hands against him. And we also saw some hints of that in his lightweight tenure, as well, against the likes of Ray Lampkin (who had some sucess with side-to-side movement, and the use of his jab) or Edwin Viruet...Haven't seen the Viruet fight, but from what I read/hear from a couple of different sources, Viruet might have been unlikely to got get the decision the first time he faced Duran in their non-title fight, and it was said that Viruet also used some quick mobility and smart outside boxing behind the jab with great success against Duran.
Don't forget the tricky Vilomar Fernandez who gave Duran some trouble went 13 rounds and also beat Alexis Arguello...

The Noose
06-03-2006, 10:41 PM
The Duran - Pipino Cuevas fight is one of my favourites. There is a moment in which he slips 2 hooks, and each time delivers a body hook perfectly.
IMO Duran was one of the most natural fighters. His instincts were second to none.
His skills are so often vastly underrated. He was not just a walk forward fighter, but a great aggresive boxer, who had incredible timing and reflexes.

We all know he didnt have much of a jab, but everything else, speed, endurance, balance, body shots, counter rights, left hooks to the body, combinations, a great chin (Hearns right hand wasnt human!), Duran was one of the best ever fighters.

kerubee
06-04-2006, 02:00 AM
No dude im actually being serious with this one...I mean he lost to the main guys he fought.I know he was a beast at lightweight but seriously he got destroyed by Hearns and even lost to Ray Leonard by embarrasment.

I recognize that you are serious about this one, and Duran lost to Hearns just plain flat but:

I do not think that he lost to Sugar Leonard boxing. There was not a problem with what he ate earlier before the fight. No. He quit because he could not "catch up" to the "running" of Leonard all around the ring afraid of getting hit.. Duran just got frustrated the same way that anybody gets frustrated when can not catch a fly.

You never saw Duran running away from nobody in order not get hit.

Learn from the mexican fighters: They stand infront of the opponent and fight. (Duran is from Panama)

oldgringo
06-04-2006, 03:14 AM
My favorite Duran fights are his wins over Moore and Barkley. The way he dismantled bigger fighters was amazing.

SouthPawHitman
02-17-2016, 07:49 PM
Duran was a brilliant fighter. I think that is the best word to describe him. I would probably pick him over any lightweight in history. He was such a complete fighter in his prime.

Good post fam.

Ray Corso
02-17-2016, 08:26 PM
This thread is .........10 years old.........................

anthonydavid11
02-17-2016, 08:37 PM
I honestly thought he sucked....just look at his fight with Hearns.He was too slow and why does everyone think he was good?

If you're going solely off of the Hearns fight, you haven't even looked at him at all. That's like watching Hearns' lost to Barkley the first time out and saying he sucks.

Duran fought out of the slums of Panama to beat Ken Buchannan who was one of the best Scottish boxers ever and win the lightweight title which he defended twelve times and unified by beating his rival Esteban Dejesus in their third fight. Duran won that series 2-1, both wins by KO over Dejesus who was a badass fighter himself. Despite their rivalry, Duran flew to Puerto Rico and embraced Dejesus when he was dying of AIDS at a time when most people kept their distance from AIDS victims.

He went on to beat Carlos Palomino, thoroughly dominating him at welterweight which was two divisions above his natural fighting weight and Palomino was no joke. He then beat a young, unbeaten Sugar Ray Leonard who was one of boxing's biggest stars at the time if not the biggest, below heavyweight. He demolished Pipino Cuevas and destroyed Davey Moore. He gave Hagler a very close fight all the way at middleweight- four divisions above his natural fighting weight and many feel he even beat him. He then beat Iran Barkley- the man who beat Hearns twice- to become middleweight champion at 37 and other than De La Hoya, the only man to win titles at lightweight and middleweight.

And I have to add, if you have a lot of great respect for Winky Wright and none for Roberto Duran, you need to seriously watch more fights and read up on the sport a whole lot more.

Scott9945
02-17-2016, 08:56 PM
If you're going solely off of the Hearns fight, you haven't even looked at him at all. That's like watching Hearns' lost to Barkley the first time out and saying he sucks.

Duran fought out of the slums of Panama to beat Ken Buchannan who was one of the best Scottish boxers ever and win the lightweight title which he defended twelve times and unified by beating his rival Esteban Dejesus in their third fight. Duran won that series 2-1, both wins by KO over Dejesus who was a badass fighter himself. Despite their rivalry, Duran flew to Puerto Rico and embraced Dejesus when he was dying of AIDS at a time when most people kept their distance from AIDS victims.

He went on to beat Carlos Palomino, thoroughly dominating him at welterweight which was two divisions above his natural fighting weight and Palomino was no joke. He then beat a young, unbeaten Sugar Ray Leonard who was one of boxing's biggest stars at the time if not the biggest, below heavyweight. He demolished Pipino Cuevas and destroyed Davey Moore. He gave Hagler a very close fight all the way at middleweight- four divisions above his natural fighting weight and many feel he even beat him. He then beat Iran Barkley- the man who beat Hearns twice- to become middleweight champion at 37 and other than De La Hoya, the only man to win titles at lightweight and middleweight.

And I have to add, if you have a lot of great respect for Winky Wright and none for Roberto Duran, you need to seriously watch more fights and read up on the sport a whole lot more.

You keep referring to Duran as a natural lightweight, but he moved because he could no longer safely make that weight. When Duran fought Leonard, he was at that point a natural welterweight still in his prime. You don't hear people call Mayweather and De La Hoya "natural lightweights" when discussing their higher weight achievements, because that would be false too.

anthonydavid11
02-17-2016, 09:10 PM
You keep referring to Duran as a natural lightweight, but he moved because he could no longer safely make that weight. When Duran fought Leonard, he was at that point a natural welterweight still in his prime. You don't hear people call Mayweather and De La Hoya "natural lightweights" when discussing their higher weight achievements, because that would be false too.

I would say Mayweather actually was a natural lightweight and De La Hoya maybe 140. These are their best weights really.

As for Duran, he started out as a bantamweight and grew into lightweight. That was his prime fighting weight.

All of his fights beyond that were above his natural fighting weight and the weight where he was the most effective which is how I define natural weight.

Scott9945
02-17-2016, 09:23 PM
I would say Mayweather actually was a natural lightweight and De La Hoya maybe 140. These are their best weights really.

As for Duran, he started out as a bantamweight and grew into lightweight. That was his prime fighting weight.

All of his fights beyond that were above his natural fighting weight and the weight where he was the most effective which is how I define natural weight.

It's all perception I suppose. If a boxer looks fit and is fighting at his highest level, then to me that is a natural weight for that point in their career. Duran was under 30 and a champion at 147. Everyone knew he had been struggling to make 135 for some time. All those fights in the 120's were when he was still a skinny teenager.

anthonydavid11
02-17-2016, 09:27 PM
It's all perception I suppose. If a boxer looks fit and is fighting at his highest level, then to me that is a natural weight for that point in their career. Duran was under 30 and a champion at 147. Everyone knew he had been struggling to make 135 for some time. All those fights in the 120's were when he was still a skinny teenager.

I look at it as where a fighter is his most effective. I think Duran as a lightweight had all his tools at their sharpest- especially his footwork. His legs were never as good as he moved up. It is all perception and that's how I see it.

And I do think a fighter moving up to face a naturally bigger opponent deserves credit for doing so. it comes with a bigger risk than an opponent closer to his natural size.

DJ Enerate
02-18-2016, 12:02 PM
Pound for pound Duran was likely the best fighter of his generation. Duran could fight as an aggressive swarmer (Leonard I),or as a patient counterpuncher as the Hagler fight showed. He could also mix it up like he did against Pipino Cuevas a masterful dismantling as was his next fight against Davey Moore.

Duran's best opponents came later in his career when he was older and at a weight above his prime fighting weight. Duran also always gave away height reach and youth to later opponents Leonard, Benitez, Hagler, Hearns, Moore, Barkley etc...

At his peak Duran was a defensive master, in-fighter, body puncher, and sharp puncher with KO power in both hands. As a lightweight champion Duran has few peers.


Excellent post. Duran was a dynamic, technical marvel and a true beast. One of, if not thee most complete fighter we have extensive footage of. He punched way above his weight.

His defence was phenomenal as this vid shows at 7.14

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/F5Pw2elzBik" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

DJ Enerate
02-18-2016, 12:28 PM
You keep referring to Duran as a natural lightweight, but he moved because he could no longer safely make that weight. When Duran fought Leonard, he was at that point a natural welterweight still in his prime. You don't hear people call Mayweather and De La Hoya "natural lightweights" when discussing their higher weight achievements, because that would be false too.

Duran started out as a skinny Bantamweight. Of course he was a natural lightweight at his peak, to say otherwise is ridiculous.

Ray Corso
02-18-2016, 12:50 PM
The expression "natural" for maintaining a certain weight in boxing is for a fighter who easily maintains said weight!
Hagler was a natural middleweight starting there and ending there without any issues making weight.
Hearns, Leonard, Duran & Benitez after a certain amount of maturity could no longer make the weights they were first noted for.
Most fighters reaching 30 years old can struggle with maintaining a weight they've averaged for years. It's a progression that most people deal with in their lives and most fighters are no different.
Mike Spinks left 175 because it became difficult to make, training for that weight began to weaken him through camp.
A good example today is GGG who is a natural middleweight and has been able to maintain the middleweight limit with very little sacrifices. He is a not a big middleweight (5' 9-10") not particularly thick or heavy boned. At 32 yrs he seems to have no issues with weight.

Benitez, Leonard at 5'10" out grew welter with Duran at 5'7" but thick and wide shouldered for his height actually bringing his lightweight skills with him at welter. Hearns at 6'1" looses some of his power after 154lbs. plus the men being physically stronger at 160+ than 147.

Mayweather at 35yrs old could easily make 140 and be considered a natural weight for his age. He started his successes at 130! At 5' 7 1/2" he is not heavy boned or thick so I do not consider him a natural at welter, especially with his limited power at 147.

Ray

Scott9945
02-18-2016, 01:00 PM
Duran started out as a skinny Bantamweight. Of course he was a natural lightweight at his peak, to say otherwise is ridiculous.

He was still at his peak when he could no longer make 135 and moved up to welter. He never would have beaten a prime Ray Leonard if he wasn't. Why do Duran fans always get so hypersensitive about this? A fighter's peak can cover more than one weight class.

joseph5620
02-18-2016, 01:44 PM
He was still at his peak when he could no longer make 135 and moved up to welter. He never would have beaten a prime Ray Leonard if he wasn't. Why do Duran fans always get so hypersensitive about this? A fighter's peak can cover more than one weight class.

I've been reading a lot of post like that lately. It's as if a fighter can never outgrow a weight class.


To continue calling Duran a "lightweight" after he moved up is ridiculous. The same with considering Hearns a "natural welterweight" after he moved up in weight.


If the weight was "natural" for them they never would have moved up. Duran didn't look any differemt from his peak when he beat both Palomino and Leonard at 147. He was clearly still in his prime.

Scott9945
02-18-2016, 02:29 PM
I've been reading a lot of post like that lately. It's as if a fighter can never outgrow a weight class.


To continue calling Duran a "lightweight" after he moved up is ridiculous. The same with considering Hearns a "natural welterweight" after he moved up in weight.


If the weight was "natural" for them they never would have moved up. Duran didn't look any differemt from his peak when he beat both Palomino and Leonard at 147. He was clearly still in his prime.

Anyone who looks at Hearns in a middleweight fight and claims he is above his best weight is either blind or hopelessly biased. Hearns still looked big fighting at 175+. It was amazing that he was a welterweight as long as he was.

Steve plunger
02-18-2016, 04:49 PM
Anyone who looks at Hearns in a middleweight fight and claims he is above his best weight is either blind or hopelessly biased. Hearns still looked big fighting at 175+. It was amazing that he was a welterweight as long as he was.
Hearns carried the weight because of his height and reach.....but even at middlweight he was getting hurt on a regular basis...roldan almost stopped him, kitchen dropped him...Barkley koed him...so to say he was at his most optimum weight as middlweight is wrong...his core strength was weak.....in a war of attrition he faded very quicky if he couldn't stop you before...hearns most dominat weight was weltwerweight and jnr middlweight and his performances prove that.....koed cuevas and simply destroyed every fighter he faced besides leonard and was 32-0 and 30 kos ....then moved up koed duran ....middlweight he was able to win because of his size and reach but he became very vulnerable as he moved up in weight....ranking someone in there prime is when there at there most optimum best and it's on record that hearns was his most devastating at jnr middleweight or welter.....it's gonna be pretty similar when amir khan faces canelo...he has the height and reach but as soon as it comes down to attrition and in the trenches he will get stopped.......and thats not a sign of your prime weight....u cannot add strength to your core just by gaining weight....a prime weight is when you are at your fighting best......hearns could have stayed at jnr middlweight but it was actually his inner warrior that he moved up to face hagler..hagler in 1985 was the man to beat..hearns faced hagler because he presented a challenge...competitive nature.....hagler didn't fancy going up to fight a dwight braxton or Michael spinks who on 3 occasions called hagler out....duran was the same the big money was leonard and he actually leaped straight over light welterweight to face leonard ...some fighters are happy staying in one division and controlling others want to beat records and gain belts.....

Steve plunger
02-18-2016, 05:12 PM
The expression "natural" for maintaining a certain weight in boxing is for a fighter who easily maintains said weight!
Hagler was a natural middleweight starting there and ending there without any issues making weight.
Hearns, Leonard, Duran & Benitez after a certain amount of maturity could no longer make the weights they were first noted for.
Most fighters reaching 30 years old can struggle with maintaining a weight they've averaged for years. It's a progression that most people deal with in their lives and most fighters are no different.
Mike Spinks left 175 because it became difficult to make, training for that weight began to weaken him through camp.
A good example today is GGG who is a natural middleweight and has been able to maintain the middleweight limit with very little sacrifices. He is a not a big middleweight (5' 9-10") not particularly thick or heavy boned. At 32 yrs he seems to have no issues with weight.

Benitez, Leonard at 5'10" out grew welter with Duran at 5'7" but thick and wide shouldered for his height actually bringing his lightweight skills with him at welter. Hearns at 6'1" looses some of his power after 154lbs. plus the men being physically stronger at 160+ than 147.

Mayweather at 35yrs old could easily make 140 and be considered a natural weight for his age. He started his successes at 130! At 5' 7 1/2" he is not heavy boned or thick so I do not consider him a natural at welter, especially with his limited power at 147.

Ray
Ray that's wrong fella...leonard was a true welterweight as well.....weighed 146 for hearns and his last fight against finch before his eye injury stopped his career....2 years later when he faced Kevin Howard he weighed 149lb and considering he was out the ring for over 2 years shows that he would have had no problem maintaining that weight and stay in the welterweight division....for over a year before he signed for hagler...he was building his frame up....doing weights and bulking up to become heavier and add core strength ....even at 35 when facing Norris after being retired for another 2 years he was just 154lbs....hagler knew the big pay days came from the durans,hearns and Leonard's who were lighter and less risk than rather gain 10lbs and face a very dangerous Michael spinks who was the dominant champion at light heavyweight

Ray Corso
02-18-2016, 06:17 PM
steveplunger;..... "less risk than rather gain 10lbs and face a very dangerous Michael spinks who was the dominant champion at lightheavy"

Gain 10 lbs??? Seriously? 160 to 175 is 15 pounds.
Spinks the night of his fights could easily hit the ring at 185lbs.
Hagler never gained more than 6 to 8 pounds fight night!
Spinks is one of the best punchers in light heavy history so you think it's a "challenge" to give away close to 20lbs to an ATG 175lb puncher?
Glad your not a manager you'd get fighters in some very bad business situations.

Your welcomed to your opinion of what went on then but I was very active in boxing at that time and probably have a lot more insight on these men then you do, ya think?

Everyone including Hagler knew Leonard put himself on hold and watched Hagler fight on and add years on his body. Power and hands don't leave veterans but your steps get slower and reactions too. Thats how Leonard out scored Hagler and some nice "track techniques" too!
It was a big deal for a welter king to challenge the middle king just as the real Sugar Ray did years before except Leonard waited years before he challenged. Don't give the eye routine because he could have challenged and got the fight with Hagler anytime he wanted.

Leonard learned from his early management that patience is a virtue in boxing. He fought very easy competition early in his career after he fought top notch amateurs for years! He trained at my gym for his 8th or 9th fight at the New Haven Col. when he fought a retired super feather/lightweight who just got his nose fixed 6 months prior to the fight hahaha guess what happened?

Hagler in his prime beats Leonard the same way Duran did! Pressure and a two handed attack. Their size was very even and body strength too a big difference was that Hagler could cut the ring down very well and lateral moves were a big part of Leonard's offense.
it would be close like their bout actually was but Hagler would have the edge that Leonard had as older fighters! That's just my opinion, been on fight cards with both of them a few times. I'm basing my opinion on what I've seen in person with the main edge going to Hagler's pain tolerances and determination.

enough of this it gets old after the 5th post!

nite boys Ray

Scott9945
02-18-2016, 06:27 PM
Hearns carried the weight because of his height and reach.....but even at middlweight he was getting hurt on a regular basis...roldan almost stopped him, kitchen dropped him...Barkley koed him...so to say he was at his most optimum weight as middlweight is wrong...his core strength was weak.....in a war of attrition he faded very quicky if he couldn't stop you before...hearns most dominat weight was weltwerweight and jnr middlweight and his performances prove that.....koed cuevas and simply destroyed every fighter he faced besides leonard and was 32-0 and 30 kos ....then moved up koed duran ....middlweight he was able to win because of his size and reach but he became very vulnerable as he moved up in weight....ranking someone in there prime is when there at there most optimum best and it's on record that hearns was his most devastating at jnr middleweight or welter.....it's gonna be pretty similar when amir khan faces canelo...he has the height and reach but as soon as it comes down to attrition and in the trenches he will get stopped.......and thats not a sign of your prime weight....u cannot add strength to your core just by gaining weight....a prime weight is when you are at your fighting best......hearns could have stayed at jnr middlweight but it was actually his inner warrior that he moved up to face hagler..hagler in 1985 was the man to beat..hearns faced hagler because he presented a challenge...competitive nature.....hagler didn't fancy going up to fight a dwight braxton or Michael spinks who on 3 occasions called hagler out....duran was the same the big money was leonard and he actually leaped straight over light welterweight to face leonard ...some fighters are happy staying in one division and controlling others want to beat records and gain belts.....

Hearns was a big man, not just in height and reach. He had massive shoulders and was a large middleweight, certainly much bigger than Amir Khan. His last welterweight fight was at age 22, which is very young for a fighter at the highest level. He went from 154 to 160 because there was more money there, and he likely had to struggle to make weight.

Tommy's chin was ordinary at best and his long legs were shaky. He was able to disguise that against less talented smaller fighters (but not Leonard). Hagler not moving up was entirely different as Marvin was a compact 5'9 with an ideal build for middleweight. Spinks was a huge lightheavy and that was a major weight jump. You seem to be very impressed by how many weight classes a fighter moves up, while I'm more focused on actual achievements.

Steve plunger
02-18-2016, 08:39 PM
Hearns was a big man, not just in height and reach. He had massive shoulders and was a large middleweight, certainly much bigger than Amir Khan. His last welterweight fight was at age 22, which is very young for a fighter at the highest level. He went from 154 to 160 because there was more money there, and he likely had to struggle to make weight.

Tommy's chin was ordinary at best and his long legs were shaky. He was able to disguise that against less talented smaller fighters (but not Leonard). Hagler not moving up was entirely different as Marvin was a compact 5'9 with an ideal build for middleweight. Spinks was a huge lightheavy and that was a major weight jump. You seem to be very impressed by how many weight classes a fighter moves up, while I'm more focused on actual achievements.
What exactly are the achievements of marvin hagler....it was a weak era for middleweights with his defences.....his 4 most notable defences were all against smaller fighters....duran,hearns,mugabi and leonard...besides that there was caveman lee,Wilfred scypion,fulgencio obelmejias, juan roldan,sibson and a few others..so what achievements are we talking about fella, haglers legacy is basically built on fighters that travelled up through weight to face him...and seeing I am quite opinionated on divisions and there merit...without those 4 who did go up weight divisons haglers legacy would be shallow and without one ATG ...now let's add the loss with willie Monroe, the draw with sugar ray seals and antuofermo...well hagler was a huge middlweight compared to duran in reality.....a man who started his pro career at 128lbs facing a fighter who even as an amatuer was a 160lber....there are very few fighters that have achieved ATG by remaining in one class.....I dare you to find five fighters that are true ATG that did not go up divsions....another buddy I was not comparing amir to hearns body size I am comparing the travelling up in weight and losing the power to stay with bigger fighters....Khan was a lightweight and he has moved now to his middlweight fight with canelo that's 5 divisons....hearns was a weltwerweight and moved up to cruiserweight that's 6 divisions.....hearns had no power at that weight and pretty much faced journeyman or lower ranked fighters ....if he had faced an Evander holyfield or even a David haye he would have been brutally knocked out.....as I said before hearns lacked the core strength to even be at lightheavyweigh...I suggest u watch the Delgado fight to see this...I'm not downplaying hagler and he was a monster and during his time he so dominant ....but to say all the fighters who went up through the weights matched his physical strength is utter bollocks....that's how he beat hearns because he just had to much strength and conditioning and walked through everything hearns threw at him.....dwight braxton was only 5'7 and he was a light heavyweight so that's the size theory out the way....also leonard faced donny lalonde and he was 168 and 6ft 2... And he was a midget compared to him and actually weighed in with coins in his pocket....I await the five ATG that stayed in one divsion

Steve plunger
02-18-2016, 09:00 PM
steveplunger;..... "less risk than rather gain 10lbs and face a very dangerous Michael spinks who was the dominant champion at lightheavy"

Gain 10 lbs??? Seriously? 160 to 175 is 15 pounds.
Spinks the night of his fights could easily hit the ring at 185lbs.
Hagler never gained more than 6 to 8 pounds fight night!
Spinks is one of the best punchers in light heavy history so you think it's a "challenge" to give away close to 20lbs to an ATG 175lb puncher?
Glad your not a manager you'd get fighters in some very bad business situations.

Your welcomed to your opinion of what went on then but I was very active in boxing at that time and probably have a lot more insight on these men then you do, ya think?

Everyone including Hagler knew Leonard put himself on hold and watched Hagler fight on and add years on his body. Power and hands don't leave veterans but your steps get slower and reactions too. Thats how Leonard out scored Hagler and some nice "track techniques" too!
It was a big deal for a welter king to challenge the middle king just as the real Sugar Ray did years before except Leonard waited years before he challenged. Don't give the eye routine because he could have challenged and got the fight with Hagler anytime he wanted.

Leonard learned from his early management that patience is a virtue in boxing. He fought very easy competition early in his career after he fought top notch amateurs for years! He trained at my gym for his 8th or 9th fight at the New Haven Col. when he fought a retired super feather/lightweight who just got his nose fixed 6 months prior to the fight hahaha guess what happened?

Hagler in his prime beats Leonard the same way Duran did! Pressure and a two handed attack. Their size was very even and body strength too a big difference was that Hagler could cut the ring down very well and lateral moves were a big part of Leonard's offense.
it would be close like their bout actually was but Hagler would have the edge that Leonard had as older fighters! That's just my opinion, been on fight cards with both of them a few times. I'm basing my opinion on what I've seen in person with the main edge going to Hagler's pain tolerances and determination.

enough of this it gets old after the 5th post!

nite boys Ray
I was giving an example of going up 10lbs...I know it's 15lbs ..hagler probably couldn't gain 15lb with out affecting him.....leonard moved 13lbs to face hagler so what the difference....147 to 160....yiu just practically said the body strenght would be too much...so that's my point.. A natural weight size makes a big difference....now I don't know who you are as its a forum you could be who you say you and u might just be someone who talks a good game..who knows......now a fighter that's been active and is naturally heavier than a fighter who has not competed for over 3 years will always have the advantage period....how many comebacks have failed Ray ? Almost every one in history ...I don't know what would have happened in 1982 and not do you....Al I saw ws duran take hagler the full 15 after duran had dropped down to an all time low with Jimmy batten and kirland Laing and yet he still pushed hagler all the way...duran said leonard could beat him...so did Marcos Geraldo and hearrns and I would much rather take notice from duran or hearns than a guy who is posting on a forum..respectively...now if leonard was a natural middleweight the same as hagler who would have won in your eyes ? Steve

Scott9945
02-18-2016, 09:20 PM
I await the five ATG that stayed in one divsion

Let me address this first before I get to the rest of your lengthy post.

Carlos Monzon
Benny Leonard
Willie Pep
Lew Ambers
Nino Benvenuti

Leonard did go up in weight, but that was after a seven year retirement. If I could have used just one weight class (and there was no super middleweight division for Marvin to conquer), I could easily get to 20 names.

Steve plunger
02-18-2016, 09:46 PM
Let me address this first before I get to the rest of your lengthy post.

Carlos Monzon
Benny Leonard
Willie Pep
Lew Ambers
Nino Benvenuti

Leonard did go up in weight, but that was after a seven year retirement. If I could have used just one weight class (and there was no super middleweight division for Marvin to conquer), I could easily get to 20 names.
Benny Leonard started his pro career at 129lbs his last pro fight was 151lbs..that's 22lbs
Willie pep started as low as 123lbs and boxed at the top end of 138lbs
Lou ambers boxed at 131lbs but also weighed above the 140lbs on five separate occasions as was as high as 145 that's welterweight
Carlos monzon half his fights there's no weight recorded so we don't know what he weighed at the start of his career but he also boxed above the middlweight limit on 4 occasions
Nino benvenuti won world titles at super welterweight and middlweight so he never stayed in the same division ...
I know I used boxrec because I wanted to check the weights...not one fighter there u mentioned has remained in one weight class like hagler...

I await your response ....Carlos monzon is the nearest to remaining true to one division in your list but he still competed in other divisions

Steve plunger
02-18-2016, 09:54 PM
Let me address this first before I get to the rest of your lengthy post.

Carlos Monzon
Benny Leonard
Willie Pep
Lew Ambers
Nino Benvenuti

Leonard did go up in weight, but that was after a seven year retirement. If I could have used just one weight class (and there was no super middleweight division for Marvin to conquer), I could easily get to 20 names.
As I said before monzon is probably identical to hagler in the fact he pretty much bordered on 160 all his career...up to 162 even....most great fighter have moved up in weight and won titles in different divisions and to me that's much more impressive when you beat a guy who is heavier ...considered almost unbeatable ....and that little tiny guy beats him...that's my opinion and you will never find boxers who are recognised hall of famers who solely stayed in one weight class....you might find 20 random boxers but not legends

Scott9945
02-18-2016, 10:03 PM
Benny Leonard started his pro career at 129lbs his last pro fight was 151lbs..that's 22lbs
Willie pep started as low as 123lbs and boxed at the top end of 138lbs
Lou ambers boxed at 131lbs but also weighed above the 140lbs on five separate occasions as was as high as 145 that's welterweight
Carlos monzon half his fights there's no weight recorded so we don't know what he weighed at the start of his career but he also boxed above the middlweight limit on 4 occasions
Nino benvenuti won world titles at super welterweight and middlweight so he never stayed in the same division ...
I know I used boxrec because I wanted to check the weights...not one fighter there u mentioned has remained in one weight class like hagler...

I await your response ....Carlos monzon is the nearest to remaining true to one division in your list but he still competed in other divisions

You're just manipulating statistics to try and make your point. Leonard was a teenager when he fought at those low weights. Clearly his entire prime was as a lightweight. I already explained that the higher weight fights were after a 7 year layoff. What about that is difficult to understand?

As for Pep, 123 is a featherweight. Those higher weight fights were meaningless non title fights when he was in his 40's. This is called keeping things in context.

So what other divisions did Monzon fight in? Was he a lightheavy when he fought a non title fight at 162? If you can't find the official weights for his fights, you can't just presume he was heavier.

If you're looking for fighters who fought at almost exactly the same weight their entire careers, then you're being unreasonable and I'm done with this.

Steve plunger
02-18-2016, 10:24 PM
You're just manipulating statistics to try and make your point. Leonard was a teenager when he fought at those low weights. Clearly his entire prime was as a lightweight. I already explained that the higher weight fights were after a 7 year layoff. What about that is difficult to understand?

As for Pep, 123 is a featherweight. Those higher weight fights were meaningless non title fights when he was in his 40's. This is called keeping things in context.

So what other divisions did Monzon fight in? Was he a lightheavy when he fought a non title fight at 162? If you can't find the official weights for his fights, you can't just presume he was heavier.

If you're looking for fighters who fought at almost exactly the same weight their entire careers, then you're being unreasonable and I'm done with this.
As I said before monzon was almost exactly the same as hagler in terms of weight....Nino benvenuti was a complete error on your part as he won two titles in 2 weight classes....at the age 18 hagler was 160lber till he was 32 years of age ..
I did say to you fighters that competed in other divisions Scott ...u can't pick and choose because of age and weight because at the end of the day they did compete in higher divisions.
Look I'm not here to have an argument with you I'm saying a fighter that travels up in weight and wins world titles against bigger stronger fighters is a bigger achievement than a guy who fights in his own class and never tests himself....sorry fella but monzon and hagler are the only boxers that I know who started there pro careers at 160 and finished at 160 and that was the discussion......and benny Leonard and willie pep competed in higher divisions and if they had got to a position of a world title and won it...then it's no different.....I've already given you monzon and that's only one true example of what we're discussing .....now let me ask you a question ...do you consider Duran a better p4p fighter than hagler or not and do you rank him higher on the all time list ? I do and I know you do as well...why because he was 130lb fighter who beat champions up to 160lbs that's why and that's always been my argument.... I don't say hagler is not great I just think the likes of Duran,Leonard are greater ....don't get stressed lol

Steve plunger
02-18-2016, 10:38 PM
Let me address this first before I get to the rest of your lengthy post.

Carlos Monzon
Benny Leonard
Willie Pep
Lew Ambers
Nino Benvenuti

Leonard did go up in weight, but that was after a seven year retirement. If I could have used just one weight class (and there was no super middleweight division for Marvin to conquer), I could easily get to 20 names.
Benny Leonard also boxed for the world welterweight title against Jack Britton but lost by DQ and he weighed only 139 and half pound so even he tested himself against a naturally bigger fighter and competed in another division and he was only 26 as well.....the other guy on here tried to pick my comments apart because I forgot Pernell Whitaker won 4 world titles....we all have opinions on what we consider are attributes for ranking fighters p4p in history.....this conversation stops now because we both have our opinions

Scott9945
02-18-2016, 10:42 PM
As I said before monzon was almost exactly the same as hagler in terms of weight....Nino benvenuti was a complete error on your part as he won two titles in 2 weight classes....at the age 18 hagler was 160lber till he was 32 years of age ..
I did say to you fighters that competed in other divisions Scott ...u can't pick and choose because of age and weight because at the end of the day they did compete in higher divisions.
Look I'm not here to have an argument with you I'm saying a fighter that travels up in weight and wins world titles against bigger stronger fighters is a bigger achievement than a guy who fights in his own class and never tests himself....sorry fella but monzon and hagler are the only boxers that I know who started there pro careers at 160 and finished at 160 and that was the discussion......and benny Leonard and willie pep competed in higher divisions and if they had got to a position of a world title and won it...then it's no different.....I've already given you monzon and that's only one true example of what we're discussing .....now let me ask you a question ...do you consider Duran a better p4p fighter than hagler or not and do you rank him higher on the all time list ? I do and I know you do as well...why because he was 130lb fighter who beat champions up to 160lbs that's why and that's always been my argument.... I don't say hagler is not great I just think the likes of Duran,Leonard are greater ....don't get stressed lol


I don't rate fighters P4P because I think it is far too subjective. But if I did I'd probably have Duran higher. It's funny how you nitpick me on petty details, then call Duran a "130lb fighter", which we all know is inaccurate. Yeah poor little Duran, too small for Hagler, yet he ended up beating a much bigger middleweight at an older age. Says something about Hagler's greatness, even though that was a subpar performance for him.

You're more impressed with fighters who move up in weight classes than I am. Lets leave it at that.

Steve plunger
02-18-2016, 10:52 PM
I don't rate fighters P4P because I think it is far too subjective. But if I did I'd probably have Duran higher. It's funny how you nitpick me on petty details, then call Duran a "130lb fighter", which we all know is inaccurate. Yeah poor little Duran, too small for Hagler, yet he ended up beating a much bigger middleweight at an older age. Says something about Hagler's greatness, even though that was a subpar performance for him.

You're more impressed with fighters who move up in weight classes than I am. Lets leave it at that.
Iran Barkley is never a marvin hagler...we both know that.....and I apologise about Duran being 130....we can both agree that Durans optimum weight was probably no more than 147...it's just a testament to Durans skill and durability that he could compete at middleweight......I regard Duran as an incredible fighter...and was it an off night for hagler not sure about that because up until that time hagler had never faced anybody as near to Duran in terms of inside and slipping punches....not many people can dominate Duran inside no matter who they are...hearns did it from range not close in

soul_survivor
02-19-2016, 05:44 AM
There's a lot of reasons, he has a fun style, he was a crazy mf, he fought much bigger guys and at times, when fully switched on, beat them and objectively speaking, he is a top 10 or 20 ATG.

On a personal level, when he quit against Leonard...well that's something that should not be easily overlooked. Plus, he lost to the best fighters of his generation, however, it is also important to note some of his best wins and the fact that he held a portion of the MW crown, and standing at 5'6'', that's some achievement. Today you have bigger welters who don't even wana fight weak title holders at the weight.

WalkerSmithJnr
02-19-2016, 07:43 AM
I'm saying a fighter that travels up in weight and wins world titles against bigger stronger fighters is a bigger achievement than a guy who fights in his own class and never tests himself....
Don't agree with this. With the amount of different weights now and 4 universally recognised governing bodies by putting on ten pounds you can fight for 16 titles.
A fighter who unifies all the titles and cleans out a division and holds the title for a number of years is more note worthy than a fighter who has a big lunch and pinches a belt off a champion who is the weakest title holder at his weight class.
Benny Leonard dominated a very strong division for a number of years
Sugar Ray Leonard for me made his reputation at welterweight against Hearns, Benetiz and Duran. Dazzling the judges in the last 30 seconds of rounds against a faded Hagler or beating Lalonde don't do much for me.

One is for boxing fans one is more for stats fans

Steve plunger
02-19-2016, 07:56 AM
Don't agree with this. With the amount of different weights now and 4 universally recognised governing bodies by putting on ten pounds you can fight for 40 titles.
A fighter who unifies all the titles and cleans out a division and holds the title for a number of years is more note worthy than a fighter who has a big lunch and pinches a belt off a champion who is the weakest title holder at his weight class.
Benny Leonard dominated a very strong division for a number of years
Sugar Ray Leonard for me made his reputation at welterweight against Hearns, Benetiz and Duran. Dazzling the judges in the last 30 seconds of rounds against a faded Hagler or beating Lalonde don't do much for me.

One is for boxing fans one is more for stats fans obviously u misread it or misunderstood the whole debate.....leonard did clean out the welterweights before he went north of the division and even my own views would be that a boxer must control the divsions he is in before proving in higher weight classes ....this also applies to duran who cleaned out his division before he went to the welterweight divison ..if a fighter wants to carry on in a divsion after he has cleaned it out and there are other challenges beyond that weight then the boxer who takes that gamble in my eyes is greater fighter than the boxer who remains in the divsion and defend against mediocre challengers.....duran and leonard would not have the same reputation and status if duran had not beat leonard or leonard beat a kalule or hagler....that's a fact

Steve plunger
02-19-2016, 08:01 AM
Don't agree with this. With the amount of different weights now and 4 universally recognised governing bodies by putting on ten pounds you can fight for 16 titles.
A fighter who unifies all the titles and cleans out a division and holds the title for a number of years is more note worthy than a fighter who has a big lunch and pinches a belt off a champion who is the weakest title holder at his weight class.
Benny Leonard dominated a very strong division for a number of years
Sugar Ray Leonard for me made his reputation at welterweight against Hearns, Benetiz and Duran. Dazzling the judges in the last 30 seconds of rounds against a faded Hagler or beating Lalonde don't do much for me.

One is for boxing fans one is more for stats fans

This also applies more to the fighter from the past eras and I don't consider fighters of today in the same conversation to be honest...this is the history section fella

Anthony342
02-19-2016, 08:14 AM
steveplunger;..... "less risk than rather gain 10lbs and face a very dangerous Michael spinks who was the dominant champion at lightheavy"

Gain 10 lbs??? Seriously? 160 to 175 is 15 pounds.
Spinks the night of his fights could easily hit the ring at 185lbs.
Hagler never gained more than 6 to 8 pounds fight night!
Spinks is one of the best punchers in light heavy history so you think it's a "challenge" to give away close to 20lbs to an ATG 175lb puncher?
Glad your not a manager you'd get fighters in some very bad business situations.

Your welcomed to your opinion of what went on then but I was very active in boxing at that time and probably have a lot more insight on these men then you do, ya think?

Everyone including Hagler knew Leonard put himself on hold and watched Hagler fight on and add years on his body. Power and hands don't leave veterans but your steps get slower and reactions too. Thats how Leonard out scored Hagler and some nice "track techniques" too!
It was a big deal for a welter king to challenge the middle king just as the real Sugar Ray did years before except Leonard waited years before he challenged. Don't give the eye routine because he could have challenged and got the fight with Hagler anytime he wanted.

Leonard learned from his early management that patience is a virtue in boxing. He fought very easy competition early in his career after he fought top notch amateurs for years! He trained at my gym for his 8th or 9th fight at the New Haven Col. when he fought a retired super feather/lightweight who just got his nose fixed 6 months prior to the fight hahaha guess what happened?

Hagler in his prime beats Leonard the same way Duran did! Pressure and a two handed attack. Their size was very even and body strength too a big difference was that Hagler could cut the ring down very well and lateral moves were a big part of Leonard's offense.
it would be close like their bout actually was but Hagler would have the edge that Leonard had as older fighters! That's just my opinion, been on fight cards with both of them a few times. I'm basing my opinion on what I've seen in person with the main edge going to Hagler's pain tolerances and determination.

enough of this it gets old after the 5th post!

nite boys Ray

Exactly. Leonard himself even admits this, so I don't know why people feel the need to argue this point. One only has to watch his Sportscentury biography to find this out. And he did the same earlier against Duran, getting a rematch 5 months after their first fight, knowing about Duran's struggles in between fights to make weight. Not saying Leonard did this his whole career, but at times he did. Like not fighting Duran a third time until 9 years later.

WalkerSmithJnr
02-19-2016, 08:17 AM
.....duran and leonard would not have the same reputation and status if duran had not beat leonard or leonard beat a kalule or hagler....that's a fact
The Leonard win enhanced Duran's reputation and no mas diminished it and pretty much cancelled out Montreal. Duran at lightweight was historic and to many makes him the greatest lightweight in history which is enough to make him an atg.

WalkerSmithJnr
02-19-2016, 08:20 AM
...this is the history section fella
I thought it was the boxingrec compare the stats section :)

billeau2
02-19-2016, 11:25 AM
I would like to dovetail off a statement made from Scott to the effect that when we look at weight classes, whether a fighter decides to stay in a class, or jump, the most important variable is the context of the decision. Also, when one has a lot of junior weight classes, this context often gets jumbled. For example, Bronner jumps around weight classes to try to find low hanging fruit. There is really little to question about the Bronner strategy...Paulie M is not going to knock you out lol. You could also have guys in junior divisions who hang around because there is little competition...which is equally abhorrent. There should be some consideration regarding a guy staying in a pure weight class with more liberal limits...so to speak. But essentially It is all relative, there is no absolute as to whether a fighter is more a mensch if they go up/down in weight, or stay at a weight.... devoid of a context for the decision.

Hagler was not in a junior weight class, he fought tough competition and he cannot be blamed if fighters want to come in and try to take the title....in fact thats what the fight game is supposed to be about, the champ defending the title against those who want to try to take it.

I think some of the arguments advanced here are a mishmash where weight class gets thrown in there with no real understanding of the context...and that is why there is so much disagreement. Duran is not better than Hagler BECAUSE Hagler was a middleweight through and through. There are valid comparisons one can make between these two and none of them have to do with making the weight and/or changing weight classes. Duran could not fight at his prime weight later in his career...Hagler could so if anything its a moot point.

Regarding Sugar Ray its a similar situation. The weight SR fought Hagler at has nothing to do with the way that fight went. It had to do with timing, entropy, and to the different styles brought to bare. Its not unreasonable to think that Hagler would need all his pressure tactics, and perhaps a bit more youth, to work against a fighter as mobile as Leonard and be optimal...Notice i didn't mention Leonard's primary weapons, his counter punching, his speed, which would always present the same dilemna to Hagler...i am specifically addressing the issue of Hagler not having as much mobility as he once had. But this is just a factor and not a reason why this fight was not fair to Hagler.

With Hearns once again, weight class has little to do with how the fight went. It is fair to say Hearn's hand was a factor in this fight.

My point is that none of the comparisons people make about who is better between Hagler, Duran, leonard and Hearns should bring up the supplemental issue of weight class. All these guys fought tough competition...the fights among them were competative, nobody was outclassed, and like all matches there were factors that had implications. Yes Leonard decided to fight a certain way against Duran, yes Hearns broke his hand, yes Marvin was older and on the downslide when fighting Leonard, and yes Duran was smaller than Hagler coming up to meet him, all contributing & intriguing elements in a series of fights that showed these men were in the same class as each other. For example, Nobody thinks Duran was outclassed by Hagler, its usually a matter of how close the fight was on points.

When we talk about Gatti versus Floyd, we don't even think to mention any of the factors that may have affected each man in the fight....why is that? could it be that precisely because these men were in an entirely different class that it did not matter? We mention the particulars precisely because the fab four were so well matched...and the weight class fought in had little to do with it.

Steve plunger
02-19-2016, 01:30 PM
The Leonard win enhanced Duran's reputation and no mas diminished it and pretty much cancelled out Montreal. Duran at lightweight was historic and to many makes him the greatest lightweight in history which is enough to make him an atg.

As I said to you before...Duran won weights at welterweight, jnr middlweight and middleweight and to say he would have the same reputation if he stayed in lightweight is waffle....we're talking about boxers who rose above there best weight and competed in a higher divisiion and was still successful and that is far more greater than a boxer who stayed in the same division fighting the likes of obelmejias, sycpion or caveman Lee ....the part about the history section is winning titles in 1982,83 or 84 is a lot harder than it is wining now the WBO,IBF,WBA,WBC or what ever else is out there ...now if you take away palomino,cuevas,Leonard,Moore,hagler,hearns and Barkley Duran would not be considered in the top 10 p4p champions of all time...don't comete with me on this I will tie you up in knots.....basically haglers legacy is built on boxers who travelled up through weights and fought hagler with a physical disadvantage ..Duran at 18 was 128lb and hagler at 18 was 160lb that's a natural weight advantage of 32lb and u consider duran a bietter fighter..and you are an idiot if you don't think Duran travelling up all them weights and still managing push marvin hagler all the way to a close decision is less impressive than a fighter who stays in his own weight who can match the fighters in his weight class.....why do you think the likes of Harry greb or Henry Armstrong are so highly ranked in the ATG list......again another poster who don't understand the complexity of moving up out your natural weight zone and still being at the top.....hagler is not on Robinson's,Leonard,Duran,Armstrong,walkers or arguello's level and there's a reason for that

Steve plunger
02-19-2016, 01:55 PM
I would like to dovetail off a statement made from Scott to the effect that when we look at weight classes, whether a fighter decides to stay in a class, or jump, the most important variable is the context of the decision. Also, when one has a lot of junior weight classes, this context often gets jumbled. For example, Bronner jumps around weight classes to try to find low hanging fruit. There is really little to question about the Bronner strategy...Paulie M is not going to knock you out lol. You could also have guys in junior divisions who hang around because there is little competition...which is equally abhorrent. There should be some consideration regarding a guy staying in a pure weight class with more liberal limits...so to speak. But essentially It is all relative, there is no absolute as to whether a fighter is more a mensch if they go up/down in weight, or stay at a weight.... devoid of a context for the decision.

Hagler was not in a junior weight class, he fought tough competition and he cannot be blamed if fighters want to come in and try to take the title....in fact thats what the fight game is supposed to be about, the champ defending the title against those who want to try to take it.

I think some of the arguments advanced here are a mishmash where weight class gets thrown in there with no real understanding of the context...and that is why there is so much disagreement. Duran is not better than Hagler BECAUSE Hagler was a middleweight through and through. There are valid comparisons one can make between these two and none of them have to do with making the weight and/or changing weight classes. Duran could not fight at his prime weight later in his career...Hagler could so if anything its a moot point.

Regarding Sugar Ray its a similar situation. The weight SR fought Hagler at has nothing to do with the way that fight went. It had to do with timing, entropy, and to the different styles brought to bare. Its not unreasonable to think that Hagler would need all his pressure tactics, and perhaps a bit more youth, to work against a fighter as mobile as Leonard and be optimal...Notice i didn't mention Leonard's primary weapons, his counter punching, his speed, which would always present the same dilemna to Hagler...i am specifically addressing the issue of Hagler not having as much mobility as he once had. But this is just a factor and not a reason why this fight was not fair to Hagler.

With Hearns once again, weight class has little to do with how the fight went. It is fair to say Hearn's hand was a factor in this fight.

My point is that none of the comparisons people make about who is better between Hagler, Duran, leonard and Hearns should bring up the supplemental issue of weight class. All these guys fought tough competition...the fights among them were competative, nobody was outclassed, and like all matches there were factors that had implications. Yes Leonard decided to fight a certain way against Duran, yes Hearns broke his hand, yes Marvin was older and on the downslide when fighting Leonard, and yes Duran was smaller than Hagler coming up to meet him, all contributing & intriguing elements in a series of fights that showed these men were in the same class as each other. For example, Nobody thinks Duran was outclassed by Hagler, its usually a matter of how close the fight was on points.

When we talk about Gatti versus Floyd, we don't even think to mention any of the factors that may have affected each man in the fight....why is that? could it be that precisely because these men were in an entirely different class that it did not matter? We mention the particulars precisely because the fab four were so well matched...and the weight class fought in had little to do with it.
Again billieau I would have no issue in somebody expressing there opinion on hagler beating Leonard or vice versa ....it the ohh I think hagler would have walked threw Leonard if hagler was in his prime.....well when he boxed Duran he didn't ....it was a close fight and Duran for most parts of the 15 round fight they competed on even terms...then they say hagler took it easy on him....then I would say hagler was a trained proffessinal boxer who if was given the opportunity would finish you and leave you beaten on the floor....For me its down to the fact that Duran was very crafty and a brilliant inside fighter and hagler was wary to commit himself because Duran was nailing him......with weight ..When they were both 18 Duran was 128lb and hagler was 160lb ...that's a massive amount of natural strength advantage and I will always consider it a more amazing achievement for a boxer to go all them weights and still manage to be on top....it cant be denied in my eyes.....it's like Harry greb going up all the way to face gene Tunney and still beating him....it's amazing in my eyes.....I boxed and I know what it's like to go up 5 kilos to face other fighters it's harder and some went up 12 kilos...your right when you say about hagler and Leonard's speed, counter punching and movement would be another factor if they had boxed in the early 80's and your also right that the fight would always be close and competitive because there both great fighters...I am a purist and always thought Leonard had to much speed and movement for him but I wouldn't put my house in it......it's my personal opinion that a fighter who moves up in weight and can still be the best should rank higher than fighter who don't

joseph5620
02-19-2016, 02:33 PM
obviously u misread it or misunderstood the whole debate.....leonard did clean out the welterweights before he went north of the division and even my own views would be that a boxer must control the divsions he is in before proving in higher weight classes ....this also applies to duran who cleaned out his division before he went to the welterweight divison ..if a fighter wants to carry on in a divsion after he has cleaned it out and there are other challenges beyond that weight then the boxer who takes that gamble in my eyes is greater fighter than the boxer who remains in the divsion and defend against mediocre challengers.....duran and leonard would not have the same reputation and status if duran had not beat leonard or leonard beat a kalule or hagler....that's a fact


Duran and Leonard's career and status goes far beyond Kalule and Hagler. Duran established his reputation long before the Leonard fights. That's just stupid.

WalkerSmithJnr
02-19-2016, 03:15 PM
As I said to you before...Duran won weights at welterweight, jnr middlweight and middleweight and to say he would have the same reputation if he stayed in lightweight is waffle....we're talking about boxers who rose above there best weight and competed in a higher divisiion and was still successful and that is far more greater than a boxer who stayed in the same division fighting the likes of obelmejias, sycpion or caveman Lee ....the part about the history section is winning titles in 1982,83 or 84 is a lot harder than it is wining now the WBO,IBF,WBA,WBC or what ever else is out there ...now if you take away palomino,cuevas,Leonard,Moore,hagler,hearns and Barkley Duran would not be considered in the top 10 p4p champions of all time...don't comete with me on this I will tie you up in knots.....basically haglers legacy is built on boxers who travelled up through weights and fought hagler with a physical disadvantage ..Duran at 18 was 128lb and hagler at 18 was 160lb that's a natural weight advantage of 32lb and u consider duran a bietter fighter..and you are an idiot if you don't think Duran travelling up all them weights and still managing push marvin hagler all the way to a close decision is less impressive than a fighter who stays in his own weight who can match the fighters in his weight class.....why do you think the likes of Harry greb or Henry Armstrong are so highly ranked in the ATG list......again another poster who don't understand the complexity of moving up out your natural weight zone and still being at the top.....hagler is not on Robinson's,Leonard,Duran,Armstrong,walkers or arguello's level and there's a reason for that
Some like to watch boxing some like to read boxing rec and file away stats.
I don't think you understand the whole p4p concept pal.
Personally I like you rate Duran far more highly than Hagler but not because he eat his way out of his natural division. Btw the Duran Hagler fight wasn't close, but you won't pick up on that unless you watch it rather than read boxingrec.

Ray Corso
02-19-2016, 03:29 PM
".......leonard moved 13lbs to face hagler so what the difference....(Hagler moving to lightheavy)



The difference is Leonard cwas 5'10" taller than the 5'9" Hagler. Spinks was 6'2 1/2" at lightheavy thats the difference!


Let me cut to the chase here because this thread should have been "cooked off" pages ago!

Is Hagler an ATG Middleweight Champ? Yes or No?
Is Duran an ATG lightweight Champ Yes or No?

Why does Hagler need to fight in different weight classes?
Because the midget welters today do it?

Ray

billeau2
02-19-2016, 04:10 PM
Again billieau I would have no issue in somebody expressing there opinion on hagler beating Leonard or vice versa ....it the ohh I think hagler would have walked threw Leonard if hagler was in his prime.....well when he boxed Duran he didn't ....it was a close fight and Duran for most parts of the 15 round fight they competed on even terms...then they say hagler took it easy on him....then I would say hagler was a trained proffessinal boxer who if was given the opportunity would finish you and leave you beaten on the floor....For me its down to the fact that Duran was very crafty and a brilliant inside fighter and hagler was wary to commit himself because Duran was nailing him......with weight ..When they were both 18 Duran was 128lb and hagler was 160lb ...that's a massive amount of natural strength advantage and I will always consider it a more amazing achievement for a boxer to go all them weights and still manage to be on top....it cant be denied in my eyes.....it's like Harry greb going up all the way to face gene Tunney and still beating him....it's amazing in my eyes.....I boxed and I know what it's like to go up 5 kilos to face other fighters it's harder and some went up 12 kilos...your right when you say about hagler and Leonard's speed, counter punching and movement would be another factor if they had boxed in the early 80's and your also right that the fight would always be close and competitive because there both great fighters...I am a purist and always thought Leonard had to much speed and movement for him but I wouldn't put my house in it......it's my personal opinion that a fighter who moves up in weight and can still be the best should rank higher than fighter who don't

If a fighter moves up in weight all other factors being equal of course that is an accomplishment that should be noted. My point is that none of these discussions are related to Hagler staying at middle weight per se, they are rather points to be debated on their own merits. It just muddies the water to confuse the issue and its nobody in particular doing it.

Regarding the comparison to Greb and Tunney, I would have to look at that carefully...my understanding is that the difference in weight and the weight class being higher, where diffences are more pronounced, would make the Greb Tunney fight more of a substantial issue with respect to moving up a class...but this is an opinion, some may think a flyweight moving up to lightweight is the same as a jump from middle to light heavy, I don't think so.

Steve plunger
02-19-2016, 04:53 PM
Some like to watch boxing some like to read boxing rec and file away stats.
I don't think you understand the whole p4p concept pal.
Personally I like you rate Duran far more highly than Hagler but not because he eat his way out of his natural division. Btw the Duran Hagler fight wasn't close, but you won't pick up on that unless you watch it rather than read boxingrec.
Well it wasn't a landslide and certainly don't need to boxrec to confirm it was probably a 9-6 decision in favour of hagler....you have no concept of what p4p means my son...it's testing your self against the best opposition ...hagler spent his entire career calling up naturally smaller fighters and without them fighters that moved up haglers would of been against the likes of sycpion and obelmejias....I will gladly challenge you to any boxing quiz you want in regards to the eras from 1970 to 2000... Let see who needs boxrecs the most....I only do boxrec as a reference to weights nothing else...see if you can back it up son

Steve plunger
02-19-2016, 04:57 PM
".......leonard moved 13lbs to face hagler so what the difference....(Hagler moving to lightheavy)



The difference is Leonard cwas 5'10" taller than the 5'9" Hagler. Spinks was 6'2 1/2" at lightheavy thats the difference!


Let me cut to the chase here because this thread should have been "cooked off" pages ago!

Is Hagler an ATG Middleweight Champ? Yes or No?
Is Duran an ATG lightweight Champ Yes or No?

Why does Hagler need to fight in different weight classes?
Because the midget welters today do it?

Ray
Dwight braxton was 5ft'7 and he was a lightheavyweight so he was smaller than hagler so what's that got to do with it...Thomas hearns was 6ft 1 .... Now do you rate Ray Robiinson as higher on the p4p list than hagler ? If so why ?

Steve plunger
02-19-2016, 05:07 PM
Duran and Leonard's career and status goes far beyond Kalule and Hagler. Duran established his reputation long before the Leonard fights. That's just stupid.
Why is Duran rated higher ton the ATG list on every top boxing pulication then....they both cleaned out there division ..and dominated for a number of years......in fact hagler beat hearns but hearns knocked out Duran...so how is that possible ?

Steve plunger
02-19-2016, 05:26 PM
Exactly. Leonard himself even admits this, so I don't know why people feel the need to argue this point. One only has to watch his Sportscentury biography to find this out. And he did the same earlier against Duran, getting a rematch 5 months after their first fight, knowing about Duran's struggles in between fights to make weight. Not saying Leonard did this his whole career, but at times he did. Like not fighting Duran a third time until 9 years later.
Leonard got a career ending injury in 1982 and that's the only reason why that fight never took place say in 1983....and you really think a boxer who Had 1 fight in 5 years was the same Leonard who beat Hearns or Duran ....a boxer who had never boxed above 153lb with a repaired retina after being an ex cocaine and alcohol addict..u was probably won of thos hagler fans that said Leonard had no chance and hagler would steamroll straight through him....Leonard had no business being in that ring with hagler with the amount of inactivity but he came back made hagler look clumsy and one dimensional....marvin hagler was beaten by willie Monroe and drew with sugar ray seals..so be damn sure Leonard could have beat him..the only doubt would have been the size difference because they were 2 weight classes apart.....he was even losing the fight against juan roldan before a thumb caught him in his eye...which was intentional as well....at his prime in 1983 he was taken 15 rounds by Roberto Duran ....who was way past his best...hagler was not on Leonard's level and it was proven

Anthony342
02-19-2016, 06:45 PM
Dwight braxton was 5ft'7 and he was a lightheavyweight so he was smaller than hagler so what's that got to do with it...Thomas hearns was 6ft 1 .... Now do you rate Ray Robiinson as higher on the p4p list than hagler ? If so why ?

Because he was quicker, more skilled and has a better resume. I go more just by who someone beats and at what point in both their and their opponent's career they beat them and how long they're champion, but also moving up in weight is a hell of an achievement. I personally consider it even better if that boxer becomes lineal or Ring champion in several weight classes, possibly even undisputed, like Pacquiao, Mayweather or Leonard, but still rate someone highly if they stay in one weight class and dominate as well.

WalkerSmithJnr
02-19-2016, 06:55 PM
Well it wasn't a landslide and certainly don't need to boxrec to confirm it was probably a 9-6 decision in favour of hagler....you have no concept of what p4p means my son...it's testing your self against the best opposition ...hagler spent his entire career calling up naturally smaller fighters and without them fighters that moved up haglers would of been against the likes of sycpion and obelmejias....I will gladly challenge you to any boxing quiz you want in regards to the eras from 1970 to 2000... Let see who needs boxrecs the most....I only do boxrec as a reference to weights nothing else...see if you can back it up son
Duran won 3 rounds it was competitive but at no point in that fight did Hagler look like losing.
The obsession you have with weights etc means that boxing means something quite different to you than me. Bet you love baseball don't you?
As for a quiz how's that going to work? I'm sure you'll beat me on the weight differential between Hearns and Leonard in their 1st fight to their 2nd fight

Anthony342
02-19-2016, 06:56 PM
Leonard got a career ending injury in 1982 and that's the only reason why that fight never took place say in 1983....and you really think a boxer who Had 1 fight in 5 years was the same Leonard who beat Hearns or Duran ....a boxer who had never boxed above 153lb with a repaired retina after being an ex cocaine and alcohol addict..u was probably won of thos hagler fans that said Leonard had no chance and hagler would steamroll straight through him....Leonard had no business being in that ring with hagler with the amount of inactivity but he came back made hagler look clumsy and one dimensional....marvin hagler was beaten by willie Monroe and drew with sugar ray seals..so be damn sure Leonard could have beat him..the only doubt would have been the size difference because they were 2 weight classes apart.....he was even losing the fight against juan roldan before a thumb caught him in his eye...which was intentional as well....at his prime in 1983 he was taken 15 rounds by Roberto Duran ....who was way past his best...hagler was not on Leonard's level and it was proven

Yes, but Leonard did come back in 1984, so he still could have fought Hagler then but his pride wouldn't allow it, as he felt embarrassed after being knocked down by Kevin Howard. I don't see why, since he recovered well, it was his first fight back and he ended up winning by TKO. Fight still could have happened sooner. And maybe Leonard still wins, but either way, it would still be pretty close and more respected. Leonard has been quoted as saying Hagler ate at his restaurant and told Leonard he was considering retirement and said that and how Hagler looked in the Mugabi fight was what convinced him to finally fight Hagler. He pulled the same thing twice with Duran, in their second and third fights. Duran later even asked Leonard why he waited 9 years to give him a rematch and he said "because I could", even though Duran gave him one only 5 months after their first fight and Leonard said he wanted a quick rematch with Duran for the second fight, not only to avenge the defeat, but because he knew Duran would struggle to make the weight. Nobody is denying that Leonard was a great fighter, but in the same respect, nobody should also deny the crap he pulled with potential opponents sometimes too. Plus, inviting Hagler to an event only to ultimately say he was retiring rather than fighting Hagler was kind of a dick move too. People rank fighters like Duran and Leonard higher than Hagler because they have better names on their resume and are more skilled, not because they won titles in multiple weight classes compared to Hagler only winning in one division.

Steve plunger
02-19-2016, 07:42 PM
Because he was quicker, more skilled and has a better resume. I go more just by who someone beats and at what point in both their and their opponent's career they beat them and how long they're champion, but also moving up in weight is a hell of an achievement. I personally consider it even better if that boxer becomes lineal or Ring champion in several weight classes, possibly even undisputed, like Pacquiao, Mayweather or Leonard, but still rate someone highly if they stay in one weight class and dominate as well.
Look Anthony I never one time said it's a bad achievement remaining at one weight class...what I said was going up win weight and beating naturally bigger opponents is a step up from that...that's my view...I never one time said hagler was not dominant at his weight....he was a monster and people get this impression that hagler was a come forward fighter who destroyed you....really he was a precision counterpuncher and was at his best when a tony Sibson or juan roldan was charging him....that's my criteria why Leonard and hagler would always have been a close fight because hagler would have to be in the front foot and he wasn't at his best like that....hearns was reckless and he was a warrior and really he met hagler head on and tried to knock him out...forget it marvin was tough as nails and he ate it up like paceman ....styles make fights ...I'm not gonna question that you don't know boxing because I know you do..if stats mattered for me I would rate calzaghe higher tha hagler because he never got beat but I know hagler was on a completely different level to him in terms of competition and all round ability...so no it's not about stats for me...it's just I look at fighter and if he has dominated not just his weight class but even higher then that's an extra mark for me for a fighter....boxing is the only sport I love ...it's in my blood and I boxed for a number of years and could have turned professional ....I was brought up in the early 80's as a young 11 year old....saw Leonard beat hearns in 1981 when I was a young boy...he was the reason why I boxed.....I was gutted when Leonard retired after the Howard fight as it was gonna finally happen the two best fighters finally meeting and I ****in cried when he quit because he got dropped...Worcester Massachusetts I will never forget it.....

Steve plunger
02-19-2016, 08:08 PM
Yes, but Leonard did come back in 1984, so he still could have fought Hagler then but his pride wouldn't allow it, as he felt embarrassed after being knocked down by Kevin Howard. I don't see why, since he recovered well, it was his first fight back and he ended up winning by TKO. Fight still could have happened sooner. And maybe Leonard still wins, but either way, it would still be pretty close and more respected. Leonard has been quoted as saying Hagler ate at his restaurant and told Leonard he was considering retirement and said that and how Hagler looked in the Mugabi fight was what convinced him to finally fight Hagler. He pulled the same thing twice with Duran, in their second and third fights. Duran later even asked Leonard why he waited 9 years to give him a rematch and he said "because I could", even though Duran gave him one only 5 months after their first fight and Leonard said he wanted a quick rematch with Duran for the second fight, not only to avenge the defeat, but because he knew Duran would struggle to make the weight. Nobody is denying that Leonard was a great fighter, but in the same respect, nobody should also deny the crap he pulled with potential opponents sometimes too. Plus, inviting Hagler to an event only to ultimately say he was retiring rather than fighting Hagler was kind of a dick move too. People rank fighters like Duran and Leonard higher than Hagler because they have better names on their resume and are more skilled, not because they won titles in multiple weight classes compared to Hagler only winning in one division.
you cannot blame Leonard for making Duran gorge himself and become overweight.....no one but Durans management are to blame if they rushed Duran into the quick rematch....there was a rematch clause and Leonard exorcised it...durans management sold Duran short because he reciieved his biggest ever purse of 8 million for the rematch...the first fight was June the 20th ...the rematch was signed first week of September ..they never boxed till 25th of November ..that's over 10 weeks to get ready...no one made Duran accept that date....Durans team took it...and if Duran is champion he has to act with dicpline and behave as a champion and blowing up to 190lbs is Durans fault not Leonard's ....there's an interview in the studio on YouTube of Duran and Leonard with Howard cosell and you judge and see if Duran was out of shape...even Ray arcel said Duran was in shape...check it....that's one of the things that lets Duran down as an ATG ....was his attitude and desire to train and you can't blame Leonard for that...he just used his brain and used it to his advantage...boxing is also psychology ...Ali used that...benny Leonard used it....how old are you Anthony just curious ? ..my view is Duran used the same tactics calling Leonard's wife a puta....being disrespectful and abusive behaviour when at the time things like that were always cordial.. so Duran made Leonard react and go toe2toe and got in his head and Leonard did the same....you can't blame Leonard for making Duran gorge on food and it was Duran who signed for the November fight.....I can dig it out and show it was Durans team that took the bigger payday for the sake of a quicker rematch

Ray Corso
02-19-2016, 10:42 PM
I'm not going any further with this BS...if you can't see the difference in body type between Qawi and Hagler there's no reason to talk with you.

Sugar Ray is the greatest ever because he is the most complete fighter, the best balanced as to skills, experience, power and speed. He had all the intangibles too.

Hagler is a top ten middleweight who could fight in any era.
Yoiu make comments about Monroe and Seales and all the middleweights from that era who were all very good fighters. These guys were main event guys who were top fifteen in the division. And top fifteen was the common number used for contenders. 4 through 8 and 9 through 15 were commonly matched.

Hagler's record is a strong one with good competition from the start to the end.

I was the Region 1 (New England) team coach for many years and knew Hagler just before turning pro. Fought many times against the Petronelli's bros gym. Hagler was a very complete fighter with solid skills and a huge heart. He didn't bring big power but he did work in combination and fought hard to wear his opponents down.

There's no reason to diminish a great fighter like Hagler, we just got rid of a few kids who degraded past greats every day here so I have no interest in contributing to another member who prefers negative posts over the positive.

Ray

joseph5620
02-20-2016, 12:03 PM
Why is Duran rated higher ton the ATG list on every top boxing pulication then....they both cleaned out there division ..and dominated for a number of years......in fact hagler beat hearns but hearns knocked out Duran...so how is that possible ?

Take away Duran's resume prior to moving up to the higher weight classes and he wouldn't be rated higher on anybody's list.

Leonard beat Duran, Hearns and Benitez at 147. Claiming he needed Kalule for his status and reputation today is beyond stupid.

Steve plunger
02-20-2016, 04:34 PM
Take away Duran's resume prior to moving up to the higher weight classes and he wouldn't be rated higher on anybody's list.

Leonard beat Duran, Hearns and Benitez at 147. Claiming he needed Kalule for his status and reputation today is beyond stupid. leonards legacy is built on beating fighters when the odds were against him...his legacy was further enhanced when he came back after 5 years and beat a naturally bigger more active opponent....same as duran....if there was no palomino,cuevas,leonard,Moore,barley and even hagler then duran legacy would not be so great......it was because he came back redeemed himself and he also did that against fighters who were physically bigger.....if duran had not come back after leonard no mas ...his legacy would have been seriously damaged.....who the stupid one
Greb,walker,Armstrong,robinson,arguello,leonard,du ran,benitez,hearns,chavez,de la hoya,pacquaio,mayweather,Camacho ,Whittaker,Gomez,toney,hopkins,Jones,holyfield and so many more went up in weight and dominated and won in higher divsions...what his Henry Armstrong known for ? First man to win titles 3 world titles at different weights....if he stayed at feather do you think he would be so well known...GTFOH dummy

Steve plunger
02-20-2016, 04:53 PM
I'm not going any further with this BS...if you can't see the difference in body type between Qawi and Hagler there's no reason to talk with you.

Sugar Ray is the greatest ever because he is the most complete fighter, the best balanced as to skills, experience, power and speed. He had all the intangibles too.

Hagler is a top ten middleweight who could fight in any era.
Yoiu make comments about Monroe and Seales and all the middleweights from that era who were all very good fighters. These guys were main event guys who were top fifteen in the division. And top fifteen was the common number used for contenders. 4 through 8 and 9 through 15 were commonly matched.

Hagler's record is a strong one with good competition from the start to the end.

I was the Region 1 (New England) team coach for many years and knew Hagler just before turning pro. Fought many times against the Petronelli's bros gym. Hagler was a very complete fighter with solid skills and a huge heart. He didn't bring big power but he did work in combination and fought hard to wear his opponents down.

There's no reason to diminish a great fighter like Hagler, we just got rid of a few kids who degraded past greats every day here so I have no interest in contributing to another member who prefers negative posts over the positive.

Ray
U don't have to you wasn't asked into this debate.....secondly you think robinson is the greatest of all time....well I don't agree....different eras cannot be compared....your of the same vein as Bert Randolph sugar who considered the old guard better than the new guard..you talk about balance with robinson..on the same evidence what you have Seen which is video...I say his balance was not superhuman, I'm not gonna get into a debate about Ray robsinosn ...he was amazing for his era but I don't consider him the best ever ..period...there's enough fights out there for a person to judge him and it's personal opinion...secondly you state you was a trainer and yet a fighter when he is naturally stronger nine times out of ten the bigger man beats the little man....and yet you don't consider a guy that is smaller beating a naturally bigger champion even though every thing is against him....u ain't a trainer that's for sure or you wasn't very good..I'm not a boy who has just got into boxing...I grew up in the early 80's watching every fight you can imagine....I can comment on what I consider are the criteria for judging fighters and one is fighting outside there comfort zone or division..hagler never done that once...he was always considered the favourite in his bouts....i never said hagler was not a great champion and he was a power house at the middleweights ...but leonard and duran rate higher because they took challenges they was suppose to lose...leonard with hagler, duran with Moore and Barkley...no one expected leonard to beat hagler and almost every publication and magazine picked hagler....to strong to powerful and naturally to big...and what happened he outboxed him after having one fight in 5 years....Ray if you was coach...you was a bad one lol.....I was not downgrading hagler at all....leonard and duran are better p4p fighters than hagler because they proved over a number of divisions...that's my opinion and don't comment no more on it

Anthony342
02-20-2016, 05:51 PM
you cannot blame Leonard for making Duran gorge himself and become overweight.....no one but Durans management are to blame if they rushed Duran into the quick rematch....there was a rematch clause and Leonard exorcised it...durans management sold Duran short because he reciieved his biggest ever purse of 8 million for the rematch...the first fight was June the 20th ...the rematch was signed first week of September ..they never boxed till 25th of November ..that's over 10 weeks to get ready...no one made Duran accept that date....Durans team took it...and if Duran is champion he has to act with dicpline and behave as a champion and blowing up to 190lbs is Durans fault not Leonard's ....there's an interview in the studio on YouTube of Duran and Leonard with Howard cosell and you judge and see if Duran was out of shape...even Ray arcel said Duran was in shape...check it....that's one of the things that lets Duran down as an ATG ....was his attitude and desire to train and you can't blame Leonard for that...he just used his brain and used it to his advantage...boxing is also psychology ...Ali used that...benny Leonard used it....how old are you Anthony just curious ? ..my view is Duran used the same tactics calling Leonard's wife a puta....being disrespectful and abusive behaviour when at the time things like that were always cordial.. so Duran made Leonard react and go toe2toe and got in his head and Leonard did the same....you can't blame Leonard for making Duran gorge on food and it was Duran who signed for the November fight.....I can dig it out and show it was Durans team that took the bigger payday for the sake of a quicker rematch

Okay, then Duran's team should've known better and made sure he was prepared. You said he used it to his advantage. That's my point. I have more respect for fighters that don't use things to their advantage and face their opponents at their best. Leonard's still great, very skilled and one of my favorites, I just like guys like Hagler more and similar guys with a true fighter's mentality. I agree with your rankings of the Fab 4 though. I also didn't like Duran saying what he did. And I'm a few weeks shy of 40.

Steve plunger
02-20-2016, 06:19 PM
Okay, then Duran's team should've known better and made sure he was prepared. You said he used it to his advantage. That's my point. I have more respect for fighters that don't use things to their advantage and face their opponents at their best. Leonard's still great, very skilled and one of my favorites, I just like guys like Hagler more and similar guys with a true fighter's mentality. I agree with your rankings of the Fab 4 though. I also didn't like Duran saying what he did. And I'm a few weeks shy of 40.
The thing is I grew up all through that era...no era for me comes close to it....styles will always make fights.....if Leonard boxed Duran he would win no matter what the circumstances were...weight or no weight....if Leonard stood toe2toe with Duran...then Duran would win ...so my point each fighter on any given day if they faced each other the end game could be different.....depending on there mindset...and boxing really is a big part mentally...hagler was bread and butter and a fighters fighter....Leonard for all purposes is one of the most skilled fighters to ever step in the ring but at his weight he was also a killer and had a will to win......hagler,Leonard,Duran and hearns were all different characters and each complimented each other ....I'm 44 btw lol

Ray Corso
02-20-2016, 07:09 PM
...44 going on 12?................another know it all whose never been in a gym let alone boxed. Good luck with this one, someone try to find the "goober magnet" so they can't be attracted to the place anymore.........:tragedy:


...."different eras cannot be compared". sorry but your wrong!
If you know what your watching you can evaluate skills and compare talent.
If you don't know techniques you can't judge skill levels.
If you've never been taught correctly I don't expect anyone to know how to
evaluate.

Good luck on the forum, you'll need it! ........:popcorn:

Ray

Mr.DagoWop
02-20-2016, 09:26 PM
U don't have to you wasn't asked into this debate.....secondly you think robinson is the greatest of all time....well I don't agree....different eras cannot be compared....your of the same vein as Bert Randolph sugar who considered the old guard better than the new guard..you talk about balance with robinson..on the same evidence what you have Seen which is video...I say his balance was not superhuman, I'm not gonna get into a debate about Ray robsinosn ...he was amazing for his era but I don't consider him the best ever ..period...there's enough fights out there for a person to judge him and it's personal opinion...secondly you state you was a trainer and yet a fighter when he is naturally stronger nine times out of ten the bigger man beats the little man....and yet you don't consider a guy that is smaller beating a naturally bigger champion even though every thing is against him....u ain't a trainer that's for sure or you wasn't very good..I'm not a boy who has just got into boxing...I grew up in the early 80's watching every fight you can imagine....I can comment on what I consider are the criteria for judging fighters and one is fighting outside there comfort zone or division..hagler never done that once...he was always considered the favourite in his bouts....i never said hagler was not a great champion and he was a power house at the middleweights ...but leonard and duran rate higher because they took challenges they was suppose to lose...leonard with hagler, duran with Moore and Barkley...no one expected leonard to beat hagler and almost every publication and magazine picked hagler....to strong to powerful and naturally to big...and what happened he outboxed him after having one fight in 5 years....Ray if you was coach...you was a bad one lol.....I was not downgrading hagler at all....leonard and duran are better p4p fighters than hagler because they proved over a number of divisions...that's my opinion and don't comment no more on it

I'm going to stop you there. Ray has proven that who he is without a doubt. Don't come on here trying to call him out saying he is a fraud. It has been done before. It doesn't end well. Show Ray the respect he has earned in this game or go back to the Non-Stop Boxing section.

Steve plunger
02-20-2016, 09:56 PM
I'm going to stop you there. Ray has proven that who he is without a doubt. Don't come on here trying to call him out saying he is a fraud. It has been done before. It doesn't end well. Show Ray the respect he has earned in this game or go back to the Non-Stop Boxing section.
Slow the [email protected] down ....because I don't consider Ray Ray Robinson the greatest of all time...that's not showing him respect....I said he was amazing for his era and that's as far as it go's ....I never saw him in the flesh and I only saw old films of him and because I believe evolution in athletes I'm wrong for not giving ray Robinson his greatest ever tag....this is where we stop talking because because obviously you can't other people's opinions....now I'm gonna say one thing to you...if you don't like my opinions on who I consider great then don't comment simple.....I never said Ray Robinson was not great I just I don't put him head and shoulders above every fighter who has ever lived...Enough of the bullsh1t don't respond to me anymore

Steve plunger
02-20-2016, 10:55 PM
...44 going on 12?................another know it all whose never been in a gym let alone boxed. Good luck with this one, someone try to find the "goober magnet" so they can't be attracted to the place anymore.........:tragedy:


...."different eras cannot be compared". sorry but your wrong!
If you know what your watching you can evaluate skills and compare talent.
If you don't know techniques you can't judge skill levels.
If you've never been taught correctly I don't expect anyone to know how to
evaluate.

Good luck on the forum, you'll need it! ........:popcorn:

Ray
Obviously you have a short memory Ray because about 3 or 4 months ago I discussed with you about my career and how long I boxed for.....and what I did...but I don't need clearance from you ....and we had a good discussion about sugar ray Robinson and our views on discussing about how we view....I gave him props but I also said I've seen enough of him to make my own judgement.......it's old ground and you think your way and I'll look at what I see and read and make my own judgements.....yes it's a history but I didn't realise you have to part of the yes crowd to post on here.....the greatest boxer of his era no doubt.....the same reason why Ali was in his era and Louis in his and Duran in his his...that's as far as it go's for me...but stick to your views and crack on but don't try and force your opinions on to others who don't agree with you....it's a forum Where you debate not some communist vote where you have to be unison .....next thing your be saying is Jesse Owens was quicker than usain bolt....good day

Mr.DagoWop
02-21-2016, 09:09 AM
Slow the [email protected] down ....because I don't consider Ray Ray Robinson the greatest of all time...that's not showing him respect....I said he was amazing for his era and that's as far as it go's ....I never saw him in the flesh and I only saw old films of him and because I believe evolution in athletes I'm wrong for not giving ray Robinson his greatest ever tag....this is where we stop talking because because obviously you can't other people's opinions....now I'm gonna say one thing to you...if you don't like my opinions on who I consider great then don't comment simple.....I never said Ray Robinson was not great I just I don't put him head and shoulders above every fighter who has ever lived...Enough of the bullsh1t don't respond to me anymore

I was talking about showing Ray Corso respect

Steve plunger
02-21-2016, 10:43 AM
I was talking about showing Ray Corso respect
I do show respect to people but I won't be talked down to like I'm some under age teenager who should sit in the corner and say nothing.....I'm not a kid mate and respect other people's opinions and as long as I get the same respect in return...calling me kiddo and I how I have not been in a gym is not respectful especially if a conversation had taken place a few months back.....the conversation was condescending to me as well but in future I'll let things roll....I will give a short opinion on why I don't agree but that's as far as it will go with certian posters...

Mr.DagoWop
02-21-2016, 11:35 AM
I do show respect to people but I won't be talked down to like I'm some under age teenager who should sit in the corner and say nothing.....I'm not a kid mate and respect other people's opinions and as long as I get the same respect in return...calling me kiddo and I how I have not been in a gym is not respectful especially if a conversation had taken place a few months back.....the conversation was condescending to me as well but in future I'll let things roll....I will give a short opinion on why I don't agree but that's as far as it will go with certian posters...

You were insulting his credibility saying he was a **** trainer and all that. I'm not saying don't argue for your opinion because that is the entire point of this section. I'm saying don't call him out on being a bad coach because he obviously was a good one. Other than that do whatever the fvck you want.

Steve plunger
02-21-2016, 12:17 PM
You were insulting his credibility saying he was a **** trainer and all that. I'm not saying don't argue for your opinion because that is the entire point of this section. I'm saying don't call him out on being a bad coach because he obviously was a good one. Other than that do whatever the fvck you want. as I said before this conversations finished

Panamaniac
02-24-2016, 02:43 PM
I'm not going to repeat all the other reasons already mentioned on this thread. Suffice it to say that people like Duran because he was a "crowd-pleaser." He climbed into the ring to fight, he brought the fight to his opponents. Despite his predatory aggressiveness, he was gifted with subtle, but effective defensive skills.

Anthony342
02-24-2016, 03:43 PM
Yep. that right there. And because he was a great fighter, one of the best ever at lightweight, who also did well when he moved up in weight.

billeau2
02-24-2016, 08:34 PM
Duran had "presence." I once asked Joe who the scarest fighter he ever met in person...He told me it was Duran...something about his eyes, his mannerisms, etc.

Panamaniac
04-15-2016, 04:21 PM
Duran had "presence." I once asked Joe who the scarest fighter he ever met in person...He told me it was Duran...something about his eyes, his mannerisms, etc.To be more specific, when asked who Duran reminded him of, Joe Frazier said his eyes reminded him of Charles Manson...

The Old LefHook
04-15-2016, 05:33 PM
Anyone's credibility on here is established through their posts, not what their old job used to be.

juggernaut666
04-15-2016, 08:52 PM
I was talking about showing Ray Corso respect

Yes because he shows others the same respect ? Come on now even you know better to throw ray in as an example don't you? Weren't you the one calling him a condosending opinionated prick or something along those lines ? Theres been so many its hard to keep count... :lol1:


The answer to the thread is Duran was liked because he gave out Tandy Candy... :la:

Mr.DagoWop
04-15-2016, 09:11 PM
Yes because he shows others the same respect ? Come on now even you know better to throw ray in as an example don't you? Weren't you the one calling him a condosending opinionated prick or something along those lines ? Theres been so many its hard to keep count... :lol1:


The answer to the thread is Duran was liked because he gave out Tandy Candy... :la:

Yes, at one time I completely doubted Ray was who he said he was lol. I thought he was a mindless internet troll stealing the identity of a boxing trainer. Ray proved himself to me. I think Ray has earned the respect of those in the boxing community.

I'm too young to have opinions set in stone. If I did then I would be an idiot.

juggernaut666
04-15-2016, 09:20 PM
Yes, at one time I completely doubted Ray was who he said he was lol. I thought he was a mindless internet troll stealing the identity of a boxing trainer. Ray proved himself to me. I think Ray has earned the respect of those in the boxing community.

I'm too young to have opinions set in stone. If I did then I would be an idiot.

Mindless ? No limited? yes A prick ? definatly.... theres my 2 cents! its not about respect if one doesn't give it. Sorry but im old school ,you want respect ,you give it first...he hasn't earned it with me and his training status means as much to me as Bert Sugar claiming one of the worst boxing champs in history like Carnera can beat Klitchko..... along with Holmes claiming Wlad has no jab and Teddy Atlas claiming Hopkins would be a non factor in the past eras..Im pretty sure those guys for example are far more knowledgable than Corso and look what that means?

Being a trainer doesn't make you a logical person. Reading your posts im pretty sure you actually understand boxing as a whole better than he does as far as figuring out whats relevant and not set in stone.

So do you still agree with him if you haven't been stepped foot in a gym trained or fought before your opinions count less if at all ? If that's the case we better shut down boxing Scene ASAP :trink26:

Mr.DagoWop
04-15-2016, 10:03 PM
Mindless ? No limited? yes A prick ? definatly.... theres my 2 cents! its not about respect if one doesn't give it. Sorry but im old school ,you want respect ,you give it first...he hasn't earned it with me and his training status means as much to me as Bert Sugar claiming one of the worst boxing champs in history like Carnera can beat Klitchko..... along with Holmes claiming Wlad has no jab and Teddy Atlas claiming Hopkins would be a non factor in the past eras..Im pretty sure those guys for example are far more knowledgable than Corso and look what that means?

Being a trainer doesn't make you a logical person. Reading your posts im pretty sure you actually understand boxing as a whole better than he does as far as figuring out whats relevant and not set in stone.

So do you still agree with him if you haven't been stepped foot in a gym trained or fought before your opinions count less if at all ? If that's the case we better shut down boxing Scene ASAP :trink26:

Like I said my opinions change constantly. I'm too young of a student in the sport of boxing to have a solid opinion. A month ago you could probably find me ****ting on Duran but right now I'm starting to really appreciate him as a fighter.

Just because I think Ray has validation doesn't mean I think that everyone else is invalid. Quite the contrary. A person would have to say some pretty stupid **** in order to be classified as irrelevant in "my book". Out of all the people I have encountered on this forum most have given reasonable evidence for their views.

The Old LefHook
04-16-2016, 01:29 AM
Who knows food better, a master chef or a fine gourmet?

What everyone does best is take their own opinions sooooo... seriously.

You can only have great divergence of opinion where things are not certain. We do not walk around arguing the validity of the quadratic formula all day, because someone would simply prove it for us, and if we persisted, ignore us.

It is real easy to argue a proposition no one has any idea how to prove.

All one can do on these boxing questions is to continue to collect more information and refine your opinions based on such information. What we like, who we prefer, when who lived, our sense of a man...those mean nothing to a good analysis.

What one fighter said about another, what an old trainer said., what an old fan who saw a bunch of fights says...these mean next to nothing, but they do mean a little, and I mean a little.

It really does depend whether the fighter gives technical reasons or simply doles out praise to someone he fought. Tunney praised Dempsey highly, but there was very little technical insight given.

Contrast that with Moore's analysis of Marciano. Archie broke it down into digestible chunks of technique. He says before the fight he thought it would be easy to hit Rock with the lefhook. But when he got in there he found that big starboard lean of Rock's while staying so low, made it really difficult to find him with the lefhook.

I can take that seriously. Moore was his own man intellectually. He never kissed *ss. He was not heaping praise on Rock, he was giving the technical reasons he was harder to fight than he looked like he would be. He also mentioned the pounding of the arms, which he started out thinking would not be so bad before it became a nightmare.

It is never just the opinion, lads, it is the information in that opinion--if any. Most opinions come stripped of all information and loaded with stubborness. The source of the opinion, like Tunney or Moore, only helps us guess the reliability of it, if it has no other redeeming content. Tunney and Moore were both honorable men. Tunney gave outright praise and accolades to Jack without breaking it down or going into detail, Archie gave a mini analysis of fighting Marciano. Don Dunphy's opinion of who hit harder between Marciano and Dempsey is based on...what was that, Don? Oh, it looked like it knocked his head off? Okay. Loved Don Dunphy by the way, just making an example.

Fact. People who have been deeply involved in an activity for a very long time don't just think their opinions are more knowledgeable than yours--whether the activity is fencing, guitar playing, boxing training or heart surgery. What is a heart surgeon supposed to think when my dear friend who is a bartender starts running his mouth about medicicne the way he always does? Yes, the medical establishment and the treatments can be awful. If my friend's gripe is strictly with the medical establisment, then the heart surgeon may listen. But if my confident friend is insisting on the superiority of mega doses of vitamin C over heart surgery, what does the surgeon think? What should he think?

Who is the best guitar player in the world, folks? You probably already have an opinion, or could come up with one. But, you see, mine is better than yours, unless you are able to say certain things I know to be true and you would not know unless you understood guitar playing. You can also say things immediately that mark you as no more than someone with a strong opinion and not much knowledge of the subject, to someone who does have that knowledge.

If you are simply a fan of guitar, your opinion is probably equally based on the style of music you prefer, not really so much on guitar itself--country Chet Atkins or Bret Mason, jazz Joe Pass or Wes Montgomery, etc., etc. You like what you hear.

A fan of boxing likes what he sees. He may or may not have additional information and experience. However, it takes no experience to judge that prime Roy Jones was faster than the Robinson we have a lot of footage of. I know for a fact that welterweight Robinson was faster than the one we have a lot of film of. The little bit of welterweight film we have proves the point to me. I don't consider the highly filmed Robinson prime. Was Roy faster than the earlier Robinson? I don't know. Such a small sample of film makes it difficult to give big judgements. I suspect their speed was very similar at their respective fastest, Roy still maybe a shade faster.

You want an opinion? Oh, you want some metaphor along with it? It is still an opinion, you realize? Robinson's medicine bag was too full for Roy, if you scaled them according to their actual prime sizes, instead of thoughtlessly throwing them in as middleweights together, Robinson will win more times than Roy does. Why? The medicine bag, baby, the medicine bag. In his prime Roy had notched twenty or thirty fights; in his Robinson had notched eighty or ninety.

Oh, yeah, why do people like Duran? Because they like what they see?

juggernaut666
04-16-2016, 07:03 AM
Like I said my opinions change constantly. I'm too young of a student in the sport of boxing to have a solid opinion. A month ago you could probably find me ****ting on Duran but right now I'm starting to really appreciate him as a fighter.

Just because I think Ray has validation doesn't mean I think that everyone else is invalid. Quite the contrary. A person would have to say some pretty stupid **** in order to be classified as irrelevant in "my book". Out of all the people I have encountered on this forum most have given reasonable evidence for their views.

Be it as it may my post to you was in reference to good old ray attacking someones credibility first and then crying when its thrown back at him ,even accusinfg Steve of fighter bashing for difference of opinion when not only Steve was actually right for the most part but said he doesnt consider the modern fighters in the same class as the 80's guys .Yet dummy Corso attacked him anyway !I'll leave it at that ,just another good poster thats made to much sense on here i guess so the few have to band together against him,what else is new ,the idiot brigade ! :sigh1:

Mr.DagoWop
04-16-2016, 07:33 AM
Be it as it may my post to you was in reference to good old ray attacking someones credibility first and then crying when its thrown back at him ,even accusinfg Steve of fighter bashing for difference of opinion when not only Steve was actually right for the most part but said he doesnt consider the modern fighters in the same class as the 80's guys .Yet dummy Corso attacked him anyway !I'll leave it at that ,just another good poster thats made to much sense on here i guess so the few have to band together against him,what else is new ,the idiot brigade ! :sigh1:

I can't give an accurate response as to why I called Steve out. If you had asked me when it happened I would have told you but now it's been too long and I have forgotten. It's in the past and really doesn't have to do with boxing.

Ray Corso
04-16-2016, 12:08 PM
Hey juggyNutz remember your posts about;

My daddy is a world wide judo expert.........
My uncle trained Bowe.........
I ko'd one of Wlads spar partners..........
I trained ONE state amateur champion......

Yet not ONE of these people have names!!!! Juggy's No Name List!

You keep disrespecting me but I answered all the questions posed to me.
You haven't answered ONE!
Your a liar and a punkazz *****, and I've proven it time and again.
This is another time because you can't answer the above questions because
there more LIES!

Just a reminder that this kid is a punk and a liar and here's the proof.

Ray

Panamaniac
04-16-2016, 12:53 PM
Recent posts remind me of Trump vs Cruz...

The Old LefHook
04-16-2016, 10:29 PM
Recent posts remind me of Trump vs Cruz...

Hardcore. Ray has Juggy in a toe hold and he is screaming to get out, every since Ray posted his information.

Ray is a crotchety geezer, but he is solid and can even be a lot of fun, I always knew that. His bullsh*t needle hovers around 1, Jughug's hovers around 8. That list of tall tales in Ray's signature is precious.

Sometimes some actual discussion even gets done. I write in detail every day to people I have never seen. In a mysterious way we really know each other.

Panamaniac
04-17-2016, 04:05 AM
Rarely have I seen a thread with so little discussed about it's topic...

TJ highway
04-19-2016, 04:44 AM
In Jr High I remember my living room filled with family and friends for Ray Leonard Roberto Duran I. It was the 2nd time I had seen Roberto Duran fight. But the The Brawl in Montreal's energy was off the roof. We are Americans (Hispanics) at the same time.

By the end of the fight I could see that many of my older family members were proud of Duran. I later would share the same feeling with Julio Cesar Chavez Sr.

Duran amassed a record of 103 wins,16 loses and 70 KO's. He won world titles in four different weight divisions while competed over five decades.

He was born on June 16 in 1951. Duran made his debut in 1968 and continued fighting until 2001.

His nickname "Manos de Piedra" translated into Hands of Stone, because of the power he possessed.

Did anyone of you ever see the 30 for 30 "No Mas?" The fight ended in the 8th round the scorecards were close (Judge: Mike Jacobs 68-66, Judge: Jean Deswert 68-66,Judge: James Brimmell 67-66). Remember it was a 15 round fight!

Frustrated as Duran was if he knew how close the fight was he never would have stopped IMHO!

But truth be told you can't compare fighters like Duran to today's fighters! How do you calculate the extra three rounds?

Don't get me wrong in a way I can understand the question.

But in a way its like starting a fight because I like Coke and you like Pepsi? You can bring in a referee but he would probably like Dr Pepper. Add thee judges, Mountain Dew, Orange Crush and A&W root beer!

Because of Duran, I became a fan of Carlos Palomino, Wilfred Benítez, José "Pipino Cuevas", Iran "The Blade"Barkley, Vinny "The Pazmanian Devil" Pazienza, "Marvelous" Marvin Hagler and Tommy "The hit Man"Hearns.

We all have our favorite fighters just cause I like them don't mean you have to! But don't hate!
http://www.quotationof.com/images/roberto-durans-quotes-1.jpg

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/44Dm-G7uxHU/maxresdefault.jpg

juggernaut666
04-19-2016, 04:35 PM
Hey juggyNutz remember your posts about;

My daddy is a world wide judo expert.........
My uncle trained Bowe.........
I ko'd one of Wlads spar partners..........
I trained ONE state amateur champion......

Yet not ONE of these people have names!!!! Juggy's No Name List!

You keep disrespecting me but I answered all the questions posed to me.
You haven't answered ONE!
Your a liar and a punkazz *****, and I've proven it time and again.
This is another time because you can't answer the above questions because
there more LIES!

Just a reminder that this kid is a punk and a liar and here's the proof.

Ray

I don't post personal info.of names.If you wish to see if im legit,just ask billeau...hes respected isn't he? As for you posing anything that I asked you...well no you actually didn't,as stated you said you were in Tysons coerner and even watched the Lewis sparring session that you said you were at then on the other thread said you weren't there,so which is it? lmao



Your a troll and not even good at it,..you continue to post on my threads yet don't want a response back and then cry like a BYCH to the mods when you throw me in other threads...don't like it/then don't troll! as stated I already posted in the other thread about me...you did nothing but act like the all god father because you taught little kids how to box,yet never once had an actual fight unlike me...again go figure ?I posted a pic AGAIN to you showing I was at a award ceromie that Ali was at....what did you say about that? Nothiong but a remark about a tye,which cost more than your personality by far one could pick up for about 5 cents.... :boxing:

TJ highway
04-19-2016, 08:06 PM
https://cdn.meme.am/instances/65416463.jpg

Ray Corso
04-19-2016, 11:06 PM
Junior Olympic Team Region One 1981 Team Coach Ray Corso Ring One Boxing
Heavyweight Mike Tyson
Light Welter Ray Bright (son)
This was proven in an article I posted and verified by John Scully a long time member here and former amateur & pro boxer from Hartford Ct. (region 1)

I stated I was at the first night session at Cus's gym and watch Lewis & Tyson spar. I then stated I left for home after being there for 3 days prior to Lewis arriving.

Thats what I said and I can't prove I was in the Catskills then but everything else I stated has been proven.

I've also proven that your a liar and a punk and your the biggest story teller on this forum. You have no proof of anything you said because there is no truth in anything you say! Thats the FACTS!!

Ray

TJ highway
04-20-2016, 12:01 AM
Junior Olympic Team Region One 1981 Team Coach Ray Corso Ring One Boxing
Heavyweight Mike Tyson
Light Welter Ray Bright (son)
This was proven in an article I posted and verified by John Scully a long time member here and former amateur & pro boxer from Hartford Ct. (region 1)

I stated I was at the first night session at Cus's gym and watch Lewis & Tyson spar. I then stated I left for home after being there for 3 days prior to Lewis arriving.

Thats what I said and I can't prove I was in the Catskills then but everything else I stated has been proven.

I've also proven that your a liar and a punk and your the biggest story teller on this forum. You have no proof of anything you said because there is no truth in anything you say! Thats the FACTS!!

Ray
Excuse me I'm new here! I think this thread is about why people like or don't like Roberto Duran. I think it's best to keep ur arguments as PM's JMHO!

Kiwi Nick
04-20-2016, 01:33 AM
Excuse me I'm new here! I think this thread is about why people like or don't like Roberto Duran. I think it's best to keep ur arguments as PM's JMHO!

I agree, Ray can be painful at times but Juggernaut is so up himself he is perpetually boring, he doesn't need a forum, he just needs a mirror.
Keep your territorial pissing contests to PM little boys.

Roberto Duran came to fight.
There was no running and hiding, he came to fight.
It's easy to respect a man like that.

Zaroku
04-20-2016, 03:07 AM
In Jr High I remember my living room filled with family and friends for Ray Leonard Roberto Duran I. It was the 2nd time I had seen Roberto Duran fight. But the The Brawl in Montreal's energy was off the roof. We are Americans (Hispanics) at the same time.

By the end of the fight I could see that many of my older family members were proud of Duran. I later would share the same feeling with Julio Cesar Chavez Sr.

Duran amassed a record of 103 wins,16 loses and 70 KO's. He won world titles in four different weight divisions while competed over five decades.

He was born on June 16 in 1951. Duran made his debut in 1968 and continued fighting until 2001.

His nickname "Manos de Piedra" translated into Hands of Stone, because of the power he possessed.

Did anyone of you ever see the 30 for 30 "No Mas?" The fight ended in the 8th round the scorecards were close (Judge: Mike Jacobs 68-66, Judge: Jean Deswert 68-66,Judge: James Brimmell 67-66). Remember it was a 15 round fight!

Frustrated as Duran was if he knew how close the fight was he never would have stopped IMHO!

But truth be told you can't compare fighters like Duran to today's fighters! How do you calculate the extra three rounds?

Don't get me wrong in a way I can understand the question.

But in a way its like starting a fight because I like Coke and you like Pepsi? You can bring in a referee but he would probably like Dr Pepper. Add thee judges, Mountain Dew, Orange Crush and A&W root beer!

Because of Duran, I became a fan of Carlos Palomino, Wilfred Benítez, José "Pipino Cuevas", Iran "The Blade"Barkley, Vinny "The Pazmanian Devil" Pazienza, "Marvelous" Marvin Hagler and Tommy "The hit Man"Hearns.

We all have our favorite fighters just cause I like them don't mean you have to! But don't hate!
http://www.quotationof.com/images/roberto-durans-quotes-1.jpg

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/44Dm-G7uxHU/maxresdefault.jpg

After the 12th round is when the championship rounds began!

TJ highway
04-20-2016, 05:10 AM
Zaroku said: After the 12th round is when the championship rounds began!
http://vomzi.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/new-were-not-worthy-gif-474.gif

GodOfBoxing
04-20-2016, 05:28 AM
RDuran..gonna rate better than SRL a.t. despite their 2-1 Leonard advantage. Sure, badly put down by Hearns. Hearns I think, was never so "hot". Duran is on record for saying he was restricted that fight! ("Distracted") Hagler: Duran did pretty well with that!
He is remembered for the LIGHTWEIGHT CHAMPIONSHIP. Then, it was extra what he added on top of 135. And, his "extra" continued and continued and comtinued. He did three careers in one!
Duran's second defeat was that one he quit in..& against Ray Leonard. After that yes, he has some losses. With already age on him too.