what in your estimation prevents duran from being the greatest fighter whoever lived?

[titoi]

Nothing whatsoever.

[wpink1]

As per Point 1, Esteban DeJesus is considered by many boxing historians to be an ATG at Lightweight. As for Point 3, I don't count past prime losses against any fighter I'm evaluating. For example I don't hold the Barcley fights against Tommy Hearns but I do hold the first Leonard and the Hagler fight against him. In the case of Duran he was having trouble making the Lightweight limit because his training habits were catching up him. By the second Leonard fight it was becoming pretty obvious that Duran was no longer at his best. Past prime he could still beat the Davey Moores but he wasn't going to beat the Hearns and the Haglers. Age is relatively unimportant when determining a fighter's prime because every fighter is different. I've seen fighters that were washed up at 26 (see Mark Breland); I've also seen fighters who's primes extended well into their 30s (see Bernard Hopkins). Fighters bodies simply deteriorate at different rates from one another: There's no little box "prime" can be made to fit in.

As for his strength of opposition I think there's a profound double standard here. Take a fighter like Tyson: Name the ATG Heavyweights HE fought in his prime. Roy Jones and Pernell Whitaker didn't exactly face a lineup of ATGs either. Can you name the ATGs THEY fought in their primes? Jones fought Hopkins but who else? Don't hold Duran or any other fighter to standards you don't hold your own personal favorites to.

Poet

Dejesus is considered a all time great LIGHTWEIGHT.My statment said all time great top 50...I guess I should have made my point clearer. Hell I could say leonard beat Kalule, who would have to be a top 154 all time,,,not top 10 but in the top since it is a relatively new division. My point was Duran did not beat a resume of top fighters like Leoanrd did.

I dont think Duran was past his prime at all. I have seen many of his fights. Duran fans lead people to think that, I believe he simply got bigger, which slows one a bit, and he fought bigger and better fighters. In his prime Leonard beats him 9 times out of 10 if Leonard boxes him, hearns beats him, and hagler beats him. Maybe not pound per pound, maybe so, but at those weights, Duran simply was not that great or that special. Yes you can factor in age also. Now obviously some fall off much quicker than others, but the duran that faced Leonard in Montreal was the same Duran that faced Leonard in New Orleans. Duran himself in his book said so. He had plenty of time to train, he balloned up to 185 and had to get back down to 147. This is something he was doin already and having to get down to the lightweight limit earlier. I tend to believe the fighter themselve vs posters and other things, espcially when it is not favoring them at all, just honesty.

As for your completley most about holding Duran to a different level of expectations..I think you better read my post again, and check your facts. I have never ever mentioned Tyson as beating a whose who of great fighters. In fact I think his list of oppostion is weak. Not sure where you got that. Also, Whitacker fought Mcgirt, Chavez, Paez, Azumah Nelson, Roger Mayweather, Jose Louis Ramirez, Haugen, Julio Vasquez, DLH, That is a great resume... and He beat almost everyone of these fighters or should have been givien the decision. The DLH fight was very close to me. Roy Jones beat James Toney also, and he moved up to heavyweight and won a title which is huge for natural Middleweight.

I think you may need to utilize Factcheck.org......

Duran is simply overrated. He is simply one of the greatest lightweight ever, who when he started fighting better fighters that were at welter, jr middle and middle he simply got his ass repeatedly handed to him. Duran fans refuse to acknowledge this, but they will quikly hold Mayweather accountable for anything he does or does not do at 147, when he was in fact a natural lightweight too, and unlike Duran he never was beaten at Lightweight. I think if you compare Mayweather resume at lightweight to Durans, Mayweather quality of opposition is much better. He did not fight 10-13 fighters after becoming a champ, thus to padd his record. Duran fans never ever mention this, they ignore how dominate Mayweather was for a short while at 135. They point out his close call to Castillo, but leave out he had to fight with one hand after the 4th round since he reinjured his shoulder, and unlike the mysterios cramp that no one ever knew about until after Duran quit, Mayweather was clearly damaged when he was in his corner discussing his shoulder with Roger.

So I think you may need to ask yourself why does Duran get credit for things when others do not, and why do Duran fans always make excuses for his shortcomings..always discrediting other fighters abilities, but saying he was not motivated or he would have won, or he had to lose weight...BS..they are professionls, they know what is expected. Nuff said

[StarshipTrooper]

Dejesus is considered a all time great LIGHTWEIGHT.My statment said all time great top 50...I guess I should have made my point clearer. Hell I could say leonard beat Kalule, who would have to be a top 154 all time,,,not top 10 but in the top since it is a relatively new division. My point was Duran did not beat a resume of top fighters like Leoanrd did.

I dont think Duran was past his prime at all. I have seen many of his fights. Duran fans lead people to think that, I believe he simply got bigger, which slows one a bit, and he fought bigger and better fighters. In his prime Leonard beats him 9 times out of 10 if Leonard boxes him, hearns beats him, and hagler beats him. Maybe not pound per pound, maybe so, but at those weights, Duran simply was not that great or that special. Yes you can factor in age also. Now obviously some fall off much quicker than others, but the duran that faced Leonard in Montreal was the same Duran that faced Leonard in New Orleans. Duran himself in his book said so. He had plenty of time to train, he balloned up to 185 and had to get back down to 147. This is something he was doin already and having to get down to the lightweight limit earlier. I tend to believe the fighter themselve vs posters and other things, espcially when it is not favoring them at all, just honesty.

As for your completley most about holding Duran to a different level of expectations..I think you better read my post again, and check your facts. I have never ever mentioned Tyson as beating a whose who of great fighters. In fact I think his list of oppostion is weak. Not sure where you got that. Also, Whitacker fought Mcgirt, Chavez, Paez, Azumah Nelson, Roger Mayweather, Jose Louis Ramirez, Haugen, Julio Vasquez, DLH, That is a great resume... and He beat almost everyone of these fighters or should have been givien the decision. The DLH fight was very close to me. Roy Jones beat James Toney also, and he moved up to heavyweight and won a title which is huge for natural Middleweight.

I think you may need to utilize Factcheck.org......

Duran is simply overrated. He is simply one of the greatest lightweight ever, who when he started fighting better fighters that were at welter, jr middle and middle he simply got his ass repeatedly handed to him. Duran fans refuse to acknowledge this, but they will quikly hold Mayweather accountable for anything he does or does not do at 147, when he was in fact a natural lightweight too, and unlike Duran he never was beaten at Lightweight. I think if you compare Mayweather resume at lightweight to Durans, Mayweather quality of opposition is much better. He did not fight 10-13 fighters after becoming a champ, thus to padd his record. Duran fans never ever mention this, they ignore how dominate Mayweather was for a short while at 135. They point out his close call to Castillo, but leave out he had to fight with one hand after the 4th round since he reinjured his shoulder, and unlike the mysterios cramp that no one ever knew about until after Duran quit, Mayweather was clearly damaged when he was in his corner discussing his shoulder with Roger.

So I think you may need to ask yourself why does Duran get credit for things when others do not, and why do Duran fans always make excuses for his shortcomings..always discrediting other fighters abilities, but saying he was not motivated or he would have won, or he had to lose weight...BS..they are professionls, they know what is expected. Nuff said

Okay, if you want to use top 50 pound for pound lets use your example of Leonard. How many top 50 p4p fighters did Leonard beat? All of TWO and one of those (Hagler) was fought when both fighters were pretty much done.

How about Whitaker? Are Mcgirt, Paez, Roger Mayweather, Jose Louis Ramirez, Haugen, Julio Vasquez top 50 p4p? If you think that you're smoking crack! Paez and Haugen weren't even legitimate world-class fighters. You cite Nelson but when he fought Whitaker it was pretty clear his best days were behind him. Why bring up the De La Hoya fight? In that case WHITAKER was past it AND he lost the fight. That leaves only Chavez and to me that's a dubious distinction at best: If anyone is overrated it isn't Duran it's Chavez. Chavez may be in the top 50 p4p in my view he doesn't belong there. Yes, Jones DID fight Toney: A Toney who was out of shape an turning into a head case.

As for Duran supposedly being 'in prime" at Welterweight, you can gratuatously assert it but that simply means it can be gratuatously denied. In other words your opinion is flat out wrong. Welterweight was not his natural weight class in anycase and no matter how much weight he puts on he's still not going to be at his best, especially going up against fighters who ARE natural at that weight. The test of a fighters greatness is NOT determined by how well he does jumping divisions. The standard has ALWAYS been how well he did in his prime in his natural weight class. Archie Moore isn't judged by how well he did at Heavyweight: His standing is based on his career at Light-Heavyweight.

I think by bringing up "stomach cramps" you reveal the real issue here: A certain number of boxing fans will NEVER stop throwing "no mas" in Duran's face. For those fans Duran's career will always be defined by the second Leonard fight and nothing he did before or after matters squat to them. So yeah, I think there's an agenda here as well as double standards at play. Why not just say you don't think Duran belongs at the top of the p4p list because of "no mas" and be done with it? At least it's honest and just a matter of a poster stating his opinion.

Poet

[wpink1]

Okay, if you want to use top 50 pound for pound lets use your example of Leonard. How many top 50 p4p fighters did Leonard beat? All of TWO and one of those (Hagler) was fought when both fighters were pretty much done.

How about Whitaker? Mcgirt, Paez, Roger Mayweather, Jose Louis Ramirez, Haugen, Julio Vasquez top 50 p4p? If you think that you're smoking crack! Paez and Haugen weren't even legitimate world-class fighters. You cite Nelson but when he fought Whitaker it was pretty clear his best days were behind him. Why bring up the De La Hoya fight? In that case WHITAKER was past it AND he lost the fight. That leaves only Chavez and to me that's a dubious distinction at best: If anyone is overrated it isn't Duran it's Chavez. Chavez may be in the top 50 p4p in my view he doesn't belong there. Yes, Jones DID fight Toney: A Toney who was out of shape an turning into a head case.



As for Duran supposedly being 'in prime" at Welterweight, you can gratuatously assert it but that simply means it can be gratuatously denied. In other words your opinion is flat out wrong. Welterweight was not his natural weight class in anycase and no matter how much weight he puts on he's still not going to be at his best, especially going up against fighters who ARE natural at that weight. The test of a fighters greatness is NOT determined by how well he does jumping divisions. The standard has ALWAYS been how well he did in his prime in his natural weight class. Archie Moore isn't judged by how well he did at Heavyweight: His standing is based on his career at Light-Heavyweight.

I think by bringing up "stomach cramps" you reveal the real issue here: A certain number of boxing fans will NEVER stop throwing "no mas" in Duran's face. For those fans Duran's career will always be defined by the second Leonard fight and nothing he did before or after matters squat to them. So yeah, I think there's an agenda here as well as double standards at play. Why not just say you don't think Duran belongs at the top of the p4p list because of "no mas" and be done with it? At least it's honest and just a matter of a poster stating his opinion.

Poet

Poet, you have your facts completely backwards. Leonard beat anywhere from 3-4 top 50 fighters..Duran, Hagler, Hearns, Benitez. Benitez has been on many list on then others I don't see him on there. On the Ring greatest fighters of the last 80 years Leonard had 4 fighters on there he beat, and Duran one, and again he won that fight when Leonard willingly and ******ly chose to abandon the very skills that got him to the top, and go toe to toe. You cant take that win from Duran cause Duran moved up, won the mental fight, and won inside the ring. However for sakes of being fair ( I never really count the last fight they had) I consider the relevants fights they had a split. Then Duran is 0-3 vs the rest of that list. Not a single other fighter on this list Duran beat. Then couple that with what has to be a all time weak list of challengers at the lightwieight division when compared to other great fighters, it is inconcievable that a great fighter the level of Duran would beat Buchanon a very good fighter for the lightweigh title in 1972 then fight Greg Potter 11-3-1 the next fight. However this is mild compared to some of the other fights he had Lupe Ramirez 6-10, Juan Medina 1-1, Doc Meclendon 10-12-2, Tony Garcia 13-2-4 .The list goes on and on and this is AFTER he became champ.
If you compare the quality og fighters Duran faced at lightweight to Whitacker or Mayweather, or Leonard at welter or even Hagler at middle it is simply a Joke! From Leonard 14th fight on, every time he stepped in the ring except once Bernardo Prada it was againt a fighter with a good record, they might not have been world beaters but not 10-12 either. Also, from the time he became champ almost always he fought very good to great to all time great fighters. Duran DID NOT. I understand Duran fought many times for money to feed himself and you can not knock that. However in a fair comparison, Duran dominance at lightweight (which he did for a entire decade) you have to point out that there was a lack of top opponents.

Thus he moved up at ag 28 and started taking repeated ass whippings by the best of the heavier weight classes. His entire great resume lies in two fights...beating Leonard in a fight Leonard practically took his boxing skills and threw them out the window, and then Barkly. Not that Barkly is a great fighter, but beating him at that stage in his career at 168 was phenomenal. Beating Moore was completley overbown as I dont rate Leonards win over Lalonde a great accomplishment either. These are two fighters they should have beaten. Moore had 11 fights at that time.

You say the standard of greatness is not determined at how they do when they jump weights but how well they do at their natural weight.....Hmmm lets examine that false statment.

What was Sugar Ray Robinson's Natural weight...He started at hmmm 130 and beat the lightweight champions (both of them) in nontitle fights. However we review him on wars he had at welter and Middle. Hmmmm

Mayweather, Never lost at his natural weight. No he did not have 70 fights at lightweight, but as I already indicated 30 or so of Durans fights were against such weak opponents they should not have been santioned. Could you imagine Mayweather coming back tody and announcing he is fighting someone with a record of 10-12. He would be laughed off the face of the earth, and the fight totally discredited. Hell this happens when he fought Judah. Why give Duran credit for his totally weak group of fights..Hmmm I would compare Mayweathers group of wins at lightweight vs Durans anyday. Carlos Gerena, Corrales, Hernadex, Jesus Chavez, Castillo N'dou, Genero Hernandez, Manfredy.... Ahh and Mayweather was undefeated at Lightweight. From his 10th fight on he didnt fight a fighter with a losing record, and outside of Emmanuel Augustus the fighter he fought were good fighters or great fighters. Another thing he does not own a victory over a fighter the level of Sugar Ray leonard, but he does own victories as he travled north over Hatton, DLH, and Judah. No losses. Duran can't say that.

So tell me how do we rate Mayweather on him being undefeated at lighweight or the total body of work. What about Roy Jones do we look at his work at Middleweight or do we include his work at Super middle, Light heavy and Heavy. What about Armstrong. I think you got your facts completley wrong. The facts are You and other Duran fans want everyone to give Duran a pass on his exploits north except of course for his win vs Leonard and Barkly but anything he was not successful at, you want Duran to historically be given a pass on this since it was not at lightweight, but you elevate Duran to legendary greatness overlooking the fact that his resume AT lightweight is HORRIBLE, and that other before and after him has dominated the divsions facing either stiffer opponents, and beat them all and moved up better. Help me understand how Duran is better then these fighters...Ohh i left out other fighters like DLH, who is reviewed based on his exploits at welter, jr welter, etc. Then you have Chavez, who had some weak fights too but beat much better opposition at his natural weight Rosario, Roger Mayweather, Jose Louis Ramirez, Taylor ( he should have lost this one), Hector Camacho. Again compare that to Buchanon, Marcil, kobayashi (61-9-4 at the time..wow great fighter) Dejesus.....Completely a Joke.

Finally for your last stament about Cramps....I think I spelled out my review of Duran before and after No mas. Yes I think No mas has to be considered in a overall review of duran, as Tyson Biting Holyfired is in a overall review of Tyson. Duran entire career accomplishments can not be offset by NO Mas, anyone that says that is igorant. Howevr, double standards..who is offering double standards..I think everything I pointed out is fact.

• I am not ignoring his level of competiton,,, You and others are.
• I am not ignoring othersr beat better competion at their natural weight, you and others are..
• I am not ignoring the fact that fighters lilke Whitacker, Jones, Armstrong, Leonard, dlh etc..are judged by their entire body of careeer, you and others are.
• I am not ignoring the fact that he 1-4 vs fighters highly regarded and ranked on the rings top 80 fighters of the last 80 years, you and others are.

Who is being biased, misleading and applying double Standards.

Funny how things are. What would everyone say about Leonard had he lost that fight to Hagler. Now consider the fact how duran fans and many convieniently leave out the fact Ray was coming out of retirment for the most part of 5 years, and hmmm Poet..he moved up 2 weight classes to do so. No what you hear is that Hagler was supposedly past his prime (name another fighter 32 years old that is undefeated over the past 10 years, coming off a ko streak over his best 3 challengers, and they are called over the hill,,hmmmm) , and leoanrd got concessions like 12 rounds vs 15, (when if these idiots did their research they would clealry know 95% of title fights in 87, and most of 86 where indeed 12 rounds fights) No double standards are being applied against fighters like Leonard. What he did in beating Duran, hearns, Benitez and Hagler is simpy amazing and not another fighter has beaten 4 fighters in the Rings top 80 all time fighters. Not one other fighter has! Dont we review leonard positivly or negativly on his fight vs hagler, even though he moved up 2 weight classes and was retired.! Check your facts my friend!

[Clegg]

Is it fair to say that Duran should've given Buchanan a rematch?

[wpink1]

Is it fair to say that Duran should've given Buchanan a rematch?

Instead of the 30 fighters with losing or close to losing records he faced after he became champion...I would say yes.

[AntonTheMeh]

Is it fair to say that Duran should've given Buchanan a rematch?

that shoulda happened.

[AntonTheMeh]

i guess discipline is the best answer.he beat leonard, loss to benitez, lost to leonard after giving up for no particularly no good reason, i think he was scared ****less when fighting hearns, he looked more tense in that fight then i'd ever seen a bad ass like duran be, he was competitive with hagler but lost.still i think he's a bit underrated considering he went from light to middle in an era of really good and great fighters.

[Hagler★]

i like duran he was a fighters fighter took on all kinds of fights. i think the fact he was quite dirty, rupturing a fighter's testicle with a low blow, and lots of eye thumbing etc didnt help also the fact that he let himself go between fights gave the notion that he lacked dedication

[JAB5239]

[QUOTE]

. Then couple that with what has to be a all time weak list of challengers at the lightwieight division when compared to other great fighters, it is inconcievable that a great fighter the level of Duran would beat Buchanon a very good fighter for the lightweigh title in 1972 then fight Greg Potter 11-3-1 the next fight. However this is mild compared to some of the other fights he had Lupe Ramirez 6-10, Juan Medina 1-1, Doc Meclendon 10-12-2, Tony Garcia 13-2-4 .The list goes on and on and this is AFTER he became champ.
If you compare the quality og fighters Duran faced at lightweight to Whitacker or Mayweather, or Leonard at welter or even Hagler at middle it is simply a Joke!

I think you are missing some very important points, my friend. First is, Duran averaged about 6 fights a year during his reign at 135. Second, he completely cleaned out the division. And third, the names on his resume are solid. Buchanon,Virurt 2x, DeJesus 2x, Lampkin and despit his record, Saoul Mamby. Add to that the contenders he beat who's names are not so well remebered today. If he took easy fight between these, it was to make money and stay sharp. This was a stratagy employed by many fighters fron days gone by, before their was big money or their names were popular enough to make a decent pay on par with their skills. I would say Durans resume at 135 is every bit comparable to the names you have above.l Maybe not as good as some, but certainly in the same league.

From Leonard 14th fight on, every time he stepped in the ring except once Bernardo Prada it was againt a fighter with a good record, they might not have been world beaters but not 10-12 either. Also, from the time he became champ almost always he fought very good to great to all time great fighters. Duran DID NOT.

By winning the gold medal in 1976, Leonards road was paved with gold. Simply put...he could fight whoever he wanted and still get paid compared to a fighter like Duran. But, if you take a close look at the records of his early opponents you will see they were really no better than a lot og guys Duran had to face to make a buck because he didn't have the same good fortune as Ray. and without any proof to back this up, I'll go out on a limb and say many of these so called bums Duran fought were just as good as the low level guys with winning records that Leonard fought. Many of those guys you see listed at boxrec have incomplete records, and were thrown to the wolves because they never had competant management. Im not saying some of them were'nt tomato cans, but I would bet some were just as tough as some of the guys on Leonards record with shiny records until they met Ray.

I understand Duran fought many times for money to feed himself and you can not knock that. However in a fair comparison, Duran dominance at lightweight (which he did for a entire decade) you have to point out that there was a lack of top opponents.

You can't blame Duran for that. He cleaned out what had to be cleaned, and did it against some very respectable names.

Thus he moved up at ag 28 and started taking repeated ass whippings by the best of the heavier weight classes. His entire great resume lies in two fights...beating Leonard in a fight Leonard practically took his boxing skills and threw them out the window, and then Barkly. Not that Barkly is a great fighter, but beating him at that stage in his career at 168 was phenomenal. Beating Moore was completley overbown as I dont rate Leonards win over Lalonde a great accomplishment either. These are two fighters they should have beaten. Moore had 11 fights at that time.

Moore had not only won the title. Not only beat Ayub Kalule in his next fight, but was actually favored, if I am recalling correctly, to beat Duran. Roberto also beat such top fighters ascarlos Palomino, Quevas, Barkley and held his own twice with Vinny Pazienza more than 20 years after winning his first title.