Is Duran the greatest fighter still alive today?

[The plunger man]

It also should be said when judging fighters, to be wary of what the accomplished in their own era as opposed to comparing eras. Because the times and rules change, if Duran was around today he probably woulda have grown up with some type of foundation helping kids like him and feeding him. Coulda even got adopted by an American who knows. Floyd couldn't have managed his career so well in the 70s, since you couldn't market yourself that easy. Leonard and Duran would have ducked eachother today and stuck to making 5 million fighting easy fights.

Duran quit against leonard that alone makes him 2nd to leonard ....plus hearns startched Duran.....hagler oupointed him and Benitez schooled him.....leoanrd beat hagler , hearns and Benitez so reality leonard comes on top over Duran

[QueensburyRules]

Duran quit against leonard that alone makes him 2nd to leonard ....plus hearns startched Duran.....hagler oupointed him and Benitez schooled him.....leoanrd beat hagler , hearns and Benitez so reality leonard comes on top over Duran

- -How come U always include that vid of U takin' a plunge?

[markusmod]

- -How come U always include that vid of U takin' a plunge?

I always thought that was Anorak.

[The Old LefHook]

Duran fought ATGs who were 12-25 lbs. heavier than his own prime self. Also, at that time, he was past his prime, but gave every ATG at least a decent tussle, with the exception of the freak match with Hearns.

Tommy "held over," Duran, and actually scared him to death. Duran's own handlers have intimated that he was always intimidated by the MCC.

Lefhook says crack a book. Whaddya got on Saddler recently? Anything written?

[The plunger man]

Being stopped by such talents as Norris and Comacho so late in his career are not black marks against Leonard. I was never a fan but in the end Leonard was one of the ATG. His incredible hand speed, boxing skill, mobility, punching power and determination raise him to a very high level.

leonard never got stopped by Norris .....lost a wide decision but battled till the end as for Camacho yeah it’s not a black mark when your 41 and coming off a 6 year lay off......i am awe of Duran but Duran when through a very dark period at the age of 29 to lose the Kirkland laing , almost Jimmy batten , schooled by Benitez , starched by hearns and lost to hagler ....leonard never had that bad of a run during his prime years and was pretty much unbeatable the night he beat hearns ....so for me if you tot up the stats with 5 belts , the only fighter to beat all the other kings....lost 3 years of absolute prime and then came back to beat hagler....so for me it’s leonard by a nose.....leonard also came out on top head to head

[HOUDINI563]

No. Belts in general are meaningless. More belts is directly relatable to how many belts are available to win. The more belts, the more fighters who should never be champion are allowed to be one.

Leonard had far fewer bouts than Duran 40 vs 119. Duran fought until he was 50. Leonard 40. When you fight more and fight much longer past athletic prime their is much more chance of losing. Duran rates higher than Leonard all time but both are ATG fighters.

[DeeMoney]

No. Belts in general are meaningless. More belts is directly relatable to how many belts are available to win. The more belts, the more fighters who should never be champion are allowed to be one.

Leonard had far fewer bouts than Duran 40 vs 119. Duran fought until he was 50. Leonard 40. When you fight more and fight much longer past athletic prime their is much more chance of losing. Duran rates higher than Leonard all time but both are ATG fighters.

I agree with this, thats why its important to establish a clear criteria when making a case for being 'great', 'greater', or 'greatest'. In the same vein, fighting more post prime, or outside your best weight class, allows a fighter more opportunities to accumulate more various accolades (belts). Thats why I personally choose to look at prime when evaluating greatness, as opposed to career accomplishments; but to each their own, they are just two different discussions.

[GhostofDempsey]

No. Belts in general are meaningless. More belts is directly relatable to how many belts are available to win. The more belts, the more fighters who should never be champion are allowed to be one.

Leonard had far fewer bouts than Duran 40 vs 119. Duran fought until he was 50. Leonard 40. When you fight more and fight much longer past athletic prime their is much more chance of losing. Duran rates higher than Leonard all time but both are ATG fighters.

Leonard won his last major title at age 32, Duran was 37 and with way more fights that had aged him even further. Duran won the MW title fighting a full blown prime MW, Leonard fought a weight drained Lalonde for his titles.

As most of us agree, they are both great, but Duran’s volume of work speaks louder. His overall skills while at his best are what really gives him the edge for him. That first Duran/Leonard fight was two greats in their respective primes. Duran came out ahead.

[HOUDINI563]

My point remains that both are all time greats. Their respective ABILITIES as FIGHTERS are both off the charts. Duran with his extremely lengthy (3 times the fights of SRL) and success during his prime give him the leg up.

[The plunger man]

Leonard won his last major title at age 32, Duran was 37 and with way more fights that had aged him even further. Duran won the MW title fighting a full blown prime MW, Leonard fought a weight drained Lalonde for his titles.

As most of us agree, they are both great, but Duran’s volume of work speaks louder. His overall skills while at his best are what really gives him the edge for him. That first Duran/Leonard fight was two greats in their respective primes. Duran came out ahead.

no when leonard chose to use his natural boxing skill he vanquished Duran and made him quit.....it’s called boxing and when leonard boxed him Duran lost....Leonard openly admits Duran psyched him out and made him want to fight toe to toe in there first fight.....look I like Duran but the bottom line is Duran lost 16 times so if you really count longevity Duran career really did nothing in the last 10 years of his *** end career......it’s all well and good having a longer career and more fights but if you lose half of them and don’t beat a world class fighter it means nothing....and another thing Duran turned pro at 16 and had no amateur accolades and titles where is Leonard did and won them all...leonard overall skills were better than durans and that’s why he came out on top in head to head and also beating hagler , hearns and Benitez and Duran lost to them.....I listen to many radio and tv presenters who constantly say Leonard is the best fighter they have seen in there lifetime skill wise......Duran gets to many passes when you consider his defeats and how he lost and like Duran alot