Why is Duran considered the greatest LW?

[GJC]

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

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

[Princemanspopa]

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


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

[JAB5239]

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


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

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

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

[BG_Knocc_Out]

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

[Princemanspopa]

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


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

[JAB5239]

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


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

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

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

[BennyST]

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

Yeah man, a bit of an overreaction.

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


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[blacklodge]

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

[blacklodge]

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

[Princemanspopa]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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