The overrated Roberto Duran

[BennyST]

You make these claims out of nothing. When did I ever say these things?

Obviously you don't know what a titlist is. There's like 4 or more titlists in every division. Even more when you count regular champions, super champions, interim champions, champions in reccess, etc., for each division.

I only think of Pacquiao as a welterweight titlist. Not a welterweight champion. I think of Jones as a middleweight and heavyweight titlist. Not a champion.

That was a big false claim.

You said Pac and Mayweather were better champions because they had won more titles in more divisions. Go back to the first page and read what you wrote yourself.

"If you define a titlist as a champion, then that's your way of thinking."

"Championship material, to me, is the man who beat the man. In other words, a lineal champion. Something Jorge "Fat" Castro was never able to become."

This is what you wrote just before as well. There was no lineal champion at that time.

Duran beat 'the man' at all but 154. He beat Buchanan and De Jesus at 135. He beat Leonard at 147 and then he beat Barkley at 160 who had beaten Hearns, who had beaten Roldan for the title left behind by Ray Leonard after he beat Hagler.

Anyway, like I said before, you use the argument that Mayweather is a six time champion and Pac won more than Duran too and I know that you would use the same argument for everyone else too, but when it suits you to say someone is not a champion because he never beat 'the man' then you brig up this false argument.

As for Castro never beating 'the man', he did in fact beat the two of 'the men'. Jonhson had held the WBA MW title for the last three years and had lost it to Jackson in his last fight before Castro. Jackson relinquished it and so Jonhson and Castro fought for it. He won. Then Castro and Jackson fought for it because in some way it was still considered to be the title of Jackson's. He lost also. He beat two of the top guys and two main champions.

When Castro won the title, there was no lineal champion. Hopkins held the IBF I think, the WBC had been vacated by McClellan and wasn't won until 1995 by J. Jackson. The two main champions at that time were Jackson and Johnson and Castro beat both. The WBA had the main lineage from Hagler still. It went from Hagler, who got stripped of it, to Kalambay who the ring recognised as the main champion, he vacated and on it went to Johnson etc.

[JAB5239]

You said Pac and Mayweather were better champions because they had won more titles in more divisions. Go back to the first page and read what you wrote yourself.

"If you define a titlist as a champion, then that's your way of thinking."

"Championship material, to me, is the man who beat the man. In other words, a lineal champion. Something Jorge "Fat" Castro was never able to become."

This is what you wrote just before as well. There was no lineal champion at that time.

Duran beat 'the man' at all but 154. He beat Buchanan and De Jesus at 135. He beat Leonard at 147 and then he beat Barkley at 160 who had beaten Hearns, who had beaten Roldan for the title left behind by Ray Leonard after he beat Hagler.

Anyway, like I said before, you use the argument that Mayweather is a six time champion and Pac won more than Duran too and I know that you would use the same argument for everyone else too, but when it suits you to say someone is not a champion because he never beat 'the man' then you brig up this false argument.

As for Castro never beating 'the man', he did in fact beat the two of 'the men'. Jonhson had held the WBA MW title for the last three years and had lost it to Jackson in his last fight before Castro. Jackson relinquished it and so Jonhson and Castro fought for it. He won. Then Castro and Jackson fought for it because in some way it was still considered to be the title of Jackson's. He lost also. He beat two of the top guys and two main champions.

When Castro won the title, there was no lineal champion. Hopkins held the IBF I think, the WBC had been vacated by McClellan and wasn't won until 1995 by J. Jackson. The two main champions at that time were Jackson and Johnson and Castro beat both. The WBA had the main lineage from Hagler still. It went from Hagler, who got stripped of it, to Kalambay who the ring recognised as the main champion, he vacated and on it went to Johnson etc.

Ohhh this is a beat down.

[BennyST]

I am at lunch and wrote a reply to this and of course before i hit submit reply the pc froze and i lost the message.

Duran lost to the two best JR MW's at the time Hearns and Benitez. The reach thing is a joke. Benitez even invited Duran at the end of the fight to hit him as he stayed in the ropes stationary. Benitez was simply a better boxer. Why you think Hearns went the full 15 rounds with Benitez and only needed 2 to KO Duran? Benitez made Hearns missed 11 consecutive blows at the end of RD 2 of their fight; he had a radar. In addition, the age thing is preposterous. Benitez was not a usual 24 year old fighter. He started to fight professionally at 15 and was world champ at 17 a record that possibly will never be broken. Guys who start very young to to peak at an earlier age. As a result, Benitez by the age of 26 was already past his prime. Mike Tyson in his 30's was not a shell of a fighter as he was at 22. Duran beat the guy that KO Benitez is incorrect. Benitez BROKE his ankle in the moore fight a fact you conveniently left out.

People say Duran beat guys with bigger reach. So did guys like Rocky Marciano and Jack Dempsey; guys you need to rate Duran higher than if you put him in top 10. Jimmy Wilde beat guys who weighed 100 pounds more; yet many put Duran higher. I don't think Duran is better Robinson, Armstrong, Louis, Pepp, Ali, Gans, Langford, Greb, Tunney, and both Leonards. Monzon beat a guy who was like 6 feet 5 and murdered him in 5 RDS. He also beat two great fighters at his same height. He went overseas and KO guys in their home countries. If you want to knock him for early losses than please knock Pacquiao for his early two knockouts. The fact is that Monzon never was Knocked out in 100 professional fights, and he had only KD his entire career. Duran was KD twice by Dejesus and even quit during a fight. Also lets not mention the Hearns massacre and NO MAS. Monzon was most interested in preserving his title defense record. The HW and MW divisions are the most fancy divisions in the sport. So why blame a fighter for trying to defend his title with record defenses? The guys immediately after Monzon didnt move up as well. Wilfred Gomez got murdered by Sanchez does that mean since he took alphabet soup belts at 126 and 130 he is better than Salvador Sanchez? Does it mean that great fighters like Sanchez or Monzon wouldn't be able to pick up belts with the current alphabelt system. Let's remember Duran won the WW title and had 0 defenses of it. He picked up the JR MW against a fighter who had 12 fights but lost to the best JR MW's Benitez and Hearns. He won his MW by a SD that many had the other way. SRL won at 154,160,168, 175 all in his FIRST try. Yet to rate Duran top 10 you likely would need to rate him higher than Leonard. I simply disagree with that.

Monzon's early draws were draws. Unless you have those fights in film than dont assume hometown cooking. It would be like saying the early Duran fights in Panama were hometown cooking. Also do you have the height and reach of all 90 plus Monzon opponents? I already name three that had the same dimensions or were bigger than him. I mentioned 2 opponents who had same height and reach and one guy who was MUCH bigger than Monzon. In addition, Mundine who Monzon KOD did become national champ at LHW, Cruiser, and HW divisions he wasen't blown up MW. Monzon was weight drained for years to make MW. Its speculation to say could he have beaten a Conteh, Tiger, or Foster. But i will say its likely that he would have won against one or two of those opponents. He definitely would have won at SMW if it existed at the time. It's also possible that Monzon would have done well at LHW since he was getting older and his body would have been more naturally at LHW.

Man, I hate it when that happens. I have done that lots of times and just couldn't be bothered redoing it.

Firstly, I still think you're missing the point. If reach, height and divisions didn't matter we wouldn't have them. Two guys with similar skill fight; the guy who is bigger will win. Great big guy will always beat great little guy. Leonard started at 147 and won the 154, 160 and 168, not 175 title (he won it, but it wasn't at 175). Duran started at 118 and still later won the same titles as Leonard apart from the 168 title. How do you not see that as relevant?

While I agree the division thing is overrated, it is still important. Duran had as impressive a run at LW as Monzon did at MW, but he then went even further by winning title in higher divisions, one against a guy who like you just said went on to win his own titles in 147, 154, 160, 168 (and 175 at 168). Duran moving up to beat him in his at his best weight is a greater feat than anything Monzon produced.

I see their title runs as about even. Duran then did a hell of a lot more after that. He beat a top ten P4P ATG that was bigger, younger and at his best weight. Duran's LW and that win alone put him above Monzon for me.

I will try to put this as succinctly as possible. I would have Duran and Monzon about equal if Duran had retired after his LW run. I would have Monzon slightly ahead. But, he moved up another two divisions and beat one of the greatest fighters of all time. It's a greater win by itself than anything Monzon had and it came against a guy that was bigger, younger, faster, supposedly more skilled and at his best weight.

I take into account the length of run and against what type of opposition, how many divisions you win titles in and how long you are champion for. Monzon had good opposition and a great title reign. Duran had both of these and more. He moved up ten divisions all up, beat ATG's at much higher weights than his natural weight and won more titles against guys that were way bigger and younger.

Maybe you don't see beating someone twice your size as anything to talk about but I certainly do. Duran beat the equivalent of your 6'5" guy in Buchanan. He was much bigger and taller than Duran, but it was still in his own division. See, him beating Buchanan doesn't get talked about as a great because of how much bigger Ken was does it?

Size does matter a great deal. Would Cotto have lost to Marg if they were the same size? I doubt it.

You are still looking at losses Duran had against guys that were so much bigger. How do you not say Hearns' height and reach advantage didn't matter? Duran had a foot less arm reach. That **** matters. Yes, smaller guys beat bigger guys but Duran did it against Leonard. He did it against Barkley, Moore. They weren't just bigger, they were much bigger and they weren't in his division. They were many, many divisions above where he started.

Moore had knocked Bentiez down and knocked him down badly and on the way down he twisted his ankle. He was ****ed. He was beaten. That was a legitimate win for Moore as he had Benitez beaten. Benitez didn't break his ankle while winning. He was getting smashed and was going to be knocked out. His ankle didn't change that. The stoppage itself was off, but Moore was pounding on him and had brutally knocked him down to the point that Benitez had no clue.

Why wouldn't you rate Duran higher than Leonard? Duran beat him and he started ten years earlier, at about seven division below where Leonard started and he still beat him. He won the same amount of titles as Leonard unless you count winning the 175 title he won at 168 another title. He fought longer, in twice as many divisions, won as many titles, beat him and his titles were across a much greater range of divisions.

Now, before you say "But Leonard beat Hearns and Hearns knocked Duran out!", like I said, divisions, age, height and reach really do matter a great deal. Hearns fought Duran in his best possible. Hearns would have beaten Leonard at 154. They fought at Leonard's best weight though and he came from behind in a stunning win. So, Hearns couldn't beat him yet Duran could even though Duran had come up from 118 since 1968, where as Hearns started in the same division as Leonard in the same year ten years after that.

You compare Duran to Hearns, Benitez, Leonard and Hagler yet he wasn't even in their era. He was in Monzon's era but at LW. He just kept on fighting and winning though against guys that were a generation younger and many divisions bigger. You can't compare them as equals because they weren't. Unless those guys started out at LW or fought Duran at LW and were the same age, they don't bare full comparison as equals.

Hey man, I do knock Pac for his early losses. That **** matters just as Duran's losses do matter but they are lessened y the fact that he was in the eighth division, was fat and old and fighting ATG's at their best weights and peak years.

Anyway, what does De Jesus knocking Duran down have to do with anything? I'm lost on that one. He won two out of three fights and knocked him out twice. Monzon got knocked down too. If he won though it doesn't matter. Yes, I have seen two of the fights in question that he had draws in and he lost both. Especially the Briscoe one.

Yes, Monzon was never knocked out but he never fought anyone in a much higher division that towered over him and was one of the hardest P4P punchers in boxing history. He got knocked down twice in his LW career.

Mundine was ok. He was the same height as Monzon though and the CW and HW division in Aus was terrible. He was good though and I rate that win highly for him. I don't see it as any better than Thompson's loss to Duran though and I think Thompson was better all around.

I just think Duran had a much greater career all up.

[BennyST]

Except the last thing Mayweather would ever do is to try and engage into any sort of slugfest.

Mayweather never really used that much strength against any opponent. He was always safety first and was all about defense. I don't know about you, but I don't think strength is required in order to avoid punches.

His reach advantage (5-6 inches) would help him greatly, against Duran. He has an amazing connect percentage and I'm sure his punches would find home.

Have you seen Mayweather fight at 135? More often than not he was in a toe to toe battle and had many slug-fests at those lighter weights. Even against Castillo, he hardly boxed the way Leonard did against him.

Leonard against a closer version of the LW Duran was hardly able to tag him with many flush shots and he was faster than Mayweather. Marcel, who was very fast too and fought with a very similar style to Mayweather, also had great landing anything major on Duran as did nearly all of his LW opponents. Mayweather would have as much trouble hitting Duran as Duran would have hitting him. Mayweather would have it better on the outside and Duran would have it better on the inside.

The thing is, MAyweather has never once been adverse to fighting on the inside, and if anything, preferred to fight there at the lighter weights.

All about defense and safety first? Again, you are talking about the WW MAyweather. He was not at all that type of fighter at the lighter weights.

You know what's interesting? Mayweather fights very similar to how Leonard did in his career up to and including Duran I. He stands up close, counter punches and uses short lateral movement and combinations to fight.

Do you call this safety first defensive fighting?







None of these fights are safety first, defensive fights. He uses defense very well but they're not safety first without risk.

Now, one major thing is that he never had any trouble finding any of these guys. They all had severe defensive liabilities. Mayweather was able to slip, duck, whatever and then counter punch and hit them pretty easily. They all walked straight into him. When the one guy that didn't, but was still a pressure fighter in Castiilo, it gave him obvious trouble.

The biggest similarity between Castillo and Duran is that they are both pressure fighters that wait on their opponent as much as lead. Castiilo waited for Mayweather to lead then countered him and got inside and then he ****** away to the body and head. It gave him a lot of trouble. But, Castiilo is easy to hit unlike Duran.

One thing Mayweather can be hit by well is the left hook and straight right. He is also open to the right uppercut to the body which Duran threw as well as anyone. Duran had one of the greatest counter rights off a number of punches, especially off the jab, 1,2 and straight right of the opponent, and an incredibly sneaky 1,2 (watch how many he lands against Palomino and Leonard) and of course his left hook to head and body is rarely equaled.



Watch how slick he is on the inside. Mayweather would have more trouble hitting him than he has ever had hitting anyone else in his whole career and he would also have his missed shots countered as much as he would be countering too.

[BennyST]

Oh, HaglerSteelChin, one thing I forgot to comment on was you saying Benitez was past it. Yes, he started early but when he fought Duran he was in his prime definitely. In fact he was in the middle of the best title run in his career and had just come off some of the greatest performances he ever had.

He was twenty four, at a good weight for him, had lost only once in about forty fights and just before his fight with Duran had looked incredible against Hope, Ranzany and the undefeated Santos and afterward he went on to have a great shot against Hearns whom he lost a close decision to. After that loss he started to go downhill which was due to lack of training and moving up to face some big MW's (which just shows how much height, reach and size do matter). But, his performances against Duran and before were among the best of his career without doubt and were nothing close to being past his best. He was at his peak in those fights.

It was Duran that was well past his best by that stage. Benitez was only in his third weight class, compared to Duran's eighth, he was only in his ninth year of fighting compared to Duran's fifteenth, he was only twenty four compared to thirty two and he was in his greatest reign as champion.

Duran was too fat, old and slow and it was commented upon numerous times in the fight by Clancy and Dundee that he looked a shell of his former self and the weight was obviously too much for him and effecting his fighting badly as he looked sluggish, slow and uninterested.

Benitez was fighting as good as he ever had and was not at all past his best.

Anyway, what I still find interesting is that you are saying Duran can't be better than Monzon based on his loss to Benitez (one of the main reasons you gave anyway) and yet Monzon never fought anyone as good as Benitez was at that stage and certainly didn't do it four divisions above his best weight and eight above the weight he started at. However, Monzon also never fought anyone as good as Leonard whereas Duran did and he did it again, well above his best weight and he beat him.

This is all after his equally impressive reign at LW compared to Monzon's. I can see Monzon being rated above Duran when looking only at their respective runs at their best weight which are very equal, but for Monzon it stopped there whereas for Duran he went on to do what very few have ever been able to get even close to doing. Beating top ten ATG's above his best weight when no one else could do it well above where Leonard himself started, winning three more division titles and fighting some of the greatest ever fighters and in most instances holding more than his own.

I can see it based on their best runs but on their overall careers, I just can't see how you could rate Monzon above Duran in a P4P sense at all. Duran, like Robinson, Leonard, Armstrong etc. epitomised the meaning of P4P by not only dominating a single division for a decade but by then moving up many divisions past his natural fighting weight and size and beating some of the greatest fighters that ever fought even though they were much bigger. It is the reason the term P4P came about.

Maybe Monzon would never have lost again even if he moved up to HW. I don't know. He was incredible. But, he didn't and only dominated the one division much as Duran dominated his, but he never went further.

Their respective runs at their best weights are so similar that they are very difficult to tell apart based on that alone. You could put either guy in front due to just their title run but with all the extra done by Duran I really struggle to see how Monzon could be seen to be above him in a P4P sense.

[wmute]

Have you seen Mayweather fight at 135? More often than not he was in a toe to toe battle and had many slug-fests at those lighter weights. Even against Castillo, he hardly boxed the way Leonard did against him.

Leonard against a closer version of the LW Duran was hardly able to tag him with many flush shots and he was faster than Mayweather. Marcel, who was very fast too and fought with a very similar style to Mayweather, also had great landing anything major on Duran as did nearly all of his LW opponents. Mayweather would have as much trouble hitting Duran as Duran would have hitting him. Mayweather would have it better on the outside and Duran would have it better on the inside.

The thing is, MAyweather has never once been adverse to fighting on the inside, and if anything, preferred to fight there at the lighter weights.

All about defense and safety first? Again, you are talking about the WW MAyweather. He was not at all that type of fighter at the lighter weights.

You know what's interesting? Mayweather fights very similar to how Leonard did in his career up to and including Duran I. He stands up close, counter punches and uses short lateral movement and combinations to fight.

Do you call this safety first defensive fighting?







None of these fights are safety first, defensive fights. He uses defense very well but they're not safety first without risk.

Now, one major thing is that he never had any trouble finding any of these guys. They all had severe defensive liabilities. Mayweather was able to slip, duck, whatever and then counter punch and hit them pretty easily. They all walked straight into him. When the one guy that didn't, but was still a pressure fighter in Castiilo, it gave him obvious trouble.

The biggest similarity between Castillo and Duran is that they are both pressure fighters that wait on their opponent as much as lead. Castiilo waited for Mayweather to lead then countered him and got inside and then he ****** away to the body and head. It gave him a lot of trouble. But, Castiilo is easy to hit unlike Duran.

One thing Mayweather can be hit by well is the left hook and straight right. He is also open to the right uppercut to the body which Duran threw as well as anyone. Duran had one of the greatest counter rights off a number of punches, especially off the jab, 1,2 and straight right of the opponent, and an incredibly sneaky 1,2 (watch how many he lands against Palomino and Leonard) and of course his left hook to head and body is rarely equaled.



Watch how slick he is on the inside. Mayweather would have more trouble hitting him than he has ever had hitting anyone else in his whole career and he would also have his missed shots countered as much as he would be countering too.

What? Straight right?!?!?

That's the punch I would just tell my fighter to basically leave at home. Well not exactly, he would need to be throwing it and keep it ready, but it would never do any damage, and if anything leave him open. There are two good things about the shoulder roll D, it protects your body, and it leaves you in a perfect position to counter the right hand, because of your position and because it leaves the other guy off balance more than a parry or block would, if the guy commits to the punch. I am going to read the rest later more carefully later Benny, but the part about the straight right is a bit shocking. I remember very few straight rights landing well on Mayweather. A couple of beautifully arched shots from Castillo which caught Mayweather ducking away (not rolling!!!) and the occasional half assed shot by a few others. Also left hooks rarely got in. The punches I have seen Mayweather hit most with were right hooks from lefties. hardly surprising, because that's when you would want your left hand close to your face. Later.

[TheGreatA]

Jeffries' humble attitude doesn't count for everything. A case can be made that Jeffries would've beaten Johnson, in his prime. The same can be said the other way around. Of course we'll never know for sure if Johnson could've beaten Jeffries in his prime, but you'll just have to give Johnson the credit for the win.

The same case can be made regarding Ortiz' victory over Brown. You can certainly make a debate that Ortiz would've beaten Brown had he been "10 years younger".

The point is, part of my rankings are based off of the champions/titlists they beat, the HOFers they beat, and their performances against those kinds of top fighters. With all that said and done, I give the edge to Ortiz ranking ahead of Duran, regarding lightweights. I do rank Duran higher on a P4P level, though. But I think Ortiz deserves to be recognized as the greater lightweight.

I just don't agree that the opposition should be rated entirely based on their past achievements, I rate them based on how competent they were at the time. Joe Brown and Sugar Ramos, not to mention Jim Jeffries, weren't truly "great" opposition at that point. Rocky Marciano has wins over all-time greats Ezzard Charles, Archie Moore, Joe Louis, Jersey Joe Walcott, but how high does he rate?

All in all Ortiz's best opponent at lightweight was Ismael Laguna, and Buchanan was better than Laguna. The next would probably be 36 year old Joe Brown but I seriously doubt that version of Brown would have beaten a prime Esteban DeJesus. He was struggling to beat Dave Charnley, Ray Portillla, Giordano Campari, Luis Molina at that point.

And besides, there are other things you should take into account than the quality of opposition, and the true quality is a bit questionable in this case. Duran had around 50-60 fights at lightweight losing only one, which he avenged. He reigned as the champion for 7 years, taking on the best contenders in the division. He beat every man he ever faced at that weight.

Ali vs Frazier I isn't actually a good example. Ali had a lot of ring rust. He didn't have the legs that he used have, in order to dance around the ring. Add the poor stamina to that and there you go. He was forced to brawl with Frazier.

Leonard had the opportunity to either move and dance or go toe to toe with Duran. He chose the latter. He do think that he had the stamina to change his approach if he wanted to but he didn't. He wanted to show his bravery.

Ali did have the ability to move even if he was rusty, see Ali-Quarry I but from the very beginning he stood flat-footed against Frazier because he felt that was the way to beat him. He wanted to gain Frazier's respect with his punching power which he was unable to do. However Leonard had fought this way for almost all of his professional career, standing more flat-footed and setting his feet to punch. It wasn't like he suddenly turned from a dancer to a puncher against Duran. That was the way he fought Benitez, Andy Price, Ranzany, Mayweather Sr. and it's what had won him all of his professional fights until then. Dundee said that they couldn't afford to back up against Duran.

If Duran wanted to brawl, it was his fight. If Leonard wanted to box, it was his fight. The thing is, Leonard was the one who was able to control whether it was a brawl or a boxing match.

He wasn't able to control it in the first fight. Leonard never wanted to brawl with his back against the ropes while taking a beating. He wanted to keep the fight in the middle of the ring.

Both Whitaker and Mayweather had a reach advantange over Duran and I'm sure they would've been able to use it wisely. Plus, I see them punching and moving and then holding if Duran got too close and attempted to make it a brawl.

In Whitaker's case he has a couple of inches at most. Mayweather has a more significant advantage but not like Ray Leonard. Clinching Duran is easier said than done because he was amazingly strong for a lightweight and would push you against the ropes, much like Hatton did to Mayweather, but he didn't smother his own offense.

None of the fighters you named were as good on the ropes as Mayweather. He slipped punches better than any of them and I'm sure he wouldn't even try that to a great extent against Duran. I can see him trying to tie Duran up a lot, to prevent any danger. Much like he did against Hatton. Hatton was the stronger fighter and pressured more than Duran.


Of course, Hatton's boxing or brawling skills are nowhere near Duran's, but the case can be made that Mayweather could deal with Duran's pressure.

Here's the difference between Hatton and Duran though.


2:00


5:50

Except the last thing Mayweather would ever do is to try and engage into any sort of slugfest.

No but he could be drawn into one. Mayweather wasn't all that cautious at 130-135. I'm not saying he was reckless, he was and is safety first but you didn't see him potshotting and doing what he did against Baldomir in the late rounds when he fought Castillo, Corrales, Genaro Hernandez.

Mayweather never really used that much strength against any opponent. He was always safety first and was all about defense. I don't know about you, but I don't think strength is required in order to avoid punches.

No but it's required to be able to hold off the opponent in the clinches. Surely what Castillo troubled Mayweather with wasn't his superior boxing skill or speed but his strength and aggressiveness. He also wasn't a "dumb" aggressor, just walking in with little regard for defense and smothering his own offense like Ricky Hatton did.

His reach advantage (5-6 inches) would help him greatly, against Duran. He has an amazing connect percentage and I'm sure his punches would find home.

Duran would be one of the better defensive fighters Mayweather has ever fought though, despite being a constant aggressor.

I doubt that a 135 pound Duran was stronger than a 148 pound Castillo. Also, don't forget that Castillo had a bigger reach and height advantage, compared to Duran.

Castillo has an inch in height and 2 inches in reach, not significant advantages by any means. Do you see Castillo ever bulling Ray Leonard around like Duran did? Was he even competitive at 140 the way Duran was at 154-160? Duran was extremely strong, all of his opponents noted this.

I'm not comparing them. I'm just saying that I do take away some credit from those victories, as I would from Duran's victory over Moore.

I think you're being a bit unfair with this because Duran using some questionable tactics is in no way comparable to loading your gloves like Margarito supposedly did, or arguably being KO'd in the first like Benn and having a biased referee officiating the bout. You'd have to take away credit for a lot of fighters if you take away credit from Duran.

I wouldn't say Pacquiao was stronger than Cotto. I would say he had more power. In the first few rounds, they were feeling each other out. Pacquiao then knocked down Cotto and from then on, the fight was his. Pacquiao's power was simply too much. Not his strength.

Basically he was able to overpower Cotto. He could take his best punch, he was able to match his strength and he was able to hurt Cotto with every punch he landed.

It's all been said before but I don't buy into how it looks on paper.

I'm still awaiting the response of where you rank him. Either the exact number or the range.

I said I don't have a list. I say he is among the 20 best fighters I've ever seen. Where exactly I'd rate him isn't clear to me.

I don't rank Hagler or Monzon as a top 10 all-time great.

Some do and since Duran should rate above the two, who are possibly top 30 or even top 20 all-time greats, then there's a very good case Duran makes top 20, top 15 or even top 10. Especially since a lot of people don't rate early 1900's fighters.

In your opinion.

I'd say the great majority rate him top 3 at lightweight. In that case it's not really an opinion, it's consensus.

He lost in return to that fighter and lost against the ATG middleweight. I know it's a brave thing to do but bravery isn't a major factor in ranking a fighter.

He was supposed to lose. I'd like to know the examples of all-time great lightweights who went onto beat all-time great welterweights and middleweights.

Joe Gans managed a draw with 140 lb Barbados Joe Walcott.

Benny Leonard was losing and fouled himself out against welterweight Jack Britton.

Ike Williams had little success above 135 pounds. Ortiz never tried.

So you can maybe point out to Henry Armstrong, Pernell Whitaker and Floyd Mayweather. None of those men were exactly facing a prime Ray Leonard during their welterweight campaign and neither did they ever even think about stepping up to face a prime Hagler at 160.

[Southpaw16BF]

Benny Leonard was losing and fouled himself out against welterweight Jack Britton.

I have read reports that Leoanard was actually winning this fight against Britton. And then fouled him after the bell, and Britton cound't continue. Thus making him the winner.

[StarshipTrooper]

I have read reports that Leoanard was actually winning this fight against Britton. And then fouled him after the bell, and Britton cound't continue. Thus making him the winner.

That's a mean looking avi of Shavers you got there

Poet

[Southpaw16BF]

That's a mean looking avi of Shavers you got there

Poet

Thanks. You a big fan of Shavers, Poet? How do you think he matches up with todays Heavyweights?