Why do people like Roberto Duran

[WalkerSmithJnr]

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]

".......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]

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.

[The plunger man]

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

[The plunger man]

".......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 ?

[The plunger man]

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 ?

[The plunger man]

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]

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]

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]

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.