Duran is not a top ten ATG

[Brandish]

something i wrote in another thread explaining why duran is ranked so highly, and why hes ranked higher than tommy hearns:

(duran actually managed to beat leonard) while hearns' run up the weights was just as impressive as durans, durans longevity at championship level is a big up for him.....at 38 he won the middleweight title off barkely, who knocked hearns out

tommy beat leonard in the rematch duran quit in his rematch so just by beating leonard and quitting in the rematch doesn't warrant top ten atg ranking..unless you're extremely biased towards said fighter

i think duran is ranked higher because:

1. he managed to beat leonard
2. he made his run up the weights when he was past his true prime, and still did very well
3. he was still fighting for world titles at 47 years old4. he probably has a better resume than hearns, and he also beat the guy who KO'd hearns
5. he went the distance with hagler, who knocked tommy out
6. he was durable as hell, like was mentioned above, who is still fighting for major belts at 47??? i cant think of anyone at that age or around it besides big george and bhop...and the most incredible thing is duran wasnt like george who had a short career, and a long lay off, and he wasnt a defensive guy like b-hop who turned pro late and hadnt taken much punishment.....he was an aggressive fighter who turned pro at 16 and had been through the meat grinder...had been KO'd, gone up in weight, dramatic highs and lows...and yet he fought at championship level from the 70's until the 90's

1. he beat leonard and quit in the rematch that says alot about the first victory being a fluke and he never duplicated a victory over any atg in his era...no way can that be top ten atg ranking..you definitely can't rank him over guys that beat him and won just as many titles

2. duran was 3-7 in championship fights after 1980..the fact that he had over 100 fights and only 22 championship fights is kinda pathetic. and duran did win a title at 47 but was not even remotely competitive with leoanrd in the rematch. beating barkely in a title fight after being at 160 for 5 years proves he was not the best at any weight outside of 135. can you say the same about roy, floyd, and whitaker

you would have a point if duran actually accomplsihed the things you said, but since you are his stan you make up really low criteria to be a top ten ATG, criteria that

leonard
hagler
hearns
mayweather
jones
hopkins
whitaker

surpass on so many levels. just because duran fought till he was 50 and never won a title after the age of 38 doesn't make him the top ten atg. what you dsecribed were not accomplishments but excuses

thats crazy, and thats the main reason he is ranked so high

holyfield and bhop are fighting in their 40's many fighters have done it, so no duran doing it does not make him special. now if he had won the 160 title at 46 and defended it a couple of times then you could toot his horn, but getting koed by joppy at 46 does not warrant top ten TG ranking that is for special fighters who accomplsihed remarkable things.

although i agree hearns is ranked too low, he shouldnt be above duran, and duran deserves his spot

duran is a genuine ATG, and a top 10 one at that

tommy won more titles and he has the victory head to head, duran couldn't carry tommy's jock strap and he proved it when they fought. and you have presented no evidence to rank duran top ten atg only you're biased opinion.

[Danny Gunz]

Great fighterbut highly overrated. like oscar he lost to most of the ATG's he faced

went 1-5 agianst the fab five

1. leonard- was 1-2 qon a close split decision in the first fight quit in embarrassing fashion in the rematch

2. Hagler--lost a wide UD

3. Benitez--lost a wide UD

4. Hearns-- brutal ko

was 12-7 in championship fights, only amassed 12 title defenses out of 100 + fights.

at the time he was fighting he was not considered the best, so how can people now want to turn around and say he had a better career then ray and tommy when he didn't do much after beating leaonard the first time at the age of 29

i dont think this was a big secret

[pistol whip]

tommy beat leonard in the rematch duran quit in his rematch [/SIZE][/B].

See I read this and just stopped reading because this in a nutshell explains why your posts will be forever ******.

Tommy did not beat Leonard in the second fight it was a draw and that would actually make tommy 1-2-1 against Ray, Marvin, and Duran.

[Brandish]

See I read this and just stopped reading because this in a nutshell explains why your posts will be forever ******.

Tommy did not beat Leonard in the second fight it was a draw and that would actually make tommy 1-2-1 against Ray, Marvin, and Duran.

did you actually watch the fight

and duran was 1-5 agianst the same group but you want me suspend belief and anoint duran the best of this bunch

I never argued tommy was top 10 atg like you are arguing for duran even though he was medicore against the greatest fighters of his era..big difference jack-off

[pistol whip]

did you actually watch the fight

and duran was 1-5 agianst the same group but you want me suspend belief and anoint duran the best of this bunch

I never argued tommy was top 10 atg like you are arguing for duran even though he was medicore against the greatest fighters of his era..big difference jack-off

First I did watch the fight and yes Tommy in my eyes won but the official decision is what counts right? Not mine or yours jerk off!!! If we all thought the way you did than Floyd lost his first fight against Castillo. Are you ready to say Floyd has lost at least one fight in his career?


Second I all but agree with you about the second half of Duran's career except that he is considered the best lightweight of all time and that is more than enough to make him an all time great. Really what more of an argument do I have to make for you to get this. He is the best fighter that the lightweight division ever produced in over 100 years of boxing. What more do you want him to accomplish? Sure he did average at every other Division but nevermind he dominated his natural division and that means he is better than

Benny leonard
Henry Armstrong
Diego Corrales
Kid Chocolate
Joel Casamayor
Ken Buchanan

Just to name a few and all those are either Hall of famer or eventual hall of Famers.

[BennyST]

ernesto marcel is not in the HOF and anyone can get lucky it is what you do with your entire career that counts. so beating arguello doesn't certify marcel as a great fighter just another name on the slide when he fought duran

ken buchanan and what was his claim to fame again, oh that's right people duran beats automatically are great. ken is in the hof so I will give you that one.



so beating ray leonard 1 time makes him the 5th best fighter of all time

you mean 11-0 davey moore hardly the champ as you say he just held an alphabet belt

Marcel? You don't even know who Marcel is do you? He retired as the FW champion of the world after beating Arguello and having defended his title numerous times. His only bad loss was to a very young Duran. His only KO loss. Every one of his other losses, of which there are only about two, are highly disputed decisions. He was nominated for the HOF this year mate.

Did you really just ask what Buchanan's claim to fame is?

I can't even be bothered....See, that's the reason you don't get taken seriously, as anyone who asks such a question should be put down. I'll let the other guys who can bothered make you look like the fool you so obviously are.

Yes, he beat Leonard and since no one else could in one of the greatest periods of WW, JMW and MW era's ever, it is a really, really special win. Hagler couldn't, Hearns got TKO'd, Benitez got TKO'd and you can go through all of his other opponents, but Duran is the only guy to beat him convincingly while Leonard was in his absolute peak prime years.

Davey Moore was hardly a champ? He had beat a very good fighter in Ayub Kalule and had wins over Benitez, and got the belt off reigning champion Mihara.

It's rather obvious that nothing will persuade you to think any differently, probably because you actually don't even know who he fought, and what he did. I think I remember you said that no one even talked about him when he was fighting......You know that the majority of boxing experts had him ranked pound for pound number one over Ali at one time, Holmes etc etc.



So, in closing, you also said you had Duran ranked around number 30 AT right? Explain who you have ahead and why. Actually since that would take a long time for you, just list the five fighters you have from 25 up to Duran and why you have them ahead.

[pistol whip]

Marcel? You don't even know who Marcel is do you? He retired as the FW champion of the world after beating Arguello and having defended his title numerous times. His only bad loss was to a very young Duran. His only KO loss. Every one of his other losses, of which there are only about two, are highly disputed decisions. He was nominated for the HOF this year mate.

Did you really just ask what Buchanan's claim to fame is?

I can't even be bothered....See, that's the reason you don't get taken seriously, as anyone who asks such a question should be put down. I'll let the other guys who can bothered make you look like the fool you so obviously are.

Yes, he beat Leonard and since no one else could in one of the greatest periods of WW, JMW and MW era's ever, it is a really, really special win. Hagler couldn't, Hearns got TKO'd, Benitez got TKO'd and you can go through all of his other opponents, but Duran is the only guy to beat him convincingly while Leonard was in his absolute peak prime years.

Davey Moore was hardly a champ? He had beat a very good fighter in Ayub Kalule and had wins over Benitez, and got the belt off reigning champion Mihara.

It's rather obvious that nothing will persuade you to think any differently, probably because you actually don't even know who he fought, and what he did. I think I remember you said that no one even talked about him when he was fighting......You know that the majority of boxing experts had him ranked pound for pound number one over Ali at one time, Holmes etc etc.



So, in closing, you also said you had Duran ranked around number 30 AT right? Explain who you have ahead and why. Actually since that would take a long time for you, just list the five fighters you have from 25 up to Duran and why you have them ahead.

Good post!!! Way to use simple logic to expose a know nothing ******.

[Brandish]

First I did watch the fight and yes Tommy in my eyes won but the official decision is what counts right? Not mine or yours jerk off!!! If we all thought the way you did than Floyd lost his first fight against Castillo. Are you ready to say Floyd has lost at least one fight in his career?

tommy clearly got robbed, and in no way did castillo beat fllyd in the first fight unless you are a hater like yourself.

Second I all but agree with you about the second half of Duran's career except that he is considered the best lightweight of all time and that is more than enough to make him an all time great.

pernell whitaker is considered the best 135lber in many circles so once again you look like a fool. duran fought way worse comp at 135 then whitaker

Really what more of an argument do I have to make for you to get this. He is the best fighter that the lightweight division ever produced in over 100 years of boxing. What more do you want him to accomplish? Sure he did average at every other Division but nevermind he dominated his natural division and that means he is better than

pernell whitaker was by far more skilled and had faced bettrer comp then duran at 135, he doesn't get anoninted the best at 135 by beating ken buchanan and while you're talking about dominating their natural weight class didn't floyd dominate 130, yet you the biggest hypocritwe on this board are screaming for him to come back and face no-name welters who haven't done ****

Benny leonard
Henry Armstrong
Diego Corrales
Kid Chocolate
Joel Casamayor
Ken Buchanan

funny how you duran fanatics leave sweet pea out of your equation

Just to name a few and all those are either Hall of famer or eventual hall of Famers.

what does your post have to do with wanting to rank duran top ten ATG. he didn't do enough in his entire career to get that distinction

[BennyST]

Good post!!! Way to use simple logic to expose a know nothing ******.

Cheers mate, but I can't be bothered writing a proper post. Those two guys, Brandish and Wpink are just freaks. Wpick only comes on this board when a Duran thread comes up to do nothing but bag him out as much as he can, which is a bit sad, I pity the poor guy, and who has a creepy love affair with Leonard so it's pretty obvious where his hate comes from, whereas brandish is quite simply just a bit daft. Seriously, he never posts about anything other than Duran. I can picture him with a Duran poster on his wall that he urinates on every day, and screams at every night! "You ruined my life, you were not meant to beat Leonard! I hate you!". Ahhh dear, good ol' Wpink.

Instead of having Mayweather rated above Duran wouldn't you wait until he's actually completed his career? Great fighter, but he'll come back, after all he's only thirty and his best win is Oscar. At thirty, Duran had dominated lightweight for a decade, moved up to WW and beat one of the greatest ever WW's in history, being the only guy to do it, and then crapped himself in the rematch. Two losses, both of which fighters he had beaten himself anyway.

Just curious Brandish. Where do you rate Willie Pep, Harry Greb and Benny Leonard? You know who they are right?

[wpink1]

Duran is not what many make him out to be. Just look at the facts

Marcel? You don't even know who Marcel is do you? He retired as the FW champion of the world after beating Arguello and having defended his title numerous times. His only bad loss was to a very young Duran. His only KO loss. Every one of his other losses, of which there are only about two, are highly disputed decisions. He was nominated for the HOF this year mate.

Did you really just ask what Buchanan's claim to fame is?

I can't even be bothered....See, that's the reason you don't get taken seriously, as anyone who asks such a question should be put down. I'll let the other guys who can bothered make you look like the fool you so obviously are.

Yes, he beat Leonard and since no one else could in one of the greatest periods of WW, JMW and MW era's ever, it is a really, really special win. Hagler couldn't, Hearns got TKO'd, Benitez got TKO'd and you can go through all of his other opponents, but Duran is the only guy to beat him convincingly while Leonard was in his absolute peak prime years.

Davey Moore was hardly a champ? He had beat a very good fighter in Ayub Kalule and had wins over Benitez, and got the belt off reigning champion Mihara.

It's rather obvious that nothing will persuade you to think any differently, probably because you actually don't even know who he fought, and what he did. I think I remember you said that no one even talked about him when he was fighting......You know that the majority of boxing experts had him ranked pound for pound number one over Ali at one time, Holmes etc etc.



So, in closing, you also said you had Duran ranked around number 30 AT right? Explain who you have ahead and why. Actually since that would take a long time for you, just list the five fighters you have from 25 up to Duran and why you have them ahead.

This post and others by duran fans..shows how they knwo nothing about boxing. Duran beat leonard soooooo convincingly that the judges scored it by a total of 4 points for duran BETWEEN ALL 3 CARDS... Also if the judges gave Leonard round 1 ( a round in which duran landed 0...I REPEAT 0 punches to the head,,,) then Leonard wins the fight. What fight did duran win so convincingly. It is another duran myth, that does not quit seem to add up to the facts.

Another fact check what weight did sugar ray robinson start at? I guess when considereing Robinson you just for get he was a lightweight too, and beat the 2 champions at the lightweight division, but they refused to put their title on the line. So Duran is greater thant SRR now too, and Henry Armstrong who was a lightweight too.

You guys know nothing about boxing.

Funny how none of you can recant the facts I put forward in my previous post about the biggest wins of Duran career at lightweight..So I will repost them. In this post also shows just how weak his resume was.

This is the list that one of the duran posters on here submitted to justify Duran beinig sooo dammm legendary..

Ernesto Marcel 24-2-1 WHEN DURAN FACED HIM
-Hiroshi Kobayashi 61-9 WHEN DURAN FACED HIM
-Ken Buchanan 43-1 VERY GOOD FIGHTER. BUT IS HE A ALL TIME GREAT?
-Esteban DeJesus 32-1 VERY GOOD FIGHTER. BUT IS HE A ALL TIME GREAT?
-Guts Ishimatsu 25-10-5 GIVE ME A FREAKING BREAK..WHAT A JOKE
-Hector Thompson 39-2-2
-Carlos Palomino 27-2-3
-Ray Leonard 27-0 BY FAR BEST WIN OF HIS CAREER.
-Pipino Cuevas 29-8
-Davey Moore 12-0......... 12 FIGHTS
-Iran Barkley 25-4
-Jorge Fernando Castro 101-5-2 WHO JUST BEAT DURAN SEV MOS EARLIER.


What a freakin joke....Compare that too this..

SRL list

Roberto Duran 72-1
Thomas Hearns 32-0
Ayub kalule 36-0
Wilfred Benitez 38-0-1
Marvin hagler. 62-2-2
Donnie lalond 31-2
Dave Green 33-2

You see a bunch of fightrs with a 0 in the loss column that Leoanrd beat. Do you see this with Duran? You also see hagler who had not lost in 10 years...Lalond a young light heavy with not 12 fights but 33 fights... You also see Duran himself, who could not deal with Ray when Ray chose to fight his own style.

Even his weaker opposition..such as Price who beat both palimino and Cuevas who your ranting and raving about that Duran beat...

How about Mayweather....

From his 18th fight....Genero hernandez 38-1-1
Angel manfredy 25-2-1
Carlos Gerena 34-2
Diego Corrales 33-0
Carlos hernandez 33-2-1
jesus Chavea 35-1
Jose castillo 45-4-1
phillip N'dou 31-1
Arturo Gatti 39-6
Zab judah 34-3
DLH 38-4
Ricky hatton 43-0

Duran resume simply DOES NOT MEASURE UP..

Now Brandish you need to be prepared for the classic Duran supporters responses

1. You cant look at his opponents records. OK then tell us what do you look at. Who did any of these so called great fighers with a bunch of losses beat that made them great...Hmmm Nobody!
2. You cant judge duran by what he did when he moved up... What a freakin joke. You dont judge duran by what he does when he moved up, but you judge everyone else by this, such as Mosley, Dlh, Pacquio, Leonard, Jones, Mayweather, Robinson, etc.
3. You cant judge duran based on the when he moved up because it was the 2nd part of his career. Hmmm oh really. Would it shock yiou that Duran moved up to welter when he was 28, and fought lenoard at age 29. Mayweather moved up to welter roughly the same age. Since when do we stop measurinig a fighter on his fights at age 29.
4. Duran dominated the entire decade at lightweight.. Once again who did he beat. Hopkins dominated the middleweights for a decade too, who did he beat when he was champion. So why does Duran get a pass....
5. You can look at Durans record in championship fights, because it is not a accurate assessment. Hmmm duran gets his ass whipped repeatedly when he fougth Leonard, hearns, Hagler, Benetiz, but it was all for not. It does not count to Duran fans, only if he wins. Sort of like how we look at the Ray leonard fight. The 1st fight Duran fans rant and rave about, and even faslsly try to say he dominated Leonard when in fact Leoanrd won more rounds on each scorecard after round 4 than Duran did. However duran fans say hey he was invincible at the first fight, but when he loses there is an excuse., didnt train, diarreah, cramps, not interested.....what other laughable excuses can they make...