Duran is not a top ten ATG

[wpink1]

Don't bother replying to what I write wPink, I can't see it. I already know exactly what you are going to write anyway so I don't need to see it after every post I put down.

Getting a little sensitive cuz some people dont fall for the fake hoopla surrounding Duran. You and othera always respond with real weak posts based off of emotion & no facts. Just weak garbage about duran dominated the lightweight division, moved up beat SRL, snd how there are valid excuses for all his loses but none for other fighters.

[Brandish]

Exactly, it was an embarrassing, terrible loss which basically ruined his career up to a point, and will forever haunt him, and bring him down in the eyes of many fans. Unlike so many fighters, nearly every single fighter ever to be honest, he was one of the few that was able to come back from such a brutally humiliating loss and compete at the top level for the next two decades and win titles in every division he ever entered.

it' easy to win titles just ask davey moore and iran barkley. the truly great ones can dominate more than one division..duran couldn't hance he is not top ten atg..

oh and to correct you duran did not compete at the top level for for 2 decades. after losing to leonard, herans, hagler, and benitez duran never competed at the top level again. unless you call barkely and vinnie pazienza top level

It is still the loss that people harp on about and it hurts him greatly, because if he had never given a rematch to Leonard and just had Leonard W15 oon his record he would very nearly be the greatest ever behind Ali, Robinson etc. That loss hurts him, but, unlike many of the guys you point out, after a loss more than half way into his career and after moving up in weight he was able to do what very few ever do and that is regain championship form and become champ again numerous times.

once again your exaggerating after 135 duran held a belt at 147, 154 and 160 only one time. he didn't beat multiple champions at any weight outside of 135. duran never regained championship form after his no mas to leonard, based on the simple fact that he lost to
1.hagler
2. herans
3. benitez

this all happened by 1984. so after the ko loss to hearns duran was done in terms of fighting at the championship level. his next title shot would come against iran barkley 5 years later. from the age of 32-37 duran did not win a title. and after the age of 37 he never won a significant fight again.

so please stop the lies and bull**** when it comes to duran. he is an atg but no way does he rate top ten. he didn't do enough outside of 135 to be ranked that high.

Of course he wasn't able to compete with the greatest he fought at those higher weights, because they were not just your usual champs of the day, they were an era of the greatest fighters that have ever lived.

so you acknowledge he couldn't compete with them but you want to rank duran above them all.. that's my problem.. admit your guy was not on their level and take his proper place in history. don't try and make him out to be greater then leonard, hagler, or hearns because he wasn't

You keep saying that the guys you have above Duran did better. When they moved up in weight did they ever face someone of truly brilliant stature? No, none of them did. Jones fought Toney and Hopkins at his own natural weight. Mayweather never faced a truly great fighter at all, ever. Duran did and won, apart from when he got so far above his natural weight that facing the greatest ever fighters at those higher weights he could only do well against them and not win. No one has ever been able to keep going up and face the best fighters in higher divisions that have possibly ever fought there and win. He did it more than just about any other fighter.

genaro hernaned top 5 130 greatest all time
diego corrales top 5 130 greatest of all time
jose luis castillo top 30 greatest 135 all time


you sound like a ****** saying castillo, corrales, and hernandez, were not great fighters. they dominated their prome weioght class just like duran did.

and to answer your question sweet pea, floyd, toney, and roy jones jr moved up successfully in weight and captured multiple titles against the best in each weight class.

You also said previously that what if Jones Jr had retired after beating Ruiz? Well guess what? He didn't and he got knocked out in back to back fights. What if Duran had retired after beating Leonard? He would probably be considered the greatest ever fighter that lived. Better than Robinson maybe. He didn't though, he went on and lost just as the guys you crap on about as being in the top five A.T. did. They all did the same thing, although the majority of them never again fought at the top level and kept winning titles, Duran did many times.

duran couldn't carry ray robinson's jock strap. only an idiot would try and place duran in that category even after the no mas debacle and his weak resume above 135.

[wpink1]

Exactly, it was an embarrassing, terrible loss which basically ruined his career up to a point, and will forever haunt him, and bring him down in the eyes of many fans. Unlike so many fighters, nearly every single fighter ever to be honest, he was one of the few that was able to come back from such a brutally humiliating loss and compete at the top level for the next two decades and win titles in every division he ever entered.

It is still the loss that people harp on about and it hurts him greatly, because if he had never given a rematch to Leonard and just had Leonard W15 oon his record he would very nearly be the greatest ever behind Ali, Robinson etc. That loss hurts him, but, unlike many of the guys you point out, after a loss more than half way into his career and after moving up in weight he was able to do what very few ever do and that is regain championship form and become champ again numerous times. Of course he wasn't able to compete with the greatest he fought at those higher weights, because they were not just your usual champs of the day, they were an era of the greatest fighters that have ever lived.

You keep saying that the guys you have above Duran did better. When they moved up in weight did they ever face someone of truly brilliant stature? No, none of them did. Jones fought Toney and Hopkins at his own natural weight. Mayweather never faced a truly great fighter at all, ever. Duran did and won, apart from when he got so far above his natural weight that facing the greatest ever fighters at those higher weights he could only do well against them and not win. No one has ever been able to keep going up and face the best fighters in higher divisions that have possibly ever fought there and win. He did it more than just about any other fighter.

You also said previously that what if Jones Jr had retired after beating Ruiz? Well guess what? He didn't and he got knocked out in back to back fights. What if Duran had retired after beating Leonard? He would probably be considered the greatest ever fighter that lived. Better than Robinson maybe. He didn't though, he went on and lost just as the guys you crap on about as being in the top five A.T. did. They all did the same thing, although the majority of them never again fought at the top level and kept winning titles, Duran did many times.

You need to learn your facts...roy fought toney at the super middleweight division. He moved up to do so, and beat toney at that weight. Hmmmm.

Now for Duran being ranked ahead of SRR, that is the dumbest stuff I have ever heard of ever. He before ray had beaten 0 great fighters, and Leoanrd was not considered a great at the time. He was still considered "media hype" and the Duran fights are being credited as elevating him in the eyes of many. If Duran had retired after beating Ray, he may have went down in many eyes at top 5, but not better than SRR.

You said that Duran fought at top level and kept winning titles, but you leave out that he had to go to 2nd rate champions to win them. Lets see hagler was the champion of the middleweights and he lost in that effort. He also got ko'd in his effort vs hearns at 154, and lost to Benetiz at 154. Thus your great hero beat a fighter who had a whopping record of 12-0. This should not surprise us, because over 30 of his challengers at lightweight had either losing records or less than 20 fights.

You also say that the leoanrd loss hurts him, how about the ko loss to hearns, the loss to benetiz, the loss to Hagler. All of these loses occured BEFORE he turned 34. Some say well he aged differently,,,,another excuse. Doesnt this actually go into considering ones greatness.

If Roy had counted his sparring sessions as actual fights (like Duran must have, by having bums with records such as 12-11, etc) then roy would have had 30 more wins on his record too.

This is getting old. You all will continue to hype up Duran and have nothing to factually document that he did better than anyone else to justify his being ranked about Jones, leonard etc. You all can not convincingly address the issue that over 80% of the time when he faced the elite fighters of his day, he lost. If your gonna count loses that Roy had at light heavy at ag 36, then shouldnt you count Durans loses before age 34..Hmmm If so, how can a fighter that went 1-5 vs the elite fighters be considered a top 5 fighter.
WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[JJumpUp]

Huh?

At one point in his career Duran was 70-1, when he was fighting people his own size. They were the best lightweights out there.

One reason he is ranked so high (top 5-10 AT) is his natural ferocity. He spent the illustrious part of his career fighting opponents who were all bigger than him. Like Mickey Walker, he fought bigger men exclusively after the midway point in his career. He lost narrowly to Hagler and beat prime Leonard. Benitiz, one of the master boxers ever, outboxed him. The only legitimate KO on his record is against the giant Hearns.

In those days it was Duran you most wanted to see. He always was more pleasing for the fan than any of the other Fab 5. Even Hearns was not as exciting as Duran. Being smaller, he was reaching further than any of the others. Face it, he made more sincere efforts to be great than any of the others did. Some people are foolish enough to think that does not count!

Even with no mas he was the greatest fighting spirit of his age. As long as there are people around who saw these things when they happened, Duran will be ranked highly AT. At some time in the future he may fall down some slots. Dempsey often does not make top 10 ATG heavyweight lists these days. Everyone that saw him do his thing in real time died. The same may happen to Duran.

[Brandish]

Huh?

At one point in his career Duran was 70-1, when he was fighting people his own size. They were the best lightweights out there.

One reason he is ranked so high (top 5-10 AT) is his natural ferocity. He spent the illustrious part of his career fighting opponents who were all bigger than him. Like Mickey Walker, he fought bigger men exclusively after the midway point in his career. He lost narrowly to Hagler and beat prime Leonard. Benitiz, one of the master boxers ever, outboxed him. The only legitimate KO on his record is against the giant Hearns.

what did duran accomplish with this natural ferocity why did he go 1-5 against the best of his era with this "natural ferocity"..you guys are so lame it's not funny anymore..it's true what they say ignorance is bliss

using the weight excuse might work but duran had been fighting above 135 since 1978

In those days it was Duran you most wanted to see. He always was more pleasing for the fan than any of the other Fab 5. Even Hearns was not as exciting as Duran. Being smaller, he was reaching further than any of the others. Face it, he made more sincere efforts to be great than any of the others did. Some people are foolish enough to think that does not count!

so you rank him top 5 based on his popularity not his accomplsihments well at least you are honest

Even with no mas he was the greatest fighting spirit of his age. As long as there are people around who saw these things when they happened, Duran will be ranked highly AT. At some time in the future he may fall down some slots. Dempsey often does not make top 10 ATG heavyweight lists these days. Everyone that saw him do his thing in real time died. The same may happen to Duran.

I saw duran fight and he is not top 10 you can make a case ofr top 20 or even top 30..but stop drinking kool aid when you say he is the greatest fighting spirit of his age, when he quit in the biggest fight of his career.

[BennyST]

so you acknowledge he couldn't compete with them but you want to rank duran above them all.. that's my problem.. admit your guy was not on their level and take his proper place in history. don't try and make him out to be greater then leonard, hagler, or hearns because he wasn't



genaro hernaned top 5 130 greatest all time
diego corrales top 5 130 greatest of all time
jose luis castillo top 30 greatest 135 all time


you sound like a ****** saying castillo, corrales, and hernandez, were not great fighters. they dominated their prome weioght class just like duran did.

and to answer your question sweet pea, floyd, toney, and roy jones jr moved up successfully in weight and captured multiple titles against the best in each weight class.

So, is Calzaghe better than Jones Jr? By your own admission he is according to the way you rank. If one beats another he is better? So, you have Jones Jr around top five all time? That means Calzaghe, Tarver, Johnson etc are all higher than him? Interesting. You putting a white fighter above Jones Jr? I never thought I'd see that. The really hilarious thing is that Calzaghe moved up in weight to Jones Jr's best division and still beat the living ****e out of him! Poor old bugger. Damn man, you have Calzaghe behind only Armstrong and Robinson? Even the most hardcore limey **** wouldn't have him there.

How did Sweet Pea move succesfully up where Duran didn't? He got beat by Oscar and thoroughly beaten by Trinidad and some other hack. Then retired.

Mate, if you say Corrales, Castillo and Hernandez are ATG's but no one Duran fought from 118 up to the Leonard fight are then you are seriously off on your understanding of fighters older than ten ago.

So, you have Toney also as an ATG, but he has terrible losses just like Duran. He was dominated when he fought his comparison in Jones Jr whereas Duran beat Leonard. He then got beaten by some journeyman, and has a bunch of other losses that rate from good to terrible. Yet you manage to put him up around ten?

You have Hopkins around the same and yet he lost his first pro fight, got beaten twice by Taylor in his own division, and couldn't even get by someone you probably don't rate at all (but who you unknowingly rate above Hopkins and Jones, which means you rank him above nearly all your favourite fighters), in Calzaghe.

So, Brandish, tell me about Pryor mate? It's good fun talking with you. Go back and read that stuff about Pryor and tell me why you have him ranked so high. Can't wait mate.

[BennyST]

Hey Brandish, explain why you have Corrales as a top five 130 ATG? In detail mate. Let's hear how you go about this ranking business of yours.

[BennyST]

once again your exaggerating after 135 duran held a belt at 147, 154 and 160 only one time. he didn't beat multiple champions at any weight outside of 135. duran never regained championship form after his no mas to leonard, based on the simple fact that he lost to
1.hagler
2. herans
3. benitez

So, what does this mean exactly? I don't understand what you're trying to say. You just said that after 'No Mas' he won belts in each of the divisions you just listed, but he still didn't regain championship form? Bit of a contradiction there Brandish. Winning a championship means that you have to be at championship form does it not? Winning a belt, especially back then, meant that you were the champion and a champion has to be of championship form right? Do you agree with that? I know you've got pretty weird logic, but that seems rather evident to me.

Hey man, I also just noticed that you said anyone could win a belt because Moore and Barkley did. You do know that Barkley knocked Hearns out right and then beat him on points in a rematch? You do know that right?
So, once again on the way you rank fighters that would mean you have Barkley above Hearns since he beat him twice, once by KO. You get more tangled the further you go mate. Now Barkley is an ATG above Hearns.

[wpink1]

Man please read the post..then counter.

Lets see Roy...Duran. I have repeatedly said that fighters should be judged up until they are about 34, this goes for Duran, Jones, etc. In all our debates about Duran i never bring up loses to SRL in their 3rd fight, or Joppy, etc.. These are irrelevant. Duran was not Duran in these fights. However the same goes for others.

Durans best opposition at 135 where not better than Castillo, or Corrales. Buchanon, marcel, Kyobashi etc.. they where good fighters but not greats. Since you rant and rave about the polls that Duran is ranked top 5 in, tell us all, what poll has buchanon, marcel, or kyobashi, Moore, or Barkley in their top 100. You can't , they are n't. Duran beat one top fighter, who was peak in his career. 1, and this was barely, and only becasue Leonard elected to give away his great tools, fight durans fight.

You also think that you can give Duran kudos for his trilogy with Dejesus, when he lost the 1st fight, but hmmm what about his trilogy with Leonard. I will go as far as saying just the 2 fights then.

This is hillarious, to sit here and watch you all offer excuse after excuse about Duran, and never simply say we are biased towards duran so we will not look at facts or judge him the same way we judge everyone else.

[Brandish]

Man please read the post..then counter.

Lets see Roy...Duran. I have repeatedly said that fighters should be judged up until they are about 34, this goes for Duran, Jones, etc. In all our debates about Duran i never bring up loses to SRL in their 3rd fight, or Joppy, etc.. These are irrelevant. Duran was not Duran in these fights. However the same goes for others.

Durans best opposition at 135 where not better than Castillo, or Corrales. Buchanon, marcel, Kyobashi etc.. they where good fighters but not greats. Since you rant and rave about the polls that Duran is ranked top 5 in, tell us all, what poll has buchanon, marcel, or kyobashi, Moore, or Barkley in their top 100. You can't , they are n't. Duran beat one top fighter, who was peak in his career. 1, and this was barely, and only becasue Leonard elected to give away his great tools, fight durans fight.

You also think that you can give Duran kudos for his trilogy with Dejesus, when he lost the 1st fight, but hmmm what about his trilogy with Leonard. I will go as far as saying just the 2 fights then.

This is hillarious, to sit here and watch you all offer excuse after excuse about Duran, and never simply say we are biased towards duran so we will not look at facts or judge him the same way we judge everyone else.

great post as always..we at least had one guy admit he thought duran was more popular hence is top 5 rankingin his eyes.

guys like benny are in denial hence the remabling about jones and calzaghe, like that has anything to do with duran's career.

if they fess up and admit to being biased then that would be cool with me. but they are really bringing up some lame arguments..duran is top 5 because he is the greatest fighting spirit of his generation..what the F.u.c.k