Duran is not a top ten ATG

[wpink1]

So wpink thinks amateurs have it harder than pros.

only on NSB.

Never said that. How about reading the post..and using some common sense. The issue was that Duran had been professional since 16 and the wear and tear on his body from those 71 fights should be considered. I pointed out that training, sparring and the wear and tear on a person the head shots etc from a long amateur career can have its impacts on a person too.

If you dont know this then, you should not be allowed to post o any board.

I can name several Great great amateurs that simply where burned out, and punched out by the time they got deeper into their professional careers. Duran never had an amateur career, he used his first 20 or so fights to learn the trade. Look at how the quality of oppositin that those the fight in the amateurs are able to fight and progressivly get better and better, vs those like chavez and duran do not. Duran had many fighters on his resume that where quality wise nothing more than a sparring parnter or amateur, where as Ray after his 13 fight generally was stepping in with good professionals.

Do your own research...http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php...boxer&pageID=1

[CreamMRS]

[Brandish]

So tell me based on objective reasoning how can you rank duran ahead of Jones.......

wink kid mccoy doesn't understand the meaninging of objectivity. he wants us to live in his fantasy world where roberto duran is the greatest fighter of all time just because he likes him

kidmccoy and jab have not posted any evidence or done any research to support their claims about their fighters standing in the sport. their main three arguments are:

1. he was a lightweight
2. he had over 70 fights before he was defeated
3. he beat sugar ray leonard

and when you analyze these three points you come up with factual info on his career that does not support a top 5 or even top 10 atg ranking. many writers use the above mentioned "duran formula" only for duran. and the many sychophants on this site who like duran have never anlayzed his career they just want to boast about something that is not true.

the facts remain:

1. duran did not jump from lightweight to welterweighht to face ray leonard he was at 147 for 2 years before facing ray. so the myth of a lightweight defeating a welterweight in his first fight is a lie and a myth used by many duran supporters

2. Duran was undefeated at 135 and was invincible. no he lost to esteban dejesus and fought over 50 fighters at lightweight with poor or losing records.

3. he lost to the best fighters of his generation at the weight he fought them. the myth of duran losing because he was a lightweight 7 years ago is a myth he just wasn;t skilled enough or dedicated enough in training to win the big fights.

[wpink1]

wink kid mccoy doesn't understand the meaninging of objectivity. he wants us to live in his fantasy world where roberto duran is the greatest fighter of all time just because he likes him

kidmccoy and jab have not posted any evidence or done any research to support their claims about their fighters standing in the sport. their main three arguments are:

1. he was a lightweight
2. he had over 70 fights before he was defeated
3. he beat sugar ray leonard

and when you analyze these three points you come up with factual info on his career that does not support a top 5 or even top 10 atg ranking. many writers use the above mentioned "duran formula" only for duran. and the many sychophants on this site who like duran have never anlayzed his career they just want to boast about something that is not true.

the facts remain:

1. duran did not jump from lightweight to welterweighht to face ray leonard he was at 147 for 2 years before facing ray. so the myth of a lightweight defeating a welterweight in his first fight is a lie and a myth used by many duran supporters

2. Duran was undefeated at 135 and was invincible. no he lost to esteban dejesus and fought over 50 fighters at lightweight with poor or losing records.

3. he lost to the best fighters of his generation at the weight he fought them. the myth of duran losing because he was a lightweight 7 years ago is a myth he just wasn;t skilled enough or dedicated enough in training to win the big fights.

Brandish...I am not as hard core against duran as you are, but your points are correct. It is funny seeing all the responses that they post but no facts.
Instead of a factual debate about duran vs Jones, they simply say anyone that says Jones over duran is a fool, or historians eveywhere rate Duran as a top 10. Notice how they use these two answers repeatedlyl vs debating the merits of Duran vs Jones.


They know thee is no way you can factually or objectivly compare Duran's quality or accomplishment favorably to Jones, or leonard. So they dont enter into those debates. Kid McCoy rant was so weak that my neighbor a pacquio fan was laughing his but off reading the response. I told him just how weak the response is..something like using Camacho against ray, but not discussing duran between ages 28-34. Or Mccoy left out the fact Ray had a detached retina. He also talk nonstop about rematches, but never focues on when they where actually in the ring. Finally he states Duran covincingly whipped Ray. On what scorecard...His? the fight was 1 round reversal away from being leonard winning, and leoanrd willingly chose to not fight using all his tools. Funny how McCoy left all this out. he also said all ray's wins where controversial or close. Hmmm Benetiz, duran, Hearns all where fights that never reached the scorecard..but they where close, or somehow when he was easilly beatinkg Duran, and he quit, this is somehow close or controversial agains Ray...hmmmmm One thing they leave out is that in scoring the 2nd Duran leoanrd fight, one perosn tried to say it was close. Hmm ray won 4 of the first 7 rounds ond even and he was easily winning the 8th. but this was close. It was still winnable for duran but simply doing your math will tell you that all fights except whitewashes are close somewhat after 6 or 7 scored rounds. Calzaghe Jones was somewhat close after 6 rounds... There is not enough time yet for seperation on a scorecard yet...So again weak as points they try to bring up.

Finally, the pryor issue. Duran himself said his camp went to Pryor and said they did not want to fight..DURAN HIMSELF... howevrer to McCoy that is not valid. Also you can tell where some (McCoy and others) get their information..rumors, chat rooms etc... To try to say Ray ducked or avoided Pryor is simply factually false and anyone who can simply go to boxrec and get the dates of Pryors fights and when he fought at welter, and compare it to when Ray retired..and when ray had his big fiights...then use common sense you will realize Pryor simply was a bit too late..... Had he moved up like Duran did and campaigned successfully at welter then he has a case, had he fougth arguello arleady then he may have had a case, had ray not been forced to retire due to retinal damage, there may have been a time frame to make this fight.

[Vasyl’s dad]

Never said that. How about reading the post..and using some common sense. The issue was that Duran had been professional since 16 and the wear and tear on his body from those 71 fights should be considered. I pointed out that training, sparring and the wear and tear on a person the head shots etc from a long amateur career can have its impacts on a person too.

If you dont know this then, you should not be allowed to post o any board.

I can name several Great great amateurs that simply where burned out, and punched out by the time they got deeper into their professional careers. Duran never had an amateur career, he used his first 20 or so fights to learn the trade. Look at how the quality of oppositin that those the fight in the amateurs are able to fight and progressivly get better and better, vs those like chavez and duran do not. Duran had many fighters on his resume that where quality wise nothing more than a sparring parnter or amateur, where as Ray after his 13 fight generally was stepping in with good professionals.

Do your own research...http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php...boxer&pageID=1

Some people just aren't built/trained for the pros. They're two separate en****** with two entirely different ways of scoring.

[Kid McCoy]

Kid mccoy your post is so factless and weak that i pains me to respond. You really need to learn the facts...Such as pryor and leonard issue... go back and do your own timeline... You will see a fight between the two was never an option. Just do your own research. hint Arguello fight came about after Leoanrd retired.

It would help if you didn't attribute non-existent claims to me. I never claimed Leonard ducked Pryor. I said Pryor called him out and Leonard ignored him. Which of that part do you dispute? Leonard didn't duck him because it was never a fight he needed to make.

As for Leonard beating the top 4 and you trying to discredit it.. What a joke. You say all leonard wins where controverisal or close. Hmmm

Benetiz - stopped
Duran- quit was losing on all 3 scorecards
hearns - stopped, had to be carried out the ring...almost had hearns stopp rounds 6-7-13 and 14
hagler - ray was retired for 5 years only 1 fight, and mvoed up with out a tune up...

Where is the controversy.....

I said close or controversial. You think Benitez deserved to be stopped? You think many don't dispute the Hagler decision to this day? You don't think the Hearns fight was close? You don't think Duran retiring unhurt while behind two points on two cards and one on the other was controversial? You don't think there should have been meaningful rematches? There are plenty of great fighters who fought often against other great fighters who have far better claims to being top ten than a guy with four close wins.

As for your weakest point...yes Camacho fight should be ignored when evaluating ray,,just like Holmes berbick fights are ignored when evaluating ali, the last loses for chavez too, and For duran as well. I have never factored in Durans loses when he was older, I repeatedly point out between aged 28-34

Tell that to Brandish, who hammers Duran for losing to William Joppy at age 47 and expects him to be cleaning out the middleweight division in his 40s.

Save the weak...I will repeat this once again garbage..No one cares, you can repeat it all night...Duran resume in those 71 wins was horrible.. Just tell me this, Marcil and Kyobashi? these are the two bums that many list as justification for his resume...Please. You have the nerve to target a undefeated kalule, but duran best at lightwieght dejesus, buchanon, Kayabashi, marcel...etc.. cant touch Ray's jock.

Marcel and Kobayashi bums, eh? Buchanan and DeJesus can't touch Ray's jock? Do you even know who they are? You do know that all were world champions, don't you? That Marcel beat a prime Arguello. That Duran beat the vastly more experienced Kobayashi at age 20. That Buchanan won his title by defeating a Latin American HOFer in Latin America and had only one loss (a bum decision) when he faced Duran? There is a lot more to fighters than just records.

As I said before, Boxrec is horribly incomplete for past fighters, especially ones from Latin America. Go check out the records of Monzon, Jofre, Chavez, Arguello and any other great Latin Americans from the past and they all have a lot of guys with only a few recorded fights. If a boxer is listed as 2-2 it does not mean he only had four fights. It means that only four of his fights are on the database. Records are often hard to come by in such places, and the full records of these guys will likely never be known. In some cases, not even the fighter's date of birth is known. I recall a similar debate on another forum with a prat who insisted that Sugar Ray Robinson was overrated because he fought guys with 0-0-0 records.

You keep on saying Duran convincingly beat Ray.. In what dream. Maybe you dont know the facts....Duran won the montreal fight by the slimmest of margins, in fact on round scored differently...One round, Leoanrd wins. Yeh this is very convincing..but you on the other hand say when leoanrd stopes Benetiz, Hearns...hmm an yes even after 7 scored rounds in the 2nd fight, Ray was already ahead by more points on the score card than Duran eventually won the 1st fight by, and the 8th round was not factored into those scored which would have made it leonard by 3 points on 2 cards and by 2 on another.

I had Duran up 9-3 through 12 rounds, so yes I stand by my point that Duran won convincingly. Duran took the last three off to celebrate, believing he already had it won, which imo he did, allowing Leonard to close to 9-6. It was his night.

You want us to say Duran should not be measured by his losses between age 28-34, but every other figher in history should be. Duran should only be measured by his success (vs all time weak resume of wins at lightweight) at lightwieght, but every other fighter should be measured by their entire career, including your weak attempt to say Camacho fight should count against leoanrd.

I say a fighter should be judged in his prime and at his peak weight. What happens when a fighter peaks before your specified years 28-34? Does losing a fight at age 33 mean he was a rubbish when he was 23? Terry McGovern and Wilfredo Benitez peaked at a young age and were finished as top level fighters by their mid-20s. Should they be marked down for losses at your specified ages? Other fighters, like Archie Moore or George Foreman, were world champions in their 40s. Do they get more brownie points than say, Ezzard Charles, for being at the top well beyond the age of 28-34? For what it's worth, Ray Leonard lost to Terry Norris at age 34, but I don't take that into consideration because I judge all fighters on their own merits.

What a joke... Where would you consider roy jones....

He dominated not one but 3 divisons
he was undefeated until age 35 excert for a a dq
he beat two great to durans 1
he had 4 titles and duran had 4 titles
He moved up 40 pounds to fight and beat a heavyweight champion who
still outweighted him by 20-30 pounds.
So tell me based on objective reasoning how can you rank duran ahead of Jones.......

Jones dominated one division, not three, and even then failed to meet to the other "man" in the 175lb division. Two wins against Hopkins and the ever-inconsistent Toney do not put him above Duran.

Duran did not only beat one great. Only someone whose boxing knowledge starts and finishes with Sugar Ray Leonard would make such a claim.

From starting at 122 and peaking at 135, at age 37 and in his 92nd pro fight, Duran moved up to defeat the fearsome prime middleweight champ, fresh off a brutal KO of Tommy Hearns. Ruiz was never more than a paper titlist and Don King puppet. If Jones had really wanted to prove something at heavyweight he'd have fought the man, Lennox, as Conn, Spinks, Moore, Foster and various others did.

Further, shrink Jones down to 135 and put him in the ring against a prime Duran. Jones either runs all night, dropping a wide UD, or El Cholo hunts him down and brutally KOs him.

Finally, Ezzard Charles was 2-0 against Charley Burley, 3-0 against Archie Moore, 5-0 against Joey Maxim, 2-1 against Lloyd Marshall and 4-1 against Jimmy Bivins. Five Hall of Famers, all of them beaten by Charles multiple times. That's before you even consider that Charles was a former middleweight contender who moved up to win the heavyweight title, of which he made eight defences, and long past his best days gave Rocky Marciano his toughest scraps.

Now tell me why Ray Leonard deserves to be rated ahead of him.

[Dynamite Kid]

First off if you dont like the content of my post, then do your american right....Dont read it. Secondly this a thread discussing the merits of Duran being a all time top pound per pound. the reason why leonard is almost always mentioned when considereing or measuring ray, is becaus they fought each other twice, in different styles, 2 of the 3 fights where meaningul fights around durans and leonard peak years. and both are considred all time top fighters. So if you are tired of the comparisons between leonard and duran, then again exercise your american citizenship rights...

Finally I have boxed, have you? if you know anything about boxing, you realize that haveing a extensive amateur career, and also the training that goes into fights, sparring etc...does a lot of damage to ones body, in fact in many fighters you get more damage done to you during training. If you follow boxing you will realize that some fighters had long amateur careers, and this does equal the beginning of most fighters career. However, Duran and JCC who you correctly brought up, did have many fights vs bums, and these level of fighters after they became champion is not what you see when you look at the leonards, Jones, Mayweather. Eachk time leonard stepped inside a ring the fighter was either a good professional or a great one, after leonards 13th fight or so....Can you say the same for Duran or JCC?

So again you all want to ignore the facts and try very hard to simply hid truths to keep up this aura of invincibility for Duran, but when the truth slaps you in the face you respond with weak and not well thought out responses. Duran started taking pounding to his body at age 16....At what age did leoanrd or mayweather start taking pounding? Amateur fight do take their toll, many times in the amateur ranks you take tremendous pounding from great figthers..Just ask Roy about his brutal amateur fight with McCllelan, or leonard bout Curry, or Hearns about Pryor....Leonard had 150 amateur fights...

As for slick defense, your right about Chavez, not haviing great defense, but Duran had all time defense. He had some of the best head movement coming in I have ever seen. His toe to toe fighting style is IMO top 10. He could come in and make 99.9 % of fighters miss their counters whe he was applying pressure. If you read my post you will see that I rate duran highly, just not top 10, and I have layed out FACTUAL EVIDENCE that you cant refute that shows you and others are judging duran on a different scale. You cant refute that Duran was 1-5 vs the top fighters of his generation. It is a fact. You cant refute that duran got ko'd in 2 by hearns. You cant refute that Duran resume at lightweight had at least 30 fighters that were bums and these where fights after he was a champion. You can refute that 4 of those 5 loses to the big 4 happened before Duran was age 34. You cant refute that many other fighters, have moved up just like duran and have not suffered to loses he has, or those that do move up are judged by their success at each weight they are at. You can not refute that, these are facts.

So since you cant refute it, what do you do,
1. try to ignore it
2. say well duran was not the same aft4r he quit... Hmmm so we are supposed to say at age 29 we should stop our review of durans career because we simply CHOOSE to look at the duran that we like, but other fighters including leonard, Jones etc..other fighters we generally look at the totality of their carer up until around age 34 and later.
3. Use excuses for each of his loses, dejesus, leonard, etc....
4. Try to ignore facts such as Roy jones beat 2 great great fighters vs Duran one, Jones beat them easily, vs duran barely winning the 1st only fight he would against the elite fighters...Duran moved up 12 pounds fought several fights to get prepared at the weight, roy jumped right up to 168 for
Toney. Duran got beat by dejesue even before leoanrd, Jones did not lose anyfight til age 35 except for a dq....Jones had a long amateur career Duran had 0 amateur fights....Jones dominated super middle, and light heavy..and middleweight...Duran did dominate lightweight,,that is it.....Jones moved up 40 and got a heavyweight title vs a man who outweighed him by 20-30 pounds....Duran went from lightweight to middle for a title...Jones and duran both 4 titles in different divisions..Jones beat 18 world champions past present futer, and 23 champions...Not sure how many duran beat

However even after all the facts as listed above, you all still refuse to accept facts and just say duran based on What?

Sorry, i cant be bothered to read through your hate rant carry on.

Silly old fool

[wpink1]

McCoy stop your getting worse and worse and the entire world can see just how much about boxing you learn from chat rooms.

I will answer your questins. No Benetiz fight should not have been stopped but it was not close. Benetiz was dropped twice, repeatedly backed up and took punishment on the ropes,,,had only a couple of rounds after he was cut by a head but, did he have any success.

Duran - so you have to be hurt to be beaten. No leoanrd did nt hurt Duran, but he was easily OUTBOXING HIM. Maybe you forgot this is boxing not UFC. After 8 he would have already been down by 3 points on 2 cards, and 2 on another. No this fight was not close. The only thing that made thsi controversial is that Duran quit like a *****..and could not deal with getting his ass being handed to him. Hearns fight was close but how did it end. What is controversial about getting stopped. Hagler was indeed controversial, but what you leave out is that Ray was like a 5-1 underdog, had not fought in 3 years, only once in 5 years, and had moved up (not like duran did, move up and have fights for two years) with no tune up and beat hagler. The simple accomplishment is all time, How many times has something like this been done?

Where you really hurt your argument is trying to point out how great bums like 61-9-4 kyobashi was. Not that they are not worthy of fighting, but they are not worthy of pointing out as great names on a resume to justify to 10 all time ranking. You go after Kalule, who was 36-0. But you hype up Kybashi who was 61-9-4. Come on you got to get real.

Tell us all who Jorge Reyes is? Hmmm you cant.... he beat a prime Arguello to. You know what his reported record was...4-6. Even if it was not all inclusive he had at least 6 losses early on.

Marcel , Kyobashi, not worthy of holding leoanrd jock. Buchanon, Dejesus are good fighters. Are they Hearns, hagler, Benetiz, toney, Hopkins, ...No. Does any of the historians that you hold in such high esteem because they rank Duran top 10, do any of these same historians have any of Dejesus, Buchanaon, Kyobahsi, marcil ranked in their top 100? If not and the best you got is these 4, along with the 30-40 fighters who are nothing more than sparring partner level, tell us just how quality was his reign at lightweight. Do we simly rank all those at top all time because they dominant a division. Then hagler, monzon, Hopkins, Holmes all of these should be up there too. No it generally except when we discuss Duran, we generally rank them based on who they beat. Duran who career is based off of one slim win. Leonard!!

I will give you this duran did coast the 15th round. But to suggest that in the 13th and 14th round that he and Ray did not go to war..You either did not see those rounds, or forgot. Duran coasted the last round and yes this did make it one pt closer, but that was a great, fight,, close after round 4.

You now agree that fighters should be judged in their peak years. Good now we are getting somewhere. However you still pick and choose what fighs you want to count for duran. Also if a fighter peaks out before age 32, this is always counted against him. Thus duran at at age 31 lost to Lainge...he also got beaten around the same time by benetiz, and ko'd by hearns. He then went on and lost to hagler. You all will try to say he gets some credit because it was close.. Bs. He lost!! Also you all say Dura was at his peak in June of 80 but past his peak in Nov of 80. Very convenient, to pick and choose when you want to say his peak fights or years where.

Finally if duran had dominated the lightweights and moved up and beat ray, etc...and retired then that is one thing. However we judge fighters for what they do when they step in the ring. Also if Duran had been the only one who ever moved up, then that is one thing, but many many mamy fighters move up and we judge them on the totality of their careers. why do you all say we cant judge Duran on his losses to the big 4. Why the different standards.

Jones he beat Hopkins for the vacant Ibf Middleweight title. Hopkins who would go on to dominant the middleweight for a decade..Roy easily beat him by 4 points on each card, with one hand. Then Roy defended his title 6 times then moved up and beat toney for the super middleweight title, which he won 119-108,117-110, 118-109. Toney was the pound per pound #1 fighter in boxig at the time, 44-0-2. Not a record like 61-9-4. Defended it 5 times all #1 challengers... then moved up beat up on a old Mike mccallum for wbc light heavyweight title...Roy was dq'd due to hitting Griffen when he was down. many say roy was about to lose this fight. Hmmm he was only down by 1 and 2 point at the time, and this round would have been a 2 point rd for Roy. Hmmmmm. Next fight he stopped him in the 1st round. Had 11 defenses most again the number ranked opponent..at light heavy..then moved up. beat Ruiz for the heavyweight title of the world...Ruiz weight 226 roy weighed 193.

When roy beat Ruiz he was 49-1 accomplished what I posted above..should have gotten the gold..No he didnt just fight a fight at a wieght division except for heavy he beat the best at that division and defended the title. There are some name he did not fight, but not one of these was seriously considered to give roy a challenge. Dm got his ass handed to him by several that roy beat. Nunn went to sleep vs toney. Roy was 35 year old before he lost, and we all knw that he destroyed his body, his reflexes his speed, everything getting back down from 193 to 175. He was never the same, and he was also 35, not 28 or 31..

So tell me again roy did not do what? Duran and leonard both said that Roy would have been to big, strong, fast and and unorthodox to fight at middle. Nobody is saying Ruiz was a great fighter, but he did win the title, he was a heavywieght titlles. Did duran beat the best at 154, no he lost to benetiz, and got ko'd by hearns, then beat a 12-0 Moore, and you are questioning Jones at heavyweight, some 40 pound leap. Duran didnt leap anywhere he was at these weights fighting. You also try to hype up Barkly as if he is some god. Barkly is not i anyones top 500 pound per pound rankings. He simply beat tommy at the higher weights. Barkly career record 43-19. Please. I can list a whose who of fighters that beat Barkly, robbie sims, eddie hall, osley silas..Hey these are fighters before Duran beat him..Not the ones after.

Sorry my man, Duran is not a top 10 all time based on facts. He simply is not. Roy jones should be ranked higher than Duran based on fact, but many simply rank Duran because of style. Other because some say duran greb, langford should be ranked up there. Hoever,,just study the facts. Based on actual accomplishment when you apply the same standards, Duran comes up short.

Shrink Jones down to 135, you would have to assume that he would be even faster and hit even harder, so you have to factor in those attributes. So you consider leonard had no issue outboxing duran when he chose to, then you have a fighter that would be faster and stronger, I have him stopping Duran, like hearns did. In fact you are smoking something. Dejesus beat Duran lightweight and the 2nd time it was nip and tuck, and you think that Jones would have issues, We are still talking about the duran that quit vs leonard...

Finally you rant and rave about Jones fighting ruiz, but who did duran beat to get his titles at 154 and 160. Hmmm Nunn, mcCallum all where around then, so why didnt he fight them. Why didnt he face Pryor at 140, hell why no fight with arguello, You can go on and on. Hell all the ass whippings duran took by the big four maybe it was enough for him.

[Kid McCoy]

McCoy stop your getting worse and worse and the entire world can see just how much about boxing you learn from chat rooms.

I will answer your questins. No Benetiz fight should not have been stopped but it was not close. Benetiz was dropped twice, repeatedly backed up and took punishment on the ropes,,,had only a couple of rounds after he was cut by a head but, did he have any success.

Good we agree that Benitez shouldn't have been stopped. Unbeaten champion stopped on his feet with less than ten seconds to go seems pretty controversial to me. I disagree that it was not close. Leonard was winning but it was no walk in the park.

Duran - so you have to be hurt to be beaten. No leoanrd did nt hurt Duran, but he was easily OUTBOXING HIM. Maybe you forgot this is boxing not UFC. After 8 he would have already been down by 3 points on 2 cards, and 2 on another. No this fight was not close. The only thing that made thsi controversial is that Duran quit like a *****..and could not deal with getting his ass being handed to him. Hearns fight was close but how did it end. What is controversial about getting stopped. Hagler was indeed controversial, but what you leave out is that Ray was like a 5-1 underdog, had not fought in 3 years, only once in 5 years, and had moved up (not like duran did, move up and have fights for two years) with no tune up and beat hagler. The simple accomplishment is all time, How many times has something like this been done?

He was not easily out-boxing him. Go and actually watch the fight. After eight rounds Leonard was ahead but the fight was still up-for-grabs. Unfortunately, Duran's more urgent need was go and take a dump, hence no mas.

Hagler was indeed controversial. Good we agree. Leonard also had a couple of behind-closed-doors fights against contenders, in fight conditions, prior to facing Hagler. Were they not, to all intents and purposes, tune-ups?

No comment on any of the rematches?

Where you really hurt your argument is trying to point out how great bums like 61-9-4 kyobashi was. Not that they are not worthy of fighting, but they are not worthy of pointing out as great names on a resume to justify to 10 all time ranking. You go after Kalule, who was 36-0. But you hype up Kybashi who was 61-9-4. Come on you got to get real.

Tell me anything you know about Kobayashi, save what is on Boxrec and what you can quickly Google, for him to be dismissed as a bum.

Tell us all who Jorge Reyes is? Hmmm you cant.... he beat a prime Arguello to. You know what his reported record was...4-6. Even if it was not all inclusive he had at least 6 losses early on.

Again with the records. For the last time, you cannot go by Boxrec! Did you see how many guys with 1-2-1 type records there are on Arguello's record? Do you really think he was padding his career with novice after novice? Henry Armstrong lost to a guy who was 0-0-0. Ray Robinson fought guys whose known record was 0-0-0. They bums too?

Marcel , Kyobashi, not worthy of holding leoanrd jock. Buchanon, Dejesus are good fighters. Are they Hearns, hagler, Benetiz, toney, Hopkins, ...No. Does any of the historians that you hold in such high esteem because they rank Duran top 10, do any of these same historians have any of Dejesus, Buchanaon, Kyobahsi, marcil ranked in their top 100? If not and the best you got is these 4, along with the 30-40 fighters who are nothing more than sparring partner level, tell us just how quality was his reign at lightweight. Do we simly rank all those at top all time because they dominant a division. Then hagler, monzon, Hopkins, Holmes all of these should be up there too. No it generally except when we discuss Duran, we generally rank them based on who they beat. Duran who career is based off of one slim win. Leonard!!

That's not even worthy of comment, Pink.

I will give you this duran did coast the 15th round. But to suggest that in the 13th and 14th round that he and Ray did not go to war..You either did not see those rounds, or forgot. Duran coasted the last round and yes this did make it one pt closer, but that was a great, fight,, close after round 4.

Well I disagree. A great fight, yes, in which Ray showed his toughness and heart, but not as close as you say. it was also a very important fight for Ray, since it toughened him up for future battles.

You now agree that fighters should be judged in their peak years. Good now we are getting somewhere. However you still pick and choose what fighs you want to count for duran. Also if a fighter peaks out before age 32, this is always counted against him. Thus duran at at age 31 lost to Lainge...he also got beaten around the same time by benetiz, and ko'd by hearns. He then went on and lost to hagler. You all will try to say he gets some credit because it was close.. Bs. He lost!! Also you all say Dura was at his peak in June of 80 but past his peak in Nov of 80. Very convenient, to pick and choose when you want to say his peak fights or years where.

So Benitez, who was at club fighter level by the age of 32 and getting KO'd by journeymen, can be dismissed then? Does Ray Robinson get demoted because he lost to Terry Downes and Memo Ayon when he was past his prime? Like I said, judge on a case by case basis.

I never said Duran was passed his peak in November 1980. Bloated and under-prepared, yes. Above his peak weight, yes.

Finally if duran had dominated the lightweights and moved up and beat ray, etc...and retired then that is one thing. However we judge fighters for what they do when they step in the ring. Also if Duran had been the only one who ever moved up, then that is one thing, but many many mamy fighters move up and we judge them on the totality of their careers. why do you all say we cant judge Duran on his losses to the big 4. Why the different standards.

You're contradicting yourself. You said above you judge fighters at their peak, and now you want to judge their whole careers, even when past their prime and best weight. Which is it Pink? You seem to be saying that if Duran had managed his career more carefully, ie by retiring after a big win and avoiding everyone with a pulse thereafter, you'd rank him higher. What kind of logic is that? Unfortunately, not many fighters can be part-time boxers the way Ray was for much of his career. That's another reason why guys like Duran, Chavez and co fought often. They had to. They couldn't afford to hire fancy dan sparring partners and pad their records with one Superfight every couple of years.

Jones he beat Hopkins for the vacant Ibf Middleweight title. Hopkins who would go on to dominant the middleweight for a decade..Roy easily beat him by 4 points on each card, with one hand. Then Roy defended his title 6 times then moved up and beat toney for the super middleweight title, which he won 119-108,117-110, 118-109. Toney was the pound per pound #1 fighter in boxig at the time, 44-0-2. Not a record like 61-9-4. Defended it 5 times all #1 challengers... then moved up beat up on a old Mike mccallum for wbc light heavyweight title...Roy was dq'd due to hitting Griffen when he was down. many say roy was about to lose this fight. Hmmm he was only down by 1 and 2 point at the time, and this round would have been a 2 point rd for Roy. Hmmmmm. Next fight he stopped him in the 1st round. Had 11 defenses most again the number ranked opponent..at light heavy..then moved up. beat Ruiz for the heavyweight title of the world...Ruiz weight 226 roy weighed 193.

When roy beat Ruiz he was 49-1 accomplished what I posted above..should have gotten the gold..No he didnt just fight a fight at a wieght division except for heavy he beat the best at that division and defended the title. There are some name he did not fight, but not one of these was seriously considered to give roy a challenge. Dm got his ass handed to him by several that roy beat. Nunn went to sleep vs toney. Roy was 35 year old before he lost, and we all knw that he destroyed his body, his reflexes his speed, everything getting back down from 193 to 175. He was never the same, and he was also 35, not 28 or 31..

No Ezzard Charles then? Still googling it?

[Brandish]

Brandish...I am not as hard core against duran as you are, but your points are correct. It is funny seeing all the responses that they post but no facts.
Instead of a factual debate about duran vs Jones, they simply say anyone that says Jones over duran is a fool, or historians eveywhere rate Duran as a top 10. Notice how they use these two answers repeatedlyl vs debating the merits of Duran vs Jones.

I am not aganst duran I am against people overrating him and saying he is top 10 all-time when his career was not top ten. if he had dominated the 70's and 80's like roy did in the 90's and part of 2000's then I would be the first to proclaim duran's greatness.

what I will not do is rank him ahead of guys he lost to and had dominate careers as well namely,

tommy hearns, ray leonard, amd hagler. I rate duran ahead of benitez and pryor just based on career accomplsihments.

They know thee is no way you can factually or objectivly compare Duran's quality or accomplishment favorably to Jones, or leonard. So they dont enter into those debates. Kid McCoy rant was so weak that my neighbor a pacquio fan was laughing his but off reading the response. I told him just how weak the response is..something like using Camacho against ray, but not discussing duran between ages 28-34. Or Mccoy left out the fact Ray had a detached retina. He also talk nonstop about rematches, but never focues on when they where actually in the ring. Finally he states Duran covincingly whipped Ray. On what scorecard...His? the fight was 1 round reversal away from being leonard winning, and leoanrd willingly chose to not fight using all his tools. Funny how McCoy left all this out. he also said all ray's wins where controversial or close. Hmmm Benetiz, duran, Hearns all where fights that never reached the scorecard..but they where close, or somehow when he was easilly beatinkg Duran, and he quit, this is somehow close or controversial agains Ray...hmmmmm One thing they leave out is that in scoring the 2nd Duran leoanrd fight, one perosn tried to say it was close. Hmm ray won 4 of the first 7 rounds ond even and he was easily winning the 8th. but this was close. It was still winnable for duran but simply doing your math will tell you that all fights except whitewashes are close somewhat after 6 or 7 scored rounds. Calzaghe Jones was somewhat close after 6 rounds... There is not enough time yet for seperation on a scorecard yet...So again weak as points they try to bring up.

Finally, the pryor issue. Duran himself said his camp went to Pryor and said they did not want to fight..DURAN HIMSELF... howevrer to McCoy that is not valid. Also you can tell where some (McCoy and others) get their information..rumors, chat rooms etc... To try to say Ray ducked or avoided Pryor is simply factually false and anyone who can simply go to boxrec and get the dates of Pryors fights and when he fought at welter, and compare it to when Ray retired..and when ray had his big fiights...then use common sense you will realize Pryor simply was a bit too late..... Had he moved up like Duran did and campaigned successfully at welter then he has a case, had he fougth arguello arleady then he may have had a case, had ray not been forced to retire due to retinal damage, there may have been a time frame to make this fight.

great post, I just want one duran fan to step up to the plate and debate factually about duran's career, because I can list ten fighters all time that have accomplsihed more and was just as talented.