Duran is not a top ten ATG

[TheGreatA]

no one is saying duran is not an ATG I have him in my top 30 he won titles in 4 weight classes which is no easy feat, but he is no pernell whitaker and if you match his record in championship fights to whitaker, leonard, hagler, herarns and floyd he doersn't rank as a top 10 atg, some even have him top 5.

Tell me about Pernell Whitaker's greatest wins.

[2501]

once again, Brandish, the dude who thinks Floyd Mayweather Jr is the best fighter of all time, makes himself out to be an ignorant bafoon.

[Steak]

Tell me about Pernell Whitaker's greatest wins.

Azumah Nelson
Julio Cesar Chavez
Buddy McGirt
Julio Cesar Vasquez
I had him going to draw with prime De La Hoya

pretty huge wins.

I consider Whitaker top 10.

[TheGreatA]

Azumah Nelson
Julio Cesar Chavez
Buddy McGirt
Julio Cesar Vasquez
I had him going to draw with prime De La Hoya

pretty huge wins.

I consider Whitaker top 10.

I agree 100% but a lot of people would say Azumah who? McGirt who? JCC fight was a draw and so on.

Believe me I've had this happen to me a couple of times when defending Whitaker's resume.

[Steak]

I agree 100% but a lot of people would say Azumah who? McGirt who? JCC fight was a draw and so on.

Believe me I've had this happen to me a couple of times when defending Whitaker's resume.

I know you know but Im just in a rare mood to discuss ATG records, so Im having a little fun.

[TheGreatA]

I know you know but Im just in a rare mood to discuss ATG records, so Im having a little fun.

Some thoughts on Whitaker and Duran:

Whitaker never fought at 160 so there's nothing that compares to Duran's win over Barkley or Castro (at age 46)
Vasquez>Moore at 154 (although Moore is slightly underrated and Duran's performance was more impressive)
Leonard>Chavez at 147
Not sure who was better, McGirt or Palomino at 147.
Duran never fought at 140 so there's nothing that compares to Whitaker's win over Rafael Pineda
Esteban DeJesus>Jose Luis Ramirez
Azumah Nelson>Ernesto Marcel (Duran however fought Marcel at 130, a more natural weight for Marcel than 135 was for Nelson)
Saoul Mamby and Freddie Pendelton were two 'legendary' journeymen.
Duran also beat Buchanan, Kobayashi, Viruet, Ishimatsu
Whitaker beat Haugen, Nazario, Mayweather, Paez

Both started losing in their mid-30's, the difference was that Whitaker knew when to call it a day (although not before losing to Trinidad and a journeyman).

33 year old Duran had a great performance against Hagler at 160, 33 year old Whitaker had a great performance against De La Hoya at 147

I don't think an old Whitaker would've done too well against the likes of Quartey, Vargas, Mosley, not to mention Bernard Hopkins, who were in some ways comparable to Benitez, Hearns and Hagler.

[Brandish]

that doesnt change the fact that Duran was at his best at 135lbs and jumped two weight divisions to face Leonard. thats like Mayweather coming up from 130 to beat Kostya Tsyzu at 140, except much better. hell, you could argue Duran jumped three weight classes since he had a pretty legitimate win at 130. but thats a stretch.

are you saying floyd jumped 5 weight divisions to face oscar de la hoya that makes no sense and you know why becasuse floyd had actually had a few fights at 147 before he went to 154.

when you say jumped two weight classes to face leonard that is a lie duran was already at 147 for two years. you can't put him back at 135 when he has been fighting at 147 for 2 freaking years vthese are the lies that I am talking about, shane mosley jumped two weight divisions to beat oscar de la hoya because he did not have any fights at 140 or 147 before he faced oscar, that is the definition of jumping weight classes not fighting at 147 like duran for 2 years and then his revisoionists come along and say he jumped from 135 to face leonard a bunch of lies.

Marcel didnt beat a prime Arguello, nah...but Duran beat him when he was a teenager, and Marcel won a title only a year or two after that fight. Arguello himself won his title over HOF Ruben Olivares less than a year after his loss to Marcel, and Marcel defended his title a few times before beating Arguello. thats at worst a notable win.

listen marcel is a good win but that doesn't make duran a top 5 atg or even top 20 beating guys like this. that is my point if you are arguing duran is somehow better then leoanrd, hagler, and hearns who I rank all above him then you will have to display more than a man crush on duran for that to fly

I will say it again duran to me is top 30 atg based on winning titles in 4 weight classes (dominant at 135) and he beat some decent fighters and he has one atg on his record, but the no mas and medicore performances throughout his career at the higher weights don't warrant top 10 atg.

the win over Kobayashi definitely isnt a career defining fight, but its not too bad. Kobayashi was the RING Magazine champ at 130 less than a year before Duran beat him. this was before Duran even won a title.
http://www.boxrec.com/media/index.ph...tweight--1970s

I wouldn't hang a top 5 or top 10 atg ranking on beating guys like kobayashi who isn't even top 100 at his prime weight.

claim to fame? I told you the first time. he beat guys like Ismael Laguna, Carlos Ortiz, and Carlos Hernandez. Carlos was pretty past his prime tho. not to mention that Buchanan was RING Magazine champ when Duran beat him.

I was never impressed with ken sort of like the ricky hatton of his time, but he is in the hof so it was a good victory for duran, not enough for me to place duran top 10 atg or rank him above leoanrd, herans or hagler.

how was Palomino finished when he went to a split Decision with Benitez in his previous fight and had only lost one fight in about 5 years?

palomini did nothing after his lost to beinitez I say he was finsihed because he never won another title after his lost to benitez. palomino became a name only fighter. he defnitiely wasn't championship caliber when he fought duran.

the win over Leonard is probebly one of the biggest wins in the history of boxing. Leonard is probebly the #2 welterweight of all time, although you could throw some other names in there, and is at worst a top 25 p4p fighter all time, and Duran went up in weight to beat him. call me crazy, but thats a pretty huge win.

but you fail to look at anything else about duran other than 1 victory that doesn't warrant being ranked top 10, since when you look at his entire career he fell well short of the true greatness a leonard, hagler and hearns had.

the win was big but the loss was even worst it proved that the myth of roberto duran was just that a myth when faced with an opponent he could not intimidate he quit, no way he makes it into my top 10. once gain if you have durtan top 25 then that sounds about right I am talking about the huggers who proclaim him top5 without any basis to do so.

yes, he was just a normal champ, but he did have a win over Ayub Kayule, who was the RING Magazine champ before Leonard beat him, and Moore was in the top 5 when Duran beat him. Moore went on to beat Benitez a year after the fight. not everyone can say something like that.

I am not bashing duran's win over moore just putting it into context beating guys like davey moore doesn't make duran a top 5 or top 10 atg since davey moore wasn't an atg fighter. good victory but duran did nothing at 147, 154, 160 or 168 and for 20 years (1980-1998) he was pretty much a punching bag for any fighter with decent skills

Castro had wins over Reggie Johnson(the man who knocked down James Toney and Antonio Tarver, and beat Steve Collins) former champ John David Jackson and even beat former Cruiserweight champ Imamu Mayfield. for a 46 year old former Lightweight to beat him is pretty impressive.

once again I am not bashing the castro victory, but keep it in context beating guys like castro doesn't warrant top 5 or top 10 atg. if duran had at least domianted another division like he did 135 or had been able to defeat hagler or even hearns then you can make a case for top 20 or even top 10 but no way is he top 5

right, the IBF was introduced in the 1980s, and Duran had been beating former/future champs since 1971 and left Lightweight before 1980, see? so his wins over former/future champs at 135 and below means much more than it does nowadays.

no it means duran was still only 26 when he left lightweight and fought at 147 for two years. so if you had said duran dumpaed his lightweight titles and jumped up to 147 to face any 147 champion you would have a point but that is not what happened. he foguht at 147 for two years agiant very poor opposition and then he challenged leonard. he did not go from 135 dirtectly into a fight with leonard.

oh, and why didnt he defend his titles? because he ran into ATGs like Hearns, Hagler, and Leonard or vacated it. do you really expect a former Lightweight to beat the beat Middleweight and Light Middleweight of all time?

if you are saying he is the 5th best fighter to ever put on a pair of gloves then he should have been able to. if you are saying he is ranked above those guys in terms of in ring greatness he should hae been able to beat them

[warp1432]

Hamsho was a tough straight ahead Brawler but still not that good

Vito exactly the same style only a bit better but still not that good overall

Sibson,Minter average,decent fighters but nothing special

fully Obell decent fighter again but another guy that likes to brawl and fight

Roldan face first brawler who was not great either

all tough guys but neither are GREAT fighters


point im making is Haglers record is not BETTER than Duran's was at LW

Hamsho, Obell were virtual uknown quantity at that level untill they met

What's wrong with brawling and fighting? A lot of guys are successful with that. They aren't all that one dimensional. Especially Hamsho and Vino.

Hamsho beat Wilfred Benitez before he lost to Hagler. Vito got a draw with Hagler before and Hagler got justification in the rematch. Hamsho also had a win over Minter.

Obell was ranked like 5 by The Ring in 1980. He was a top middleweight and composed a record of 30-0. Sibson was good.

**** all the people were good. I can do what the thread starter is doing and what I think you are doing to me, to any boxer's resume. Even Robinson.

edit: Forgot to mention Minter and Vito had very good wins. Especially minter.

[TheGreatA]

What's wrong with brawling and fighting? A lot of guys are successful with that. They aren't all that one dimensional. Especially Hamsho and Vinto.

Hamsho beat Wilfred Benitez before he lost to Hagler. Vinto got a draw with Hagler before and Hagler got justification in the rematch.

Obell was ranked like 5 by The Ring in 1980. He was a top middleweight and composed a record of 30-0. Sibson was good.

**** all the people were good. I can do what the thread starter is doing and what I think you are doing to me, to any boxer's resume. Even Robinson.

I think Dynamite Kid's/Terrible's point is exactly that though.

The thread starter says Hagler is much greater than Duran although anyone could easily say the same things for Hagler (who did he beat, Hamsho, Briscoe, Vito, Sibson, Minter?) that the thread starter is saying about Duran (who were Buchanan, Marcel, Palomino, Kobayashi, etc.).

[Brandish]

Leonard admitted himself in beyond the Glory that he quickly fought Duran while he was obese and had little time to get in shape because that was only way to beat him. he then never gave him a rematch!

duran got a rematch and he lost that fight too, all I ever hear are excuses from duranites, it is so pathetic..why not manup and admit he was outclassed. what was your excuse when benitez schooled him for 12 rounds always an excuse with a roberto duran fan. you guys never admit your fighter had flaws inside the ring always back to that crap about being at 135

Hagler and Hearns were not natural lightweights which is what you would rate Duran at fairly.

duran outgrew lightweight at the age of 25 he was a pretty big welterweight and a godd sized middle weight what is your excuse, if he had won those fights you wouldn't be amking any excuses

there was an article on latino boxing website (posted here in history section too) saying Duran was not better than Chavez because of achievements! BULL****. It doesn't matter if Chavez acheived more or anyone else, and neither do all these stats. what matters is prime v prime, who was better? Duran is right up there! His prime was short, fast and furious

he had a short prime that warranted a top 5 or top 10 atg ranking I don't think so. to get up there your career has to outshine every other fighter before you and his did not.

but as the best fighter in one of the original weight categories (lightweight) he is defo in my ATG top ten list. Stat attack freaks know nothing about the sport. Watch the ****ing fights instead of reading boxrec and books !!

being the best at 135 for a few years doean't warrant top 10 atg status, he needed to prove he could dominate more than one wight class and he didn't